Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from...

LQ

Lê Quỳnh Anh

9 tháng 10 2019

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 36 to 42. Diversity is a hallmark of life, an intrinsic feature of living systems in the natural world. The demonstration and celebration of this diversity is an endless rite. Look at the popularity of museums, zoos, aquariums and botanic gardens. The odder the exhibit, the more different it is from the most common and familiar life forms around us, the more successful it is...

Đọc tiếp

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 36 to 42.

Diversity is a hallmark of life, an intrinsic feature of living systems in the natural world. The demonstration and celebration of this diversity is an endless rite. Look at the popularity of museums, zoos, aquariums and botanic gardens. The odder the exhibit, the more different it is from the most common and familiar life forms around us, the more successful it is likely to be. Nature does not tire of providing oddities for people who look for them. Biologists have already formally classified 1.7 million species. As many as 30 to 40 million more may remain to be classified. (1)

Most people seem to take diversity for granted. If they think about it at all they assume it exists in endless supply. Nevertheless, diversity is endangered as never before in its history. Advocates of perpetual economic growth treat living species as expendable. As a result an extinction crisis of unprecedented magnitude is under way. Worse yet, when diversity needs help most, it is neglected and misunderstood by much of the scientific community that once championed it. (2)

Of the two great challenges to the legitimacy of this diversity, the familiar one comes primarily from economists. Their argument, associated with such names as Julian Simon, Malcolm McPherson and the late Herman Kahn, can be paraphrased: "First, if endangered species have a value as resources - which has been greatly exaggerated - then we should be able to quantify that value so that we can make unbiased, objective decisions about which species, if any, we should bother to save, and how much the effort is worth. Secondly, the global threat to the diversity of species, particularly in the tropics, has been overestimated. Thirdly, we have good substitutes for the species and ecosystems that are being lost, and these substitutes will nullify the damage caused by the extinctions". (3)

The structure of the argument seems to me to be identical in form to that of an old joke from the American vaudeville circuit. One elderly lady complained to another about her recent vacation at a resort in the Catskill Mountains in New York State. "The food was terrible", she moaned. "Pure poison, I couldn't eat a bite. And the portions were so tiny!" (4)

Species may be valuable, but not especially so, and the threat to them has been exaggerated. But this does not matter anyway, say the economists, because we can replace any species that vanishes.(5)

It is not clear how much of an impact this argument has on the informed public, but it has certainly provoked an outcry among scientific conservationists. It has set the terms for, and dominated, most of the pro-diversity literature of the past few years, making it a literature of response, thus limiting its scope and creative force.

Question 37: Which feature of the natural world do people find especially fascinating?

A. its great variety

B. its ancient forms

C. its strange ritual

D. its unclassified species

#Mẫu giáo

1

DH

Dương Hoàn Anh

9 tháng 10 2019

Đáp án A

Dịch nghĩa: Đâu là đặc điểm của thế giới tự nhiên mà con người thấy hứng thú nhất?

A. sự đa dạng, muôn vẻ

B. hình thức cổ kính

C. lễ nghi kì lạ

D. những loài chưa được phân loại

Giải thích: Thông tin ở đoạn 1 “Nature does not tire of providing oddities for people who look for them” [Thiên nhiên không ngừng mang đến những điều mới lạ cho con người, những người mà luôn tìm kiếm nó]

Đúng(0)

LQ

Lê Quỳnh Anh

7 tháng 10 2018

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 36 to 42. Diversity is a hallmark of life, an intrinsic feature of living systems in the natural world. The demonstration and celebration of this diversity is an endless rite. Look at the popularity of museums, zoos, aquariums and botanic gardens. The odder the exhibit, the more different it is from the most common and familiar life forms around us, the more successful it is...

Đọc tiếp

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 36 to 42.

