Lectures1 An imal Aware ness and Thought （动物的意识与思想）2 Antibiotics （抗生素）3 Beta Pictoris （绘架座3 星）4 Child Development （儿童的发展过程）5 Climate and Population （气候与人口）6 Co-evolution （共同进化）7 Deforestation （森林砍伐）8 Early Magazines （早期的杂志）9 Early Written Language （早期的手写文字）10 Gen etic Diversity in Crops （农作物基因的多样性）11 Gullies on Mars （浸蚀谷）12 History of In sura nee （保险的历史）13 In flue nee of thd Media （媒体的影响）14 Mammoth Cave Archeology （巨大洞穴考古研究）15 Mayan Drought （毁玛雅文明的大旱灾）16 New Media T echnology （新媒体科技）17 Nullification Crisis （拒行联邦法危机）18 Periodic Extinction （周期性绝种）19 Petrified Wood （石化木）20 Salesperson Attributes （销售人员特征）21 Stress （压力）22 Support Groups for Writers （作家互助会）23 Tidal Power Gen eratio n （潮汐发电）24 Why Pla nets Are Rou nd （行星体为何成球状）We need to understand how the reading process varies when we go from writing system to ano ther, kno wledges of how this affects the n eurological processesAnimal Awareness and ThoughtAnimal behaviour is currently jK well jk I guess you could say it's a pretty hot field of research. A lot of work is being done in trying to answer certain basic questions about the other creatures we share this planet with One of the issues that I find particu^rly interesting is the question of to what degree animals--and by animals, of course I mean animals other than humans-to what degree these non-human animals are capable of self awareness and conscious thought. For some time now, researchers have been trying to determine if animals think in the same sense that we do, or if. on the other hand, their behaviour is just a 卩altern of automated reactions, kind of like a computer program that runs from birth-what we commonly refer to as instinct.In 亡ase any of you are wonderirig why we should care b Jefs talk about the importance of this for a minute or two. Whether animals think is a question that has both practical and moral implications-serious ones. We as humans position ourselves at the top of the nsdu『合I hierarchy by comparing ourselves to other animals and then basicaHy |k well, basically g treat those animals accordingly, often in ways that can only be described as artro匚iou合Our jiustificati on of that treatment 冷based on the assumption that animals don't reason, think or feel in the same way that we humans do. And this is something we've really had little reason ta doubt, until recently. But k what if animals are found to have the capacity for thought. the jk ah jK welll jK maybe I should ask you for an answer to this questiork What do you think the practical consequences ofthis might be?(Student 1)I think it would change the world. Issues would come up about eve^thing from theraising of animals for consumption as food totheir use as research subjects and even thekeeping 口f animals ss 卩et$ or in zoos. AHsorts of scientific research would beaffected. So would the testing of newproducts ilike cosmetics and medicines；(Student 2)I agree. I think the question of animal awa reness and thought alrriost 帖sto beignored; at least until our technology gets toa point where we no longer have to exploitthem the way we do now Besiides, hew canwe ever be sure whether they have it or not?Well, iV s ceftainly not possible to ask them questions to find out. Ac：cording to someresearchers, that fact alone-the fact that animals are incapable af using language conversationaNy-is enough to tell us they cannot reason and are without selfie on sciousness. But there are indicatio ns that language ability, or the lack of it may not be the whole storyA number of years ago a pioneering study of se^awareness in animals was done using a technique called the ''mirror test1' A group of chimpanzees that were famihar with mirrors were anaesthetized and then marked on their foreheads with red dye. After they awoke, the marked animals were allowed to see themselves in a mirror. These animals tended to touch their own foreheads in the region of the mark more frequenUy than a group that was unmarked or another group that was marked^ but not allowed to look in a mirror. What's more, some of the marked chimpanzees would examine their fingers after touching the red mark on their foreheads. This clearly suggested they understood that what they were seeing was not another chimpanzee, but a ^epfese^ation of themselves This realization required that a thought process, on some basic level anyway, be taking place.This realization required that a thought process, on some basic level anyway, be taking place.(Student 1) But professor, those were chimpanzees. They're about as close to humans as you can get geneti亡音lly What about other species?I'm glad s口mebody asked that, because that's the really sticky issue. Once we decide that thought \s not exclusively a human characteristic, where do we draw the line? How do we decide which animals p口ssess it and which do not, which animals qualify for treatment as smntient beings mnd which do not. Why should a dog be treated one way and a chicken another, for example? Think about it and prepare ycur arguments for our next class.According to the lecture, what is it that researchers are trying to deiermine about animals?O Whether they are bom with instinct.O Whether they have language.O Whelher their behaviour is automatic.O Whether they can be trained to recognize themselvesAccording to the professor, why is the research mentioned in the feclure important?O