Article: There is a saying in French--"Si vieillesse pouvait, si jeunesse savait"--which means roughly "if age had the ability, if youth had the knowledge." I was reminded of this saying the other day when I saw an interview with a distinguished Asian neurosurgeon , now retired, about the impact of computer technology on modern surgery. He was referring to the difficulty people of his age had in using the new techniques, but also to the fact that younger surgeons, who are more comfortable with the technology, lack some of the wisdom of experience. It struck me that this problem is not just confined to specialized fields such as medicine, but is widespread in modern life. There are many areas where the rapid growth of technology has widened the generation gap. Young people are at ease with modern technology and propose all sorts of ways for using and developing it. But they often lack the experience needed to see further into the future to the possible dangers that a particular development may cause. Older people see all sorts of difficulties and dangers, but are sometimes ignored, or even accused of being against progress, if they point out potential problems. Equally, they may see potential uses, but not have the technical skills to put them into practice themselves or the trust in the younger generation to do so. Enthusiasm and inexperience come into conflict with caution and arrogance, usually with unsatisfactory results for both sides. What is needed is the development of a partnership, based on mutual respect, which can deliver real progress by combining enthusiasm and caution in a constructive way, rather than in conflict with each other. The old need to give the younger generation the time, the resources and, above all, the authority to develop new ideas and use their skills. In exchange, the young need to turn more actively to the older generation to seek their advice and exploit their greater experience of the world in foreseeing and overcoming potential problems. Question: The passage is mainly about _ . Yes or no, is the answer "new generation gap between the old and the young"?
No

(Question)
Article: No matter where you travel in Asia, you'll find yourself faced with a new culture, amazing food and special and friendly people. Here are some of these wonderful cities. Beijing, China Beijing serves as the capital of China. The city is old. In fact, almost all buildings have some cultural or historical significance --no matter how small they are. Throughout the city you can find temples, palaces, and works of art that can make you breathless. Siem Reap, Cambodia The wonderful town of Siem Reap is actually a good place to visit, though most people regard it only as a base point for further trips to Angkor and other nearby attractions. Visitors will be amazed by the beautiful temples and artworks that still exist today. Kathmandu, Nepal Located in the heart of the Himalayas, Kathmandu, the largest city and the capital of Nepal, is considered to be one of the most beautiful cities in existence today. It is well-known for its beautiful views of the Himalayas. The shopping districts are world-famous and the hotels in Kathmandu are among the best in the world. Kyoto, Japan The city of Kyoto served as the capital of Japan from 794 to 1868. No longer the capital, it is known as the seventh largest city in Japan instead. Kyoto was destroyed many times throughout history by fires and wars. Now the city is home to more than 1.4 million people and presents a modern look to the world. Question: What the cities mentioned above have in common is that they _ . Yes or no, is the answer "all have many tourist attractions to enjoy"?
(Answer)
No

Ques: Article: Sitting in front of the television may be relaxing, but spending too much time in front of the TV may take years off your life. That's what Australian researchers found when they collected TV viewing information from more than 11,000 people older than 25 years. The study found that people who watches an average six hours of TV a day lived an average 4.8 years less than those who didn't watch any television .Also ,every hour of TV that participants watched after age 25 was associated with a 22-minute reduction in their life expectancy . It's no mystery that sitting in front of the TV isn't exactly healthy. The more TV you watch, the less physically active you are. And the less exercise you get, the more likely you are to develop disease such as diabetes or hear problems. Lennert Veerman is the lead author of the study ,which was published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine .Working at the University of Queesland, Veerman acknowledges that it may not just be the sedentary nature of watching TV that lowers life expectancy,but also the poor diet that onscreen junk-food advertising can promote. But Veerman says that association between watching too much TV and lower life expectancy exists, even after adjusting for diet. Veerman says that it might make sense for doctors to start asking their patients about how much time they spend in front of the TV, and to treat TV time as they would be other risk factors for poor health, such as lack of exercise and an unhealthy diet. Veerman points out that people who are concerned can simply turn off the TV and get off the couch. "Exercise is good," he says, "but even light physical activity also improves health." Question: If you change your diet and watch too much TV, you will _ . Yes or no, is the answer "shorten life expectancy"?
Ans: No

Article: Sadness is unpleasant, and in a society where personal happiness is prized above all else, there is little tolerance for falling in despair. Especially now we've got drugs for getting rid of sad feelings -- whether it's after losing a job, the break-up of a relationship or the death of a loved one. So it's no surprise that more and more people are taking them. But is _ really such a good idea? A growing number of voices from the world of mental health research are saying it isn't. They fear that the increasing tendency to treat normal sadness as a disease is playing fast and loose . Sadness, they argue, serves a useful purpose--and if we lose it, we lose out. Yet many psychiatrists insist not. Sadness has a nasty habit of turning into depression , they warn. Even when people are sad for good reason, they should take drugs to make themselves feel better. So who is right? Is sadness something we cannot live without or something horrible never to touch? There are lots of ideas about why feeling sad should become part of human life. It may be a self-protection strategy, as other primates also show signs of sadness. A losing monkey that doesn't show sadness after it loses a fight may be seen as continuing to challenge the winning monkey -- and that could result in death. In humans sadness has a further function: we may display sadness as a form of communication. By acting sad, we tell other community members that we need support. Then there is the idea that creativity is connected to dark moods. There are plenty of great artists, writers and musicians who have suffered from depression or disorder. Scientists found that people with signs of depression performed better at a creative task, and negative moods make people think deeply over the unhappy experience, which allows creative processes to come to the front. There is also evidence that too much happiness can be bad for your career. A doctor found that people who scored 8 out of 10 on a happiness test were more successful in income and education than 9s... Question: The author believes sadness is _ . Yes or no, is the answer "a necessary function of humans'"?
Yes