Read the following article and answer the question. Article: Think about what you usually have for a meal: Is it a hamburger? What about vegetables? Would it surprise you to learn that what you eat can affect the whole planet? It can--in a big way. Scientists attending the American Association for the Advancement of Science meeting in Chicago presented new studies showing how food and its production affect the globe and its warming climate. It is generally believed that global warming is caused by the large amounts of greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere. One of these greenhouse gases is carbon dioxide. What does this have to do with food? A big part of the carbon dioxide comes from the process of making and eating food, the scientists reported in Chicago. The production of meat contributes to a lot of that carbon dioxide. The process of making a hamburger, for example, requires a lot of energy. A cow has to be fed and raised on farmland, and cow manure is a major source of methane --an especially powerful greenhouse gas. By the time a hamburger is finally served on a dinner plate, it has done great harm to the environment. The message from the research is clear: We can greatly reduce the production of greenhouse gases by eating less meat. All kinds of meat, the scientists reported, are harder on the planet than vegetables. To grow and eat a pound of potatoes, for example, sends less than one-quarter pound of carbon dioxide or other greenhouse gases into the air. So shifting our diet to less meat and more vegetables ,as it turns out, may do the world some good. Question: Which of the following is NOT true? Answer:
OPTIONS:
- To make and eat meat requires a great deal of energy.
- To feed and raise cows on farmland contributes to greenhouse gases.
- To make and eat hamburgers sends greenhouse gases into the air.
- To grow and eat vegetables does no harm to the environment.

Answer: To grow and eat vegetables does no harm to the environment.

Read the following article and answer the question. Article: A new Canada Prize for the Arts and Creativity could be in place by 2010, with large cash prizes for emerging artists in dance, music, theatre and visual arts. The prize is the idea of Tony Gagliano and David Pecaut, founders of the Luminato festival,who were able to convince the federal government to back it. The federal budget has allocated $25 million to support the awards open to emerging artists. The aim is to create a prize that has the prestige of a Nobel Prize. "When you think about the major prizes of the world ---- the Nobel Prize in Sweden,the Kyoto prizes in Japan or the Booker Prize in the U.K . --- they bring great honor and opportunity to the countries that award them," Pecaut said."The idea here is that every year,the Canada prizes will be awarded to the very best promising emerging artists around the world in those four fields. " A jury of international experts would judge the 12 finalists,who would come to Canada and perform or show their work in public to win the Canada prizes.The performances would be televised, allowing Canadians across the country to see it. The federal government liked the idea of such an international prize that would advance Canada's brand,draw tourists and arts professionals from around the world.For the Canadian arts community, one of the greatest challenges is connecting to that international arts world to come up with co-productions and foreign investment and touring chances. A group is working toward establishing the prize by 2010,with potential for semi-final rounds to take place about the same time as the Vancouver Olympic Games."Thirty or forty years from now,the future outstanding dancers and performers will look back and say, 'I broke out on the world scene in Toronto -- that's where I was discovered.' " Question: Why did David Pecaut have the idea of founding a new Ganada Prize? Answer:
OPTIONS:
- To enlarge the content of the Luminato festival.
- To advance Canada's honor and opportunities.
- To consider his own benefits from the prize.
- To make more Canadians get world prizes.

Answer: To advance Canada's honor and opportunities.

Read the following article and answer the question. Article: I was very sympathetic with world leaders burdened with resolving conflicts between nations. When my three children were young, in most days it was hard to keep my house from becoming a war zone. It got worse as they grew older. Three years ago, Zack, then 16, couldn't make it through a day without playing tricks on his sisters, Alex and Taryn, then 11 and 9. My husband and I tried to understand his adolescent moodiness. We begged, reasoned, punished, and left heartfelt notes on his bed about how his behavior was hurting our family. His response was a shrug and "I say it because it's true". I even tried telling the girls to fight back. But it was a bad idea. Now I had three kids at war. At wit's end, I poured my heart out to my sister in an e-mail. She wrote back, "Don't e-mail me. E-mail him." Our son was online every day, mailing and instantly messaging his friends. So what if I was within shouting distance? Maybe he would actually hear me this way. There'd be no yelling or door slamming . Zack wouldn't feel under attack. And with a few simple keystrokes, he could respond. Or not. Zack didn't reply for days. When he finally did, his entire message was four words. I expected the worst, but then smiled when I read them, "You are right. I'm sorry." The kids still fought, of course, but Zack scaled back the abuse . Best of all, I now have an effective way to communicate with not one but three easily annoyed teens. They don't tune me out as much. They don't like to listen to me nag .Or as Alex says, "You're so much nicer online." All I know is that the house is quiet, and we're talking. In fact, Taryn just instantly messaged me from upstairs. It's time to take her to softball practice. Question: By the first sentence of the passage, the author really means to be _ . Answer:
OPTIONS:
- humourous
- sympathetic
- serious
- inspiring

Answer:
humourous