If how anrmals think FS known, they can be trained more easdy.O The way animals are treated is based on our understanding of themO Some animals may appr口白ch humans in intelligenceO Animals must be understood before they can be protected.Which of the fbll口wing can be inferred about chimpanzees from the Jecture?O They can distinguish betwee n an 口bject and its imageO Instinct plays no part in their behaviour.O They are very social animals.O They are n early as intelligent as humans.What question does the professor ask his students to consider for the next class?O How human thought differs from thought in animats.O How animals that 匕日n think should be treatedO Howto distinguish between animals that can think and those that can't.O Why dogs and chickens shouid be considered as thinking creatures.Why does the professor say thisjk?O He w^nts to expt^fn the reason for discussing something.O He wants the students to know their understanding will be testedO He thinks some students may not have understood what he just saidO He doesn't think what he is saying is very tmportantWhat does the profess口r mean when he says ihisjK? O He expecled a question.O The student has asked a meaningful question.O He knows the answer to the question.O The students should ask more questions.AntibioticsIn our last class we drscussed how antibiotics are developed and how some of them work In this lecture, I'd like to jKwell, I'd like to consider them from another aspect. Tci day, I want to look into the limitations of antibiotics, and the dangers of misusing them. I'm sure non己of you would argue if i 阳id that the development of antibiotics qualifies as cne of the most significant medical advances afthe twentieth century Okay(KI can see most of you are nodding your heads in agreement After Friday's class, I'd be surprised if you didn't. I mean jk we talked about howtheyVe saved millions of Irves and relieved enormous suffering, rigM?Antibiotics worked so well that only a few decades ago it was thought they would allow us to eliminate forever many of the infectious diseases that had been such a threat to human life But jK unfortunately, now it looks like things may not work out that way The optimism brought about by successes in the battle against diseases like tuberculosis and syphilis is now giving way to daubt: and concern, even to fear over what the future may hold.So h now, w/y have things taken such a turn for the worse? i guess we could say that it's because microofganisms are the ultimate v survivalists. Given half a chance they u白n adapt to practically anything. The organisms that cause many of our worst diseases 日re. in a sense, learning how to defeat the antibiotics we use against them, though it can^ really be called "learning", as I'll explain later.Maybe we should take a closer fook at why these tiny creatures are the most adaptablE organisms on this planet. If we think about it, it's really not that hard to figure out what their secret is; well, part of their secret anyway. Does anyone want 1 口take a guess? Ah jK yes jK Donna, go ahead.(Student 1)I think I remember reading somewhere that it has to do with the way they repr口ducm.Okay. youYe pointed in the right direction. But can you be a Bttle more specific?(Student 1)Pm sorry, but that's all I can remember now.(Studer 2)I'm pretty sure it's haw fast they reproduce They do it so quickly that they just evolve faster than other kinds of organisms.That's a good pmrt of the answer. The rateat which they reproduce is very fast compared to other, especially larger^ organisms. lt R s important to remember that because high rates of reproduction mean more genetic mutations jk uh, i n other words more changes to lheir genetic makeup jK taking place over a certain period of time. Now, these changes .like all mutations, are randorn; they aren't consciously drrected in any way by the bacteria. That's what I meant a few minutes ago when I said we can't refer to the process as "teaming." But it's easy to see how having more changes happening in a given period of time means there's a better chance thal a version, called 3"st rain1' by biologists, will be produced that is resistant to a particular kind □f antibiotic.What makes things worse jk much worse |K for us is that the bacteria dont even have to rely on reproduction to pass this resistance from individual to individual. They can transfer it between themselves with something called a "plasmid." Plasmids are fragments-piecss-of DMA that can be transferred between bacteria \when they are in physical contact. This has kind of 日jK well t kind of a multiplying effect on their adaptability.But even that isn't the whole story. To understand the problem completely we |K uh, we really have to look at our own behavior and the Effect it is having For many yea『s dolors haveprescribed antibiotics when they were not really necessary, and patients have quit taking them before their schedule of treatment was complete The effect this has is to kill off the bacteria that are most sensitive to the drugs and jK and now it's important to understand this(K to give thedrug*resrstant strains a匚ompetitive advantage.What had the class been discussing?O The diseases caused by bacteria.O Medicines that kill bacteriaO The first antibioticsO Diseases that have been wiped out by anlibioti匚百.Accordi ng