Diversity is a hallmark of life, an intrinsic feature of living systems in the natural world. The demonstration and celebration of this diversity is an endless rite. Look at the popularity of museums, zoos, aquariums and botanic gardens. The odder the exhibit, the more different it is from the most common and familiar life forms around us, the more successful it is likely to be. Nature does not tire of providing oddities for people who look for them. Biologists have already formally classified 1.7 million species. As many as 30 to 40 million more may remain to be classified. (1)

Most people seem to take diversity for granted. If they think about it at all they assume it exists in endless supply. Nevertheless, diversity is endangered as never before in its history. Advocates of perpetual economic growth treat living species as expendable. As a result an extinction crisis of unprecedented magnitude is under way. Worse yet, when diversity needs help most, it is neglected and misunderstood by much of the scientific community that once championed it. (2)

Of the two great challenges to the legitimacy of this diversity, the familiar one comes primarily from economists. Their argument, associated with such names as Julian Simon, Malcolm McPherson and the late Herman Kahn, can be paraphrased: "First, if endangered species have a value as resources - which has been greatly exaggerated - then we should be able to quantify that value so that we can make unbiased, objective decisions about which species, if any, we should bother to save, and how much the effort is worth. Secondly, the global threat to the diversity of species, particularly in the tropics, has been overestimated. Thirdly, we have good substitutes for the species and ecosystems that are being lost, and these substitutes will nullify the damage caused by the extinctions". (3)

The structure of the argument seems to me to be identical in form to that of an old joke from the American vaudeville circuit. One elderly lady complained to another about her recent vacation at a resort in the Catskill Mountains in New York State. "The food was terrible", she moaned. "Pure poison, I couldn't eat a bite. And the portions were so tiny!" (4)

Species may be valuable, but not especially so, and the threat to them has been exaggerated. But this does not matter anyway, say the economists, because we can replace any species that vanishes.(5)

It is not clear how much of an impact this argument has on the informed public, but it has certainly provoked an outcry among scientific conservationists. It has set the terms for, and dominated, most of the pro-diversity literature of the past few years, making it a literature of response, thus limiting its scope and creative force.

Question 42: The position of the scientific conservationists has been weakened because they have _________.

A. adopted the economists' arguments.

B. failed to communicate with public.

C. lost the initiative in the debate.

D. protested too loudly.

#Mẫu giáo

1

DH

Dương Hoàn Anh

7 tháng 10 2018

Đáp án C

Giải thích: Vị trí của những nhà bảo tồn khoa học trở nên yếu thế hơn bởi vì họ đã _______.

A. lấy lý lẽ của những nhà kinh tế học

B. thất bại trong việc đối thoại với cộng đồng

C. mất đi vị thế chủ động trong cuộc tranh luận

D. phản kháng quá kịch liệt

Giải thích: Thông tin ở đoạn cuối cùng “It is not clear how much of an impact this argument has on the informed public, but it has certainly provoked an outcry among scientiﬁc conservationists. It has set the terms for, and dominated” [Không rõ là ảnh hưởng của những lý lẽ này đến công chúng ra sao, nhưng chắc chắn rằng nó đã dẫn đến sự phản đối kịch liệt của những nhà bảo tồn khoa học. Nó đã đặt ra giới hạn và áp đảo. . .] Lí luận của nhà kinh tế chiếm thế chủ đạo, nghĩa là vị trí của nhà bảo tồn khoa học sẽ ngược lại là mất đi, yếu hơn.

Đúng(0)

LQ

Lê Quỳnh Anh

27 tháng 10 2017

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 36 to 42. Diversity is a hallmark of life, an intrinsic feature of living systems in the natural world. The demonstration and celebration of this diversity is an endless rite. Look at the popularity of museums, zoos, aquariums and botanic gardens. The odder the exhibit, the more different it is from the most common and familiar life forms around us, the more successful it is...

Đọc tiếp

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 36 to 42.

Diversity is a hallmark of life, an intrinsic feature of living systems in the natural world. The demonstration and celebration of this diversity is an endless rite. Look at the popularity of museums, zoos, aquariums and botanic gardens. The odder the exhibit, the more different it is from the most common and familiar life forms around us, the more successful it is likely to be. Nature does not tire of providing oddities for people who look for them. Biologists have already formally classified 1.7 million species. As many as 30 to 40 million more may remain to be classified. (1)

Most people seem to take diversity for granted. If they think about it at all they assume it exists in endless supply. Nevertheless, diversity is endangered as never before in its history. Advocates of perpetual economic growth treat living species as expendable. As a result an extinction crisis of unprecedented magnitude is under way. Worse yet, when diversity needs help most, it is neglected and misunderstood by much of the scientific community that once championed it. (2)

