Câu 33: GMAT Section 3 Verbal Ability: Section Three Verbal Ability
Take a very commonplace, often discussed and critical topic: Are we detecting a greenhouse effect, and related to this, is it exacerbated by "homogenic factors," i.e., human actions? Most would be inclined to give a positive answer to both of these questions. But, if pushed, what would be the evidence, and how well gr…
Nội dung câu hỏi
Take a very commonplace, often discussed and critical topic: Are we detecting a greenhouse effect, and related to this, is it exacerbated by "homogenic factors," i.e., human actions? Most would be inclined to give a positive answer to both of these questions. But, if pushed, what would be the evidence, and how well grounded would it be for such affirmations?Within scientific communities and associated scientifically informed circles, the answers have to be somewhat more ambiguous, particularly when rigorous questions concerning evidence are raised. Were scientific truth to be a matter of consensus, and some argue that scientific truth often turns out to be just that, then it is clear that there is beginning to be a kind of majority consensus among many earth science practitioners that the temperature of the Earth, particularly of the oceans, is indeed rising and that this is a crucial indicator for a possible greenhouse effect. Most of these scientists admit that the mean oceanic temperature has risen globally in the last several decades. But this generalization depends upon how accurate measurements may be, not just for samples, but also for the whole Earth. A hot spot, for example the now four year old hot spot near New Guinea which is part of the El Nio cycle, does not count by itself because it might be balanced by cold spots elsewhere. And the fact of the matter is that "whole earth measurements" are still rare and primitive in the simple sense that we simply do not have enough thermometers out. Secondly, even if we had enough thermometers, a simply synchronic whole earth measurement over three decades is but a blip in the diachronic history of ice age cycles over the last tens of thousands of years. Thirdly, even if we know that the earth is now heating up, has an ever increasing ozone hole, and from this strange weather effects can be predicted, how much of this is due to homogenic factors, such as CFCs, CO2 increases, hydrocarbon burning, and the like? Is it really the case, as Science magazine claimed in l990, "24% of greenhouse encouraging gases are of homogenic origin"?The author of the passage would be most likely to agree with which of the following statements about the greenhouse effect?
Các lựa chọn
Đáp án được giữ gọn theo nhãn A, B, C, D trong phần bình chọn tương tác.
- A. 24% of greenhouse encouraging gases are of homogenic origin.
- B. There is a greenhouse effect that is exacerbated by homogenic factors.
- C. The ozone hole is increasing due to homogenic factors, such as CFCs, CO2 increases, hydrocarbon burning, and the like.
- D. One can determine if mean oceanic temperatures have risen globally in the last several decades only if measurements of ocean temperatures are precise. — đáp án hiện tại
- E. Hot spots, such as the El Niño cycle, should not be counted as a factor in the greenhouse effect.
Cộng đồng
0 bình luận công khai. Tên thành viên được ẩn một phần.