to the lecture, how did the development of antibiotics change ocr view of infectious disease?O It made us overconfidenl.O It helped us understand how bacteria 亡a jse disease.O It showed us hew to eliminate infectious diseaseO It 前口恥日us how diseases are spread.What is mentioned as a reason for the adaptability of bacteria?O Their simplicity.O Their small size.Their rate of reproduction.Their resistance to antibiotics.Why does the professor menttan plasmids?O To show how antibioses work.O To describe how bacteria adapt.O To explain how di&eases are spread.O To suggest how bacteria can be destroyedWhy does the professor say thisjK?O He anticipated the students' responseO The information is fundamental.O The information is common knowledge.O There is much disagreement on this point.What does the professor imply when he says thisjk?O There is much research yet to be done.O The students ought to know the reel already.O There is a conflicting point of view.O He hasn't finished his explanation yetBeta PictorisThe next topic in our syllabus is the formation of planets. £口」think it would be a good time to ialk about one place-the only place so far -where we umn actualEy see this process going on Who'she^rd of Dete P/ctcws? □kay( well, in that case, maybe I'd better give you a little background on it first. Beta Pictoris is a bright star that, unfortunately for us here. can only be seen frorn the southern hemisphere. It's also a fairiy close star; if anything that's 63 light years away can be called 'close1At any rate, it's close enough that some of our larger and more advanced telescopes uan make very detailed observations of it.Beta Pictoris first caught the attention of astronomers way back in 19B3 That's when they detected exceptionally sir口ng infrared energy coming from that direction using instruments on a Bate 11 its orbiting the earth. Tm sure I don't need to spend much trme going over this, but remember that infrared energy is energy with a very long wavelength-much longerthan that of visible light This type of energy is usually seen c口ming from very young stars. These are often stars that are surrounded by huge disks of orbiting dust. We see these stars in infrared, not hEC：ause they produce more of that type ofstar, the sun, is at least four and a half billion ye^rs older.(Student 2) Can we see any planets, or any signs that planets have begun to formYou mean around Beta J Pictoris? That's a good question and that's where \ was headed next, because there 盹 signs th艮t something is going on. Just recently we discovered that the dust in the disk around the star isn't distributed unifbrmly. What I mean by thai is it isn't smooth. It has kind of like waves or ripples in it. Interestingly enough, these features are found at distances from the star that are very similar to the distances of the gisnt pEarrets in our own solar system From this. even though we can't actually see them ye1, many astronomers are concluding that Beta Pictoris is wall along the way to developing its own family of orbiting bodies. Our best guess is that the ripples are probably caused by the gravity of two large planets that have already formed.because of these ripples, some astronomers think that the Beta Pictoris system is probably in an intermediate phase of development jK uh, that is they think it's probably a link between even younger stars with smooth dusty disks and much more evolved systems; systems in which most of the disk hasenergy, but because the material in the disks stops energy of shorter wavelengths from reaching us. And it these dusty disks, you know, the disks that blcic：k the energy; it is these disks from which planets are thought to form.EventuaEly. using new techniques anti better equipirient, astronomers were ^ble to observe the disk around Beta Pictons directly. They no longer had to infer its existence; they could actually see it. Having formed orly about 20 million years ago( Beta Pictoris is at just about ihe age when we would expect it io have a disk t and so far it is the only star around which one has been observed. We only expect to see these disks around relatively young stars, tf the st^r were much older, the disk would have already disappeared; because it would already have coalesced into planets(Student 1}Excuse me, professor. Are you saying that a star twenty miElion years old is young?Yes(that's exactly what I'm saying. You see, it's important for us to keep things in perspective here Twenty million years may not seem very young, but a starthat old is really still just in its infancy. That might be a little hard to take in, I understand, but remember that our own already formed into planets Beta Pictoris is probably the only place that's close enough for us to observe the stages of planetary formation and the other processes that take place in the first 100 million years of a star's life.Why did astronomers first start paying attention to Beta Pictoris?O It was discovered to have planets.O It ts close to earth.O A dusty disk was seen around itO It was giving off an unusual amount of radiation.According to the lecture, what do the npples in the disk around Beta Pictoris teB astronomers?O Planets have already formed.O There isn't much material in the diskO The disk is coohng rapidly.O The disk is very youngAccording to the lecture, what is the value of Beta Pictoris to astronomers?It is the first star arourtcJ which phnels have been discovered, k fs the closest star to our solar system.Its radiation is easily delected.It 匚启门show us how planetary systems evolve.According to the lecture, which of the following statements are true about Beta Pictoris?