Of the two great challenges to the legitimacy of this diversity, the familiar one comes primarily from economists. Their argument, associated with such names as Julian Simon, Malcolm McPherson and the late Herman Kahn, can be paraphrased: "First, if endangered species have a value as resources - which has been greatly exaggerated - then we should be able to quantify that value so that we can make unbiased, objective decisions about which species, if any, we should bother to save, and how much the effort is worth. Secondly, the global threat to the diversity of species, particularly in the tropics, has been overestimated. Thirdly, we have good substitutes for the species and ecosystems that are being lost, and these substitutes will nullify the damage caused by the extinctions". (3)

The structure of the argument seems to me to be identical in form to that of an old joke from the American vaudeville circuit. One elderly lady complained to another about her recent vacation at a resort in the Catskill Mountains in New York State. "The food was terrible", she moaned. "Pure poison, I couldn't eat a bite. And the portions were so tiny!" (4)

Species may be valuable, but not especially so, and the threat to them has been exaggerated. But this does not matter anyway, say the economists, because we can replace any species that vanishes.(5)

It is not clear how much of an impact this argument has on the informed public, but it has certainly provoked an outcry among scientific conservationists. It has set the terms for, and dominated, most of the pro-diversity literature of the past few years, making it a literature of response, thus limiting its scope and creative force.

Question 40: Which statement represents the views of economists?

A. It is important to conserve endangered species.

B. Endangered species have no value in themselves.

C. Only some parts of the natural world are under threat.

D. New species could be introduced as necessary.

#Mẫu giáo

1

DH

Dương Hoàn Anh

27 tháng 10 2017

Đáp án B

Dịch nghĩa: Câu nào trong số các phát biểu sau đây thể hiện quan điểm của các nhà kinh tế học?

A. Bảo vệ các loài vật đang gặp nguy hiểm là chuyện rất quan trọng.

B. Những loài vật đang gặp nguy hiểm không có giá trị nào với họ cả.

C. Chỉ một vài phần của thế giới tự nhiên đang bị đe dọa.

D. Những loài vật mới sẽ rất cần thiết.

Giải thích: Thông tin ở đoạn 3 “if endangered species have a value as resources - which has been greatly exaggerated” [những loài động vật đang gặp nguy hiểm có giá trị như những nguồn tài nguyên - cái mà đang được thổi phồng quá mức]

Đúng(0)

LQ

Lê Quỳnh Anh

6 tháng 10 2019

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 36 to 42. Diversity is a hallmark of life, an intrinsic feature of living systems in the natural world. The demonstration and celebration of this diversity is an endless rite. Look at the popularity of museums, zoos, aquariums and botanic gardens. The odder the exhibit, the more different it is from the most common and familiar life forms around us, the more successful it is...

Đọc tiếp

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 36 to 42.

Diversity is a hallmark of life, an intrinsic feature of living systems in the natural world. The demonstration and celebration of this diversity is an endless rite. Look at the popularity of museums, zoos, aquariums and botanic gardens. The odder the exhibit, the more different it is from the most common and familiar life forms around us, the more successful it is likely to be. Nature does not tire of providing oddities for people who look for them. Biologists have already formally classified 1.7 million species. As many as 30 to 40 million more may remain to be classified. (1)

Most people seem to take diversity for granted. If they think about it at all they assume it exists in endless supply. Nevertheless, diversity is endangered as never before in its history. Advocates of perpetual economic growth treat living species as expendable. As a result an extinction crisis of unprecedented magnitude is under way. Worse yet, when diversity needs help most, it is neglected and misunderstood by much of the scientific community that once championed it. (2)

Of the two great challenges to the legitimacy of this diversity, the familiar one comes primarily from economists. Their argument, associated with such names as Julian Simon, Malcolm McPherson and the late Herman Kahn, can be paraphrased: "First, if endangered species have a value as resources - which has been greatly exaggerated - then we should be able to quantify that value so that we can make unbiased, objective decisions about which species, if any, we should bother to save, and how much the effort is worth. Secondly, the global threat to the diversity of species, particularly in the tropics, has been overestimated. Thirdly, we have good substitutes for the species and ecosystems that are being lost, and these substitutes will nullify the damage caused by the extinctions". (3)

