题目内容
Let us consider what science and technology have to contribute to the food problem.
The simplest way to increase food production, one might suppose, is to bring more land 【C1】______ cultivation and put more people to work on it. Some of the underdeveloped countries have resorted to this 【C2】______ approach, without notable success. It contains several fallacies. For one thing, it usually means 【C3】______ into marginal lands where the soil and climatic conditions give a poor 【C4】______ . Cultivation may quickly deplete this soil,【C5】______ it for pasture or forest growth. It is often possible, of course, to turn such lands into useful farms by agricultural 【C6】______ ; for instance, a sophisticated knowledge of how to use the available water【C7】______ an irrigation system may reclaim semi-arid grasslands for crop-growing. But the cultivation of marginal lands i6 in any case unsuccessful【C8】______ it is carried out by farmers with a centuries - old tradition of experience or by modern ex pelts with a detailed knowledge of the【C9】______ conditions and the varieties of crops that are suitable for those conditions. Such knowledge is【C10】______ absent in the underdeveloped countries.
【C11】______ , we know that highly developed countries have not increased the【C12】______ of acres under cultivation, 【C13】______ on the contrary have 【C14】______ their marginal lands and steadily reduced the proportion of the population engaged in farming. Efficient farming【C15】______ concentration on the most efficient lands, and it results in greater production with【C16】______ people. The problem of the underdeveloped countries, then is to increase the【C17】______ of their farms and farmers. This would allow them to industrialize and to feed their people more adequately. It is not easy to【C18】______ , how ever. The farmers are conservative and resistant to change【C19】______ their methods of cultivation. The underdeveloped countries are greatly in need of studies and experiments to help them to【C20】______ modern agricultural methods to their own conditions.
【C1】
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
Someone once marked that the British and the Americans are two peoples separated by the same language. Most epigrams exaggerate for effect, and this one is no exception. But it is, nevertheless, undeniably true that some commonly used words mean different things in these two countries. Consider the seemingly simple term--"the government".
To parliamentarians trained in British terminology "the government" means the cabinet: a group of the legislature's own members, chosen by it to devise public policies, to manage the legislature's major activities, and to exercise executive powers. In theory, at least, the government continues in office only so long as it commands the support of the legislature. Losing that support, it may be turned out of power at almost any moment.
When Americans say "the government", they mean some thing quite different: It connotes the whole governmental structure-- executive, legislative and judicial. Americans assume a situation in which the branches of government are deliberately separated and in which the powers of each check and balance those of the other.
Another difference between the U. S. and parliamentary systems concerns the concept of "political party". In the British tradition, a political party connotes a group relatively cohesive in ideology and disciplined in action. Playwright William S. Gilbert's satirical line that remembers of parliament "vote just as their leaders tell 'em to" is not as accurate as it once was, but it is still close enough to the mark.
In contrast, the two major U. S. political parties are vast, sprawling, decentralized conglomerations of varied ideological positions whose members do not feel obliged to vote the way the party leaders tell them to do. In fact, most members come to Congress as independent entrepreneurs, willing to go along with party policy only to the extent that it does not conflict with what they perceive to be the wishes and interests of their constituencies.
The main ideas of the passage is that ______.
The ultimate advantage of viewers' online communication by Joost is to help advertisers
The survey conducted earlier this month by Nesfl6 Box Tops for Books, which asked parents about their children's reading habits, found that half of UK children spend less than two hours reading per week. A further one in 10 had not read a book in the past month, and of those who do read regularly, one in four avoid non-fiction titles. More than half of the parents surveyed believed their children should read more non-fiction books.
"It is essential that young children read at least one book a week and, in particular, educational books," said family counsellor Jenni Trent Hughes.
But others believe such a stern approach to reading may not help children. "We can turn children off it by simply saying it's something they must be doing," said Amelia Foster, who runs Reading Connects for the National Literacy Trust, an organisation that encourages reading for pleasure to enhance classroom achievement.
Ms Foster said the survey results might not give children enough credit. Previous studies have found that 75% of 11 to 18-year-olds enjoyed reading, and 83% read in their spare time.
Past reading surveys have found distinct differences in the reading habits of boys and girls. Girls tend to be more enthusiastic about reading in general, but particularly fiction (perhaps helping to explain why Jaequeline Wilson, author of Sleepovers and Bad Girls, is the most borrowed author from public libraries), while boys are drawn to books about a place, subject, or hobby that interests them.
Nicola Davies, author of Poo: A Natural History of the Unmentionable, said while working with underachieving boys she found they responded to non-fiction better than fiction. "You can get them to write poetry but they won' t read it," she said.
Ms Davies would like to see children's non-fiction take off in the way adult non-fiction has in recent years, thanks largely to rifles like Longitude that employ strong narratives. This may encourage boys to read more, she said.
"There's a lot of really crap non-fiction out there. It's absolute' paint by numbers, pile them high, and sell them cheap'. But it's not really addressing the issue. Non-fiction as it is cutting off a whole route into reading, especially for boys," added Ms Davies.
But the consequences of these trends may run deeper. Some worry that steering clear of non-fiction may effect the development of a child's imagination, even going so far as to impact their future career choices.
Nicola Jones credits her choice of studying zoology at university to her childhood Encyclopedia Britannica. "There was this fantastic bit in the back on transparencies of human bodies, and it absolutely fired my imagination about the workings of the human body. Children's imagination needs all sorts of fuel. And that's what's going to drive them, give them intrinsic motivation. It's what makes your intellectual cars go." For this reason Ms Jones is planning a conference next year that will address how non-fiction can be transformed into something more children will want to read.
Which of the following belongs to non-fiction？
A．Building.B．Running a gym.C．Body building.D．Traveling.
微信支付 
支付宝支付