(click on two answers)It ns a very large star.It is relatively easy to observe.It is nearly as old our Sun.It is the only star known to have a dusty diskWh at can be inferred about the professor when she says thisjk?O She thinks the students should already know about Beta Pictoris O She sees that the students are unfamiliar with Seta Pictoris.O She doesn't think Beta Pictoris is difficult to understand.O She has talked to the class about Beta Pictoris beforeWhy does the professor say this^K?O The concept should be reviewed. O The concept is not important O The concept is simple.O The concept is new.Chihi DevelnptnentGood morning everyone. I hope you enjoyed your weekend. but I also hope you spent st least a little bit of it studying for Friday's midterm Okay, the next item I want to talk about in our disc：ussion of factors that influen匚© a child's devel口prriErU is the attention or, in many cases, the lack of it that a child recedes during the first few months of its life It is an unfortunate fact that many children must spend those first months, or even years in the care of institutions. As regrettable as that is, studying these disadvantaged children can tea ch us something. By looking at the special problems they face, g can better understanci how early childhood experience umn affect the development of particular skills or abilities later in lifeA study recently examined certain skills and abilities arnong 5- and 6-year olds And these werent just any 5- and 6-year olds either this was a very special grou卩of children. I say that because they all had been orphaned. They had all. for one reason or another, lost their parents and had spent anywhere from the first seven to the first 41 mcinth£ of therr lives in the care of st ate-run institutions. The quality of care they received varied, but jK 日nci I think I'm on pretty soHd ground here jK nene enjoyed the richness found in a normal family environment. Typically, the children spent lhe entire day in basically quiet. colorless rooms that provided very little in the way of stimulation of any kind. They didnl have much contact with the oveiworked caregivers either. So few adults were caring for so many children that it was practi：cany impossible to give each child anything close to the amount af attention he would have received in a more normal family environ in ent.But the n. well |K sooner or later, the children were adopted. After adoption, their situation changed dramatically The strict requirements for adoption ensured that they v^ertt from some of the most attention deprived environme Ms to some of the most enriched ones SuddenJy-well, overnight really-these children became part of well-educated, affluent, stable gnd loving families. Understandably, the children could not change as quickly as their surroundings had. As they adjusted to their new situations, they Continued to experience a number of physical and behavioral problems. deficiencies that had been first seen by researchers while the children were still at institutions How well do you think they were able to overcome them?(Student 1)Children are pretty resilient. Theycan get through some pretty tough challenges. So, I would guess that the problems weren't permanent. I imagine the age at which the childwas adopted had something Io do with how well they did. I mean, theearher the better, right? But I'd guess that most of the children w口ulH be fine h sooner or later.(Student 2) I'm not so sure I agree with that. What happens to a child that early in life usually sticks with them into later life, doesn't it?Well, you're both right For most of thechildren, these problems disappeared within a yearBut for some the physical and behauforal problemspersisted. These included difficulties learning andforming social rel^tionshipw The children generallyhad normal levels 口f iritElli gence and showedpatterns of strength, as well as weakness, acrossdifferent ^kiCI areas. just tike other children do. Allof the children performed well on tasks thatrequired visual perception like jk uh jK likearranging blocks in patterns, -for example.However, more than half of the children showedserious difficulty in paying attention to verbal inform ation. When they had to listen to words,remember a task and perform it quickly, m^ny ofthem had a hardtime. Furthermore, all of the children studied showed sonne delay in the development of physical coordination. They had a poorly developed sense of balance 自nd experienced difficulty integrating the movement of the right and left sides of their bodies.That's the bad news, but there is another side. The study also found that while a deprived environment appears to hinder same aspects of development among adopted chddren, enriched surroundings have a compensating effect. The longer children had been living with their adoptive families, the better they performed on mmny cif the tests.What is the main point the professor is making in the lecture?O Most orphanages provide an adequately stimulating environme nt for childrenO A child's merit臼I development is closely related to its earhesi experiences.O Chifdren can recover from the effects of a poor childhood environment.O The most serious effects ofthe orphanage experience are physical ralher than mental. What can be inferred from the lecture?O Children who are adopted at an earlier age have fewer problemsO Not all children from orphanages have problemsO The environment in orphanagem is generally improving.O Most ofthe problems the children have last their entire lives.Which of the following were mentioned as problems 匚hildren who spend time in institution have?