The structure of the argument seems to me to be identical in form to that of an old joke from the American vaudeville circuit. One elderly lady complained to another about her recent vacation at a resort in the Catskill Mountains in New York State. "The food was terrible", she moaned. "Pure poison, I couldn't eat a bite. And the portions were so tiny!" (4)

Species may be valuable, but not especially so, and the threat to them has been exaggerated. But this does not matter anyway, say the economists, because we can replace any species that vanishes.(5)

It is not clear how much of an impact this argument has on the informed public, but it has certainly provoked an outcry among scientific conservationists. It has set the terms for, and dominated, most of the pro-diversity literature of the past few years, making it a literature of response, thus limiting its scope and creative force.

Question 39: Which adjective best describes the writer's attitude towards the community?

A. respectful

B. supportive

C. critical

D. uncomprehending

#Mẫu giáo

1

DH

Dương Hoàn Anh

6 tháng 10 2019

Đáp án C

Dịch nghĩa: Đâu là tính từ tốt nhất để miêu tả thái độ của tác giá đối với cộng đồng khoa học?

A. tôn trọng

B. ủng hộ

C. phê bình

D. không hiểu biết rõ

Giải thích: Thông tin ở câu cuối đoạn 2 “Worse yet, when diversity needs help most, it is neglected and misunderstood by much of the scientiﬁc community that once championed it”

[Tồi tệ hơn, khi mà đa dạng sinh học cần sự giúp đỡ nhiều nhất thì nó lại bị làm ngơ và hiểu nhầm bởi cộng động khoa học, người mà đã từng một thời đấu tranh vì nó]

Đúng(0)

LQ

Lê Quỳnh Anh

30 tháng 1 2017

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 36 to 42. Diversity is a hallmark of life, an intrinsic feature of living systems in the natural world. The demonstration and celebration of this diversity is an endless rite. Look at the popularity of museums, zoos, aquariums and botanic gardens. The odder the exhibit, the more different it is from the most common and familiar life forms around us, the more successful it is...

Đọc tiếp

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 36 to 42.

Diversity is a hallmark of life, an intrinsic feature of living systems in the natural world. The demonstration and celebration of this diversity is an endless rite. Look at the popularity of museums, zoos, aquariums and botanic gardens. The odder the exhibit, the more different it is from the most common and familiar life forms around us, the more successful it is likely to be. Nature does not tire of providing oddities for people who look for them. Biologists have already formally classified 1.7 million species. As many as 30 to 40 million more may remain to be classified. (1)

Most people seem to take diversity for granted. If they think about it at all they assume it exists in endless supply. Nevertheless, diversity is endangered as never before in its history. Advocates of perpetual economic growth treat living species as expendable. As a result an extinction crisis of unprecedented magnitude is under way. Worse yet, when diversity needs help most, it is neglected and misunderstood by much of the scientific community that once championed it. (2)

Of the two great challenges to the legitimacy of this diversity, the familiar one comes primarily from economists. Their argument, associated with such names as Julian Simon, Malcolm McPherson and the late Herman Kahn, can be paraphrased: "First, if endangered species have a value as resources - which has been greatly exaggerated - then we should be able to quantify that value so that we can make unbiased, objective decisions about which species, if any, we should bother to save, and how much the effort is worth. Secondly, the global threat to the diversity of species, particularly in the tropics, has been overestimated. Thirdly, we have good substitutes for the species and ecosystems that are being lost, and these substitutes will nullify the damage caused by the extinctions". (3)

The structure of the argument seems to me to be identical in form to that of an old joke from the American vaudeville circuit. One elderly lady complained to another about her recent vacation at a resort in the Catskill Mountains in New York State. "The food was terrible", she moaned. "Pure poison, I couldn't eat a bite. And the portions were so tiny!" (4)

Species may be valuable, but not especially so, and the threat to them has been exaggerated. But this does not matter anyway, say the economists, because we can replace any species that vanishes.(5)

It is not clear how much of an impact this argument has on the informed public, but it has certainly provoked an outcry among scientific conservationists. It has set the terms for, and dominated, most of the pro-diversity literature of the past few years, making it a literature of response, thus limiting its scope and creative force.

