Article: Most people call it "body language" -- the clues to the meaning that we get from gesture, facial expressions, posture -- everything that isn't spoken.Experts call it "nonverbal communication," but it means the same thing: a second source of human communication that is often more reliable to understanding what is really going on than the words themselves. Understanding body language is important to success, whether in the business world or in our personal lives.However, most of our ideas about body language are wrong, according to modern communication research. There is a belief that people with shifty eyes are probably lying.As Paul Ekman says, "When we asked people how they could tell if someone was lying, too much blinking and shifty eyes were the winners.But sometimes people act like that because they are shy.Liars pretend to be calm in order not to be caught. Ekman goes on to argue against such a wrong belief.Although this kind of body language is probably an expression of nervousness, it is not always because the person is lying.Shyness can, for example, make people shift their eyes.To understand what someone's behavior means, you have to watch them carefully. There is also a belief that when meeting someone, the more eye contact , the better.As a result people would like to make initial contact in formal situations, like a job interview, by staring fixedly at the other human.Yet Ekman points out that most of us are comfortable with eye contact lasting a few seconds, but any eye contact that is longer than that can make us nervous. In short, you must carefully consider the speaker and the speaking environment.Experts suggest that unless you know about someone's basic communication style, you will have little hope in understanding their true feelings through body language.In other words, body language carries important but not always true messages. Question: It can be inferred from the passage that _ . Yes or no, is the answer "sometimes we can't judge a person by watching his body language"?
No

(Question)
Article: For a long time, the traditional method of identifying liars was to watch their body language, including facial expressions. What if the person appears to be nervous? Is the person unable to look me in the eye? Is he or she look around the room? What about other nervous movements, such as fidgeting or shifting from side to side? Many people--from parents to police officers and airport security personnel--depend on this method. But does a person's body and face reveal the truth? Not according to a new study. Talking, it seems, is the best way to smoke out a liar. That is what researchers in the United Kingdom found out recently. Their investigation took place at one place where lying can get you into big trouble--an airport. The researchers asked volunteers to pretend they were real passengers and then lie to airport security agents. Some of the agents used spoke conversation-based methods to question these make-believe passengers. Others depended instead on the person's body language, like lack of eye contact and showing signs of nervousness. The agents talking with the passengers were 20 times more likely to catch the liars. The study found that these conversation-based techniques can help you recognize when a person is lying to you. Like many methods, this conversation method has a name. It is called Controlled Cognitive Engagement or CCE, for short. The British government partly financed this study. The American Psychological (APA) published the findings. Body language cannot be trusted. Using body language and facial expressions to catch someone in a lie is really hard. And it only works, seemingly, by chance. Thomas Ormerod is the head of the School of Psychology at the University of Sussex in England. On the APA website, he reported that the "suspicious-signs method"--or using body language--"almost completely fails" in finding lies. Question: What should volunteers in the investigation do? Yes or no, is the answer "Act as passengers as researchers required."?
(Answer)
Yes

Ques: Article: In 1992, when Xi Jinping worked in Fuzhou, he came across a newspaper report about "My Guling," written by a Chinese student studying in the United States. The report described an American couple who tried in vain to revisit a southern Chinese town called Guling, where the husband, Milton Gardner, had spent 10 years of his childhood before moving back to the United States in 1911. Gardner, who later became a professor of physics at the University of California, had been longing to revisit Guling since 1979 when the diplomatic ties between China and the US were set up. But he had never made the trip due to his failing health. According to the newspaper, Gardner kept uttering "Kuling, Kuling" in the final hours of his life. After he passed away, his wife Elizabeth Gardner decided to carry out the dying wish of her husband and since then made several trips to China in an attempt to find the small town that her husband had so much affection about. Her efforts ended in vain as she had few clues about the exact spot of the town. But a Chinese student lodging at the Gardners' recognized the small town as Guling near Fuzhou City from postmarks on some old mails of late Mr. Gardner. The student wrote an article about Gardners' story and sent it to the People's Daily, one of the major newspapers in China. "After I read the story, I immediately contacted Mrs. Gardner through the departments concerned and invited her to visit Guling," Xi told the media. Thanks to Xi's arrangement, Mrs. Gardner finally arrived at Guling in August 1992. She met there with nine childhood friends of her husband, all of whom were over 90 years old at that time. It was a happy occasion for Mrs. Gardner, who was later awarded the honorary citizenship of Fuzhou City, Xi recalled. "She said that she would value this bond of friendship between her husband and the people of China, because after seeing for herself the beautiful Guling and the warmth and goodwill of the Chinese people, she now understood why her husband had been so deeply attached... Question: From the passage we can learn that _ . Yes or no, is the answer "the Gardners' story is a moving one with a happy ending"?
Ans: No

Ques:Article: There have always been laws against copying other people's ideas. However, when copying was only limited to copying something by hand, problems were solved easily. The solution was always the destruction or removal of the copy. Nowadays, the rise of the Internet has made the issue of intellectual property more complicated. Almost every bit of information can be cut and pasted with a few clicks of a mouse. Many art forms such as writings, films, and music need new protection to ensure that people do not simply transfer them for free. Online illegal copying has been blamed for a huge reduction in the sales of many records because it is hard to convince people to buy something that they can get for free. Even the ideas behind traditional games, such as Scrabble, have been used without the owners' permission. Old laws have been struggling to keep up. While music companies have been successful in persuading courts that action should be taken against people who illegally download music, the law is difficult to carry out. Furthermore, intellectual property rights vary widely from country to country, so it's up for debate which laws apply. Finally, there is the fact that many people simply do not see the act as theft , since once the work has been digitized there is no clear physical object to steal in the first place. All of these issues mean that companies involved with intellectual property -- ideas or easily digitized information -- are fighting desperately to get people to pay for the information they use, rather than paying for an object like a CD that they use. While the companies have sometimes been successful, the practical barriers to full protection seem _ . Finally, all that concerned parties can do is hope that their few successes scare off others and try to find new ways of making money. Question: What can be inferred from this passage? Yes or no, is the answer "New laws are necessary but difficult to put into practice."?

Ans:
No