搜题请搜索小程序“爱下问搜题”
问题 选择题

下列事故或药品的处理正确的是（   ）

A．少量浓硫酸沾在皮肤上，立即用氢氧化钠溶液冲洗

B．将含硫酸的废液倒入水槽，用水冲入下水道

C．制取并收集氧气结束后，应立即停止加热

D．当出现CO中毒时，应立即将中毒者抬到室外新鲜空气处

答案

答案：D

考查化学实验基本操作、实验安全等。浓硫酸溶于水放出大量得热，少量浓硫酸沾在皮肤上，立即用氢氧化钠溶液冲洗，会加速皮肤的腐蚀，选项A不正确；硫酸是强酸，不能随意排放，选项B不正确；选项C不正确，这样做容易引起液体倒流，所以正确的答案选D。

阅读理解

GUATEMALA CITY(Reuters)— A fish that lives in mangrove swamps(红树沼泽)across the Americas can live out of water for months at a time, similar to how animals adapted(适应)to land millions of years ago, a new study shows.

The Mangrove Rivulus, a type of small killifish, lives in small pools of water in a certain type of empty nut or even old beer cans in the mangrove swamps of Belize, the United States and Brazil. When their living place dries up, they live on the land in logs(圆木), said Scott Taylor, a researcher at the Brevard Endangered Lands Program in Florida.

The fish, whose scientific name is Rivulus marmoratus, can grow as large as three inches. They group together in logs and breathe air through their skin until they can find water again.

The new scientific discovery came after a trip to Belize.

“We kicked over a log and the fish just came crowding out.” Taylor told Reuters in neighboring Guatemala by telephone. He said he will make his study on the fish known to the public in an American magazine early next year.

In lab tests, Taylor said he found the fish can live up to 66 days out of water without eating.

Some other fish can live out of water for a short period of time. The walking catfish found in Southeast Asia can stay on land for hours at a time, while lungfish found in Australia, Africa and South America can live out of water, but only in an inactive state. But no other known fish can be out of water as long as the Mangrove Rivulus and remain active, according to Patricia Wright, a biologist at Canada’s University of Guelph.

Further studies of the fish may tell how animals changed over time.

“These animals live in conditions similar to those that existed millions of years ago, when animals began making the transition(过渡)from water onto land,” Wright said.

小题1:The Mangrove Rivulus is a type of fish that__________.

A．like eating nuts

B．prefers living in dry places

C．is the longest living fish on earth

D．can stay alive for two months out of water小题2:Who will write up a report on Mangrove Rivulus?

A．Patricia Wright

B．Researchers in Guatemala

C．Scientists from Belize

D．Scott Taylor小题3:According to the text, lungfish can__________.

A．breathe through its skin

B．move freely on dry land

C．remain alive out of water

D．be as active on land as in waster小题4:What can we say about the discovery of Mangrove Rivulus?

A．It was made quite by accident

B．It was based on a lab test of sea life

C．It was supported by an American magazine

D．It was helped by Patricia Wright
查看答案
问答题

It’s a safe bet that the millions of Americans who have recently changed their minds about global warming--deciding it isn’t happening, or isn’t due to human activities such as burning coal and oil, or isn’t a serious threat--didn’t just spend an intense few days poring over climate-change studies and decide, holy cow, the discrimination of continuous equations in general circulation models is completely wrong! Instead, the backlash (an 18-point rise since 2006 in the percentage who say the risk of climate change is exaggerated, Gallup found this month) has been stoked by scientists’ abysmal communication skills, plus some peculiarly American attitudes, both brought into play now by how critics have spun the "Climategate" e-mails to make it seem as if scientists have pulled a fast one.
Scientists are lousy communicators. They appeal to people’s heads, not their hearts or guts, argues Randy Olson, who left a professorship in marine biology to make science films. "Scientists think of themselves as guardians of truth," he says. "Once they have spewed it out, they feel the burden is on the audience to understand it" and agree.
That may work if the topic is something with no emotional content, such as how black holes forms, but since climate change and how to address it make people feel threatened, that arrogance is a disaster. Yet just as smarter-than-thou condescension happens time after time in debates between evolutionary biologists and proponents of intelligent design (the latter almost always win), now it’s happening with climate change. In his 2009 book, Don’t Be Such a Scientist: Talking Substance in an Age of Style, Olson recounts a 2007 debate where a scientist contending that global warming is a crisis said his opponents failed to argue in a way "that the people here will understand. " His sophisticated, educated Manhattan audience groaned and, thoroughly insulted, voted that the "not a crisis" side won.
Like evolutionary biologists before them, climate scientists also have failed to master "truthiness" (thank you, Stephen Colbert), which their opponent--climate deniers and creationists--wield like a shiv. They say the Intergovemmental Panel on climate Change is a political, not a scientific, organization; a climate mafia (like evolutionary biologists) keeps contrarian papers out of the top journals; Washington got two feet of snow, and you say the world is warming’
There is less backlash against climate science in Europe and Japan, and the U. S. is 33rd out of 34 developed countries in the percentage of adults who agree that species, including humans, evolved. That suggests there is something peculiarly American about the rejection of science. Charles Harper, a devout Christian who for years ran the program bridging science and faith at the Templeton Foundation and who has had more than his share of arguments with people who view science as the Devil’s spawn, has some hypotheses about why that is. "In America, people do not bow to authority the way they do in England," be says. "when the lumpenproletariat are told they have to think in a certain way, there is a backlash," as with climate science now and, never-endingly, with evolution. (Harper, who studied planetary atmospheres before leaving science, calls climate scientists "a smug community of true believers. ")
Another factor is that the ideas of the Reformatio--no intermediaries between people and God; anyone can read the Bible and know the truth as well as a theologia--inform the American character more ply than they do that of many other nations. "It’s the idea that everyone has equal access to the divine," says Harper. That has been extended to the belief that anyone with an Internet connection can know as much about climate or evolution as an expert. Finally, Americans carry in their bones the country’ s history of being populated by emigrants fed up with hierarchy. It is the American way to distrust those who set themselves up-even justifiably--as authorities. Presto: climate backlash.
One new actor is also at work. the growing belief in the wisdom of crowds (Wikis, polling the audience on Who Wants to Be a Millionaire). If tweeting for advice on the best route somewhere yields the right answer. Americans seem to have decided, it doesn’t take any special expertise to pick apart evolutionary biology or climate science. My final hypothesis, the Great Recession was caused by the smartest guys in the room saying, trust us, we understand how credit default swaps work, and they’re great. No wonder so many Americans have decided that experts are idiots.

1.What is the "Climategate" What is the recent debate about global warming

查看答案