Question 38: Which does the author mean by saying "Most people seem to take diversity for granted"?

A. Many people appreciate diversity.

B. Most people think diversity is special.

C. Most people assume that diversity shouldn't be put in museum.

D. Many people do not realize the true value of diversity.

#Mẫu giáo

1

DH

Dương Hoàn Anh

30 tháng 1 2017

Đáp án D

Dịch nghĩa: Tác giả muốn thể hiện gì khi nói “Most people seem to take diversity for granted” - Hầu hết mọi người không quý trọng sự đa dạng?

A. Nhiều người đánh giá cao sự da dang.

B. Hầu hết mọi người nghĩ đa dạng rất đặc biệt.

C. Hầu hết mọi người cho rằng đa dạng không nên bị đặt trong bảo tàng.

D. Nhiều người không nhận ra giá trị thực của sự đa dạng.

Đúng(0)

LQ

Lê Quỳnh Anh

21 tháng 10 2017

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 36 to 42. Diversity is a hallmark of life, an intrinsic feature of living systems in the natural world. The demonstration and celebration of this diversity is an endless rite. Look at the popularity of museums, zoos, aquariums and botanic gardens. The odder the exhibit, the more different it is from the most common and familiar life forms around us, the more successful it is...

Đọc tiếp

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C or D to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 36 to 42.

Diversity is a hallmark of life, an intrinsic feature of living systems in the natural world. The demonstration and celebration of this diversity is an endless rite. Look at the popularity of museums, zoos, aquariums and botanic gardens. The odder the exhibit, the more different it is from the most common and familiar life forms around us, the more successful it is likely to be. Nature does not tire of providing oddities for people who look for them. Biologists have already formally classified 1.7 million species. As many as 30 to 40 million more may remain to be classified. (1)

Most people seem to take diversity for granted. If they think about it at all they assume it exists in endless supply. Nevertheless, diversity is endangered as never before in its history. Advocates of perpetual economic growth treat living species as expendable. As a result an extinction crisis of unprecedented magnitude is under way. Worse yet, when diversity needs help most, it is neglected and misunderstood by much of the scientific community that once championed it. (2)

Of the two great challenges to the legitimacy of this diversity, the familiar one comes primarily from economists. Their argument, associated with such names as Julian Simon, Malcolm McPherson and the late Herman Kahn, can be paraphrased: "First, if endangered species have a value as resources - which has been greatly exaggerated - then we should be able to quantify that value so that we can make unbiased, objective decisions about which species, if any, we should bother to save, and how much the effort is worth. Secondly, the global threat to the diversity of species, particularly in the tropics, has been overestimated. Thirdly, we have good substitutes for the species and ecosystems that are being lost, and these substitutes will nullify the damage caused by the extinctions". (3)

The structure of the argument seems to me to be identical in form to that of an old joke from the American vaudeville circuit. One elderly lady complained to another about her recent vacation at a resort in the Catskill Mountains in New York State. "The food was terrible", she moaned. "Pure poison, I couldn't eat a bite. And the portions were so tiny!" (4)

Species may be valuable, but not especially so, and the threat to them has been exaggerated. But this does not matter anyway, say the economists, because we can replace any species that vanishes.(5)

It is not clear how much of an impact this argument has on the informed public, but it has certainly provoked an outcry among scientific conservationists. It has set the terms for, and dominated, most of the pro-diversity literature of the past few years, making it a literature of response, thus limiting its scope and creative force.

Question 41: What point is the writer trying to make about the economists' arguments by including the joke in paragraph 4?

A. Their case is overstated.

B. Their logic is unsound.

C. They are unduly pessimistic.

D. They ignore the views of ordinary people

#Mẫu giáo

1

DH

Dương Hoàn Anh

21 tháng 10 2017

Đáp án B

Dịch nghĩa: Tác giả muốn nói điều gì về quan điểm của các nhà kinh tế học khi thêm vào đoạn 4 một mẩu truyện cười?

