Read the following article and answer the question. Article: August was one of the nastiest months I can remember: torrential rain; a hailstorm or two; cold, bitter winds; and mists. But we are accustomed to such weather in England. Lord Byron used to say that an English summer begins on July 31 and ends on Aug. 1. He called 1816 "the year without a summer." He spent it gazing across Lake Geneva, watching the storms, with 18-year-old Mary Shelley. The lightening flickering across the lake inspired her Frankenstein, the tale of the man-made monster galvanized into life by electricity. This summer's atrocious weather tempted me to tease a Green whom I know. "Well, what about your weather theory now?" (One of the characteristics of Greens is that they know no history.) He replied: "Yes, this weather is unprecedented. England has never had such an August before. It's global warming, of course." That's the Greens' stock response to anything weather-related. Too much sun? "Global warming." Too little sun? "Global warming." Drought? "Global warming." Floods? "Global warming." Freezing cold? "Global warming." I wish the great philosopher Sir Karl Popper were alive to _ the unscientific nature of global warming. He was a student when Albert Einstein's General Theory of Relativity was first published and then successfully tested. Einstein said that for his theory to be valid it would have to pass three tests. "If," Einstein wrote to British scientist Sir Arthur Eddington, "it were proved that this effect does not exist in nature, then the whole theory would have to be abandoned." The idea that human beings have changed and are changing the basic climate system of the Earth through their industrial activities and burning of fossil fuels--the essence of the Greens' theory of global warming--has not much basis in science. Global warming, like Marxism, is a political theory of actions, demanding compliance with its rules. Those who buy in to global warming wish to drastically curb human economic and industrial activities, regardless of the consequences for people, especially the... Question: Which person(s), in the writer's eyes, is the one he agrees with? Answer:
OPTIONS:
- Karl Marx
- Sir Karl Popper
- The Greens
- Mary Shelley

Answer: Sir Karl Popper

Question: Read the following article and answer the question. Article: At Denver there was an crowd of passengers into the coaches on the eastbound B. & M. express. In one coach there sat a very pretty young woman dressed in elegant taste and surrounded by all the luxurious comforts of an experienced traveler. Among the newcomers were two young men, one of handsome presence with a bold, frank face expression and manner; the other a ruffled, glum-faced person, heavily built and roughly dressed. The two were handcuffed together. As they passed down the aisle of the coach the only available seat offered was a reversed one facing the attractive young woman. Here the linked couple seated themselves. The young woman's glance fell upon them with a distant, swift disinterest; then with a lovely smile brightening her face and a tender pink tingeing(,) her rounded cheeks, she held out a little gray-gloved hand. When she spoke her voice, full, sweet, and deliberate, proclaimed that its owner was accustomed to speak and be heard. "Well, Mr. Easton, if you will make me speak first, I suppose I must. Don't you ever recognize old friends when you meet them in the West?" The younger man aroused himself sharply at the sound of her voice, seemed to struggle with a slight embarrassment which he threw off instantly, and then clasped her fingers with his left hand. "It's Miss Fairchild," he said, with a smile. "I'll ask you to excuse the other hand; "it's otherwise engaged just at present." He slightly raised his right hand, bound at the wrist by the shining "bracelet" to the left one of his companion. The glad look in the girl's eyes slowly changed to a bewildered horror. The glow faded from her cheeks. Her lips parted in a vague(,), relaxing distress. Easton, with a little laugh, as if amused, was about to speak again when the other forestalled him. The glum-faced man had been watching the girl's face expression with veiled glances from his keen, shrewd eyes. "You'll excuse me for speaking, miss, but, I see you're acquainted with(,) the officer here. If you'll ask him to speak a word for me when... Question: Why did the glum-faced man urge Easton to the smoker? Answer:
OPTIONS:
- Because he needed a drink and tobacco badly.
- Because he was angry that Miss Fairchild did not say any good words for him
- Because he was bored and tired with Miss Fairchild and Easton's talk.
- Because he was afraid Miss Fairchild would find the truth.
Answer: Because he was afraid Miss Fairchild would find the truth.

Question: Read the following article and answer the question. Article: Olaf Stapledon wrote a book called First and Last Men, in which he looked millions of years ahead. He told of different men and of strange civilizations, broken up by long 'dark ages' in between. In his view, what is called the present time is no more than a moment in human history and we are just the First Men. In 2,000 million years from now there will be the Eighteenth or Last Men. However, most of our ideas about the future are really very short-sighted. Perhaps we can see some possibilities for the next fifty years. But the next hundred? The next thousand? The next million? That's much more difficult. When men and women lived by hunting 50,000 years ago, how could they even begin to picture modern life? Yet to men of 50,000 years from now, we may seem as primitive in our ideas as the Stone-Age hunters do to us. Perhaps they will spend their days goallocking to make new spundles, or struggling with their ballalators through the cribe. These words, which I have just made up, have to stand for things and ideas that we simply can't think of. So why bother even to try imagining life far in the future? Here are two reasons. First, unless we remember how short our own lives are compared with the whole human history, we are likely to think our own interests are much more important than they really are. If we make the earth a poor place to live on, because we are careless or greedy or quarrelsome, our grandchildren will not bother to think of excuses for us. Second, by trying to escape from present interests and imagine life far in the future, we may arrive at quite fresh ideas that we can use ourselves. For example, if we imagine that in the future men may give up farming, we can think of trying it now. So set your imagination free when you think about the future. Question: The text discusses men and women 50,000 years ago and 50,000 years from now in order to show that _ . Answer:
OPTIONS:
- human history is extremely long
- life has changed a great deal
- it is useless to plan for the next 50 years
- it is difficult to tell what will happen in the future
Answer:
it is difficult to tell what will happen in the future