□Difficulty paying attention to spoken language.□Difficulty coordinarting physical movements.□Problems with visual perception.□Lower than average levels cifintelligerice.What did the professor say about childre n who were adopted?O They improved little.O They recovered to the level of children 艸ho were never in orphanage.O Many of thetr prablems were lessened.O They were more than other children.What does the professor mean when he says this|K?O He is not sure of what he is saying.O His view is only one way of locking at the problem.O The students should feel free to disagree with wh合t he is saying.O He is confident what he is saying is accurate.What does the professor imply when he says thisjK?O He will present 刁more optimistic view O The situation is worse than it seems. O There is much more to be studied.O No conductors can be made yet.Climate and PopulationIt might be a good idea to start off todays lecture with a question. You all know somethjng about the Mayans, don't you? What can you tell me about them; I mean who they were, what happened to them, that sort of thing?(Stutfent 7) I remember that they had a pretty advanced civilization Jn southern Mexico. Ithink. Their civilization lasted for a long time-a couple of thousand years-and then justcollapsed; pretty suddenly, I think. There area lot theories about what hap卩日DEd, butno one can say which one is right. We Yemostly just guessing.That's not a bad summary But the bit about noi knowing what happened? Well. that may no longer be true. An important discovery was made recently, it's a discovery thafs leading rn^ny people to believe that the May^n civilization may have failed due to a prolonged drought. I don't want to get into that very deeply, but it is an interesting idea to use to introduce what we will be talking about-the possibility that climatic factors har/e had a much larger impact on human populations. specificalEy on deiermFiling how fast they grew, than we have previously imagined.Estimates of what the world population was at any time before the nineteenth century are very difficult to make with confidence. However, we can be fairly certain that the total nuinber of humans living on the phnet has rot increased steadily; that if has( in fact( gone both up and down repeatedly over the centuries. The traditional explanations for this fluctuation include disease, war and natural disaster, but little menticri is made of large-scale climatic change as having had much of an impact.One period of history when there was a fairly steady rise in the human populstion was the 400 hundred years from 1400 to 1800、World population doubled during this time, and it did so not t in one or two regions, but throughout the world 3S a whole. Even more interesting is the fact that this occurred with little or no improvement in standards of nutriti口n, health care or sanilation. So,, how can the increase be explained? Now, keep in mind people at that time were far more dependent on the cHmate than we are today. Now, for a little pdp quiz, why was that?(Student 2) It's mentioned in one of our readings, isn't it? In todays world, the effects ofregional drought or some other kind ofdisaster car ha reduced bybringing in what is needed from someplace else. Before the 20thcentury, food could not be produced in large enough quantitiesanywhere to allow thisAnd dcrnl forget transportation. That's another major factor. It wasnt untit fairly recently that we could move large amounts of food and water with enough speed to make a difference. So. before we could do 创I this, a serious regional disruption of agricultural productivity 神口咖have been m(KE likely to cost a large number of lives.(Student 1)Wouldn't medical advances also ba something to consider?i mean, it's much easier for us to &ave the lives of people affectedby hunger or disease than it was a century or two agoThat JS another factor. Yes, it certainly is. 凯 now we car see what is so interesting about that period of tim e from 1400 to 1800-*a time when the world population grew so dramatically in spite of the fact that none of the rnodern advantages we have-surplus food production, W transportation and advanced medical treatment had come along yet. What was different about it? Th at's the question we rreed toI think we need to examine what theclimate was like during this peri口d When we Jo, vvh日t do we find? We find that the climate was unusually stable over most of the world for much of this time Could this account for the popjlatton increase? Well, the green revol uiion hadnt happened yet Agriculture was still based on the same technology that had already been in use for centuries, and tittle h^d changed either. Eo.il seems that the cfimate may be the oni\/explanation。