A. Trường hợp của họ đã bị nói quá

B. Lập luận của họ thiếu logic

C. Họ quá bi quan

D. Họ thờ ơ với quan điểm của dân thưởng.

Giải thích: Tác giả nói lập luận của các nhà kinh tế giống với một câu truyện cười: Bà ta kêu thức ăn tệ, bẩn, không ăn được miếng nào, chia phần còn quá nhỏ” - bà ta nói không liên quan đến nhau.

Như vậy, tác giả có ý nói các nhà kinh tế lập luận không logic.

Đúng(0)

LQ

Lê Quỳnh Anh

9 tháng 4 2018

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 35 to 42. The idea of preserving biological diversity gives most people a warm feeling inside. But what, exactly, is diversity? And which kind is most worth preserving? It may be anathema to save-the-lot environmentalists who hate setting such priorities, but academics are starting to cook up answers. Andrew Solow, a mathematician at the Woods Hole...

Đọc tiếp

Read the following passage and mark the letter A, B, C, or D on your answer sheet to indicate the correct answer to each of the questions from 35 to 42.

The idea of preserving biological diversity gives most people a warm feeling inside. But what, exactly, is diversity? And which kind is most worth preserving? It may be anathema to save-the-lot environmentalists who hate setting such priorities, but academics are starting to cook up answers.

Andrew Solow, a mathematician at the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, and his colleagues argue that in the eyes of conservation, all species should not be equal. Even more controversially, they suggest that preserving the rarest is not always the best approach. Their measure of diversity is the amount of evolutionary distance between species. They reckon that if choices must be made, then the number of times that cousins are removed from one another should be one of the criteria.

This makes sense from both a practical and an aesthetic point of view. Close relatives have many genes in common. If those genes might be medically or agriculturally valuable, saving one is nearly as good as saving both. And different forms are more interesting to admire and study than lots of things that look the same. Dr Solow’s group illustrates its thesis with an example. Six species of crane are at some risk of extinction. Breeding in captivity might save them. But suppose there were only enough money to protect three. Which ones should be picked?

The genetic distances between 14 species of cranes, including the six at risk, have already been established using a technique known as DNA hybridisation. The group estimated how likely it was that each of these 14 species would become extinct in the next 50 years. Unendangered species were assigned a 10% chance of meeting the Darwinian reaper-man; the most vulnerable, a 90% chance. Captive breeding was assumed to reduce an otherwise endangered species’ risk to the 10% level of the safest. Dr Solow’s computer permed all possible combinations of three from six and came to the conclusion that protecting the Siberian, white-naped and black-necked cranes gave the smallest likely loss of biological diversity over the next five decades. The other three had close relatives in little need of protection. Even if they became extinct, most of their genes would be saved.

Building on the work of this group, Martin Weitzman, of Harvard University, argues that conservation policy needs to take account not only of some firm measure of the genetic relationships of species to each other and their likelihood of survival, but also the costs of preserving them. Where species are equally important in genetic terms, and - an important and improbable precondition - where the protection of one species can be assured at the expense of another, he argues for making safe species safer, rather than endangered species less endangered.

In practice, it is difficult to choose between species. Most of those at risk - especially plants, the group most likely to yield useful medicines - are under threat because their habitats are in trouble, not because they are being shot, or plucked, to extinction. Nor can conservationists choose among the millions of species that theory predicts must exist, but that have not yet been classified by the biologists assigned to that tedious task.

This is not necessarily cause for despair. At the moment, the usual way to save the genes in these creatures is to find the bits of the world with the largest number of species and try to protect them from the bulldozers. What economists require from biologists are more sophisticated ways to estimate the diversity of groups of organisms that happen to live together, as well as those which are related to each other. With clearer goals established, economic theory can then tell environmentalists where to go.

[from The Economist]

According to the writer what has to be done first is for _____________.

A. biologists to instruct economists

B. biologists to classify undiscovered species

C. developers to stop destroying habitats

D. economists to instruct biologists

#Mẫu giáo

1

DH

Dương Hoàn Anh

9 tháng 4 2018

Chọn A

Đúng(0)

LQ

Lê Quỳnh Anh

30 tháng 7 2018