Questõessobre Inglês
Considerando-se o contexto de uso dos termos deliberately, eventually e really, a palavra que completa
adequadamente a sentença: post-truth as a concept has _________ been finding its linguistic footing for some
time é a seguinte:
Considerando-se a estrutura linguística do texto, verifica-se que
Disponível em: <http://images.ucomics.com/comics/ga/2004/ga040512.gif> Acesso em: 21 fev. 2017.
Considerando-se os aspectos linguísticos da charge, percebe-se que
o homem, com sua fala, não consegue persuadir o gato a tomar atitudes que possam mudar o futuro.
De acordo com o texto, o termo “pós-verdade”
A única palavra cuja tradução não corresponde ao sentido
usado no texto é
NOGUEIRA, Salvador. Translated by Marina Della Valle. Disponível em: <
www1folha.uol.com.br/internacional/em/scienceandhealth/2016/03/
1755511-russia-will-install-telescope-in-brazil..shtml>. Acesso em: 27 set.
2016.
“damage” (l. 24) – dano.
Considerando o uso gramatical da língua no texto, é correto
afirmar:
NOGUEIRA, Salvador. Translated by Marina Della Valle. Disponível em: <
www1folha.uol.com.br/internacional/em/scienceandhealth/2016/03/
1755511-russia-will-install-telescope-in-brazil..shtml>. Acesso em: 27 set.
2016.
A instalação de um telescópio pelos russos em território
brasileiro visa principalmente
NOGUEIRA, Salvador. Translated by Marina Della Valle. Disponível em: <
www1folha.uol.com.br/internacional/em/scienceandhealth/2016/03/
1755511-russia-will-install-telescope-in-brazil..shtml>. Acesso em: 27 set.
2016.
Preencha os parênteses com V (Verdadeiro) ou F (Falso).
O texto tem resposta para as seguintes questões sobre o
telescópio:
( ) When is it expected to start operating?
( ) Where will it be installed?
( ) How many people took part in its project?
A sequência correta, de cima para baixo, é
NOGUEIRA, Salvador. Translated by Marina Della Valle. Disponível em: <
www1folha.uol.com.br/internacional/em/scienceandhealth/2016/03/
1755511-russia-will-install-telescope-in-brazil..shtml>. Acesso em: 27 set.
2016.
De acordo com o texto, o telescópio
NOGUEIRA, Salvador. Translated by Marina Della Valle. Disponível em: <
www1folha.uol.com.br/internacional/em/scienceandhealth/2016/03/
1755511-russia-will-install-telescope-in-brazil..shtml>. Acesso em: 27 set.
2016.
The pernicious effects of social media
The use of social media
Read the graph below and answer the following
question.
According to the graph above it is true to assert that
Read the graph below and answer the following question.
According to the graph above it is true to assert that
One of the things that makes cellular culture hard to
succeed is
Read the text below and answer the following question.
Can Cellular Agriculture Feed the World?
Within 20 years, there will be 2 billion more people than today — over 9 billion people in total. The impact to the environment could be severe. Just feeding that population using current methods is problematic.
On average, cattle ranchers need 100 times more land than corn growers to produce a gram of food. So, if that hungry world continues to eat meat like we do, the demand for land — and fresh water — will be alarming, not to mention the environmental impact of raising so many animals. Meat production aside, the large-scale monoculture of crops like corn usually results in damaging terrestrial pollution from pesticides and soil depletion. The impact to the oceans is equally perilous.
Instead of farming animals, fish and plants, cellular agriculture grows the proteins and nutrients we consume from a culture, cell by cell. With this alternative approach, the consumable meat and plant tissues produced don’t need to be harvested from animals or plants. It’s food production on an industrial scale.
The technology to do this is not new. Growing meat from a scaffold embedded in growth culture is no different in theory than making bread from yeast. The vast majority of insulin for diabetics is already manufactured by genetically engineered bacteria, as is the rennet used to culture cheese. In the past 10 years, this approach has been pioneered with a variety of foodstuffs: milk, eggs, beef, chicken, fish — even coffee.
To succeed, cellular agriculture must overcome 6,000 years of established dependence on traditional agriculture, and it has to do so via one of the most finicky human senses: taste. No one will eat manufactured meat or fish if it doesn’t have the same sensual satisfaction generated by the grown version. So, in addition to all the technical challenges in creating edible tissues from cultures, the startups pioneering this approach are working diligently to make their products tasty.
The possibilities for cellular agriculture are seemingly limitless; it may be possible to grow human organs for transplant using the method. But it is still early days.
Adaptado de: <https://earth911.com/business-policy/cellular-agriculture/>
Read the graph below and answer the following
question.
According to the graph above we can assert that
Read the graph below and answer the following question.
According to the graph above we can assert that
Cellular agriculture
Read the text below and answer the following question.
Can Cellular Agriculture Feed the World?
Within 20 years, there will be 2 billion more people than today — over 9 billion people in total. The impact to the environment could be severe. Just feeding that population using current methods is problematic.
On average, cattle ranchers need 100 times more land than corn growers to produce a gram of food. So, if that hungry world continues to eat meat like we do, the demand for land — and fresh water — will be alarming, not to mention the environmental impact of raising so many animals. Meat production aside, the large-scale monoculture of crops like corn usually results in damaging terrestrial pollution from pesticides and soil depletion. The impact to the oceans is equally perilous.
Instead of farming animals, fish and plants, cellular agriculture grows the proteins and nutrients we consume from a culture, cell by cell. With this alternative approach, the consumable meat and plant tissues produced don’t need to be harvested from animals or plants. It’s food production on an industrial scale.
The technology to do this is not new. Growing meat from a scaffold embedded in growth culture is no different in theory than making bread from yeast. The vast majority of insulin for diabetics is already manufactured by genetically engineered bacteria, as is the rennet used to culture cheese. In the past 10 years, this approach has been pioneered with a variety of foodstuffs: milk, eggs, beef, chicken, fish — even coffee.
To succeed, cellular agriculture must overcome 6,000 years of established dependence on traditional agriculture, and it has to do so via one of the most finicky human senses: taste. No one will eat manufactured meat or fish if it doesn’t have the same sensual satisfaction generated by the grown version. So, in addition to all the technical challenges in creating edible tissues from cultures, the startups pioneering this approach are working diligently to make their products tasty.
The possibilities for cellular agriculture are seemingly limitless; it may be possible to grow human organs for transplant using the method. But it is still early days.
Adaptado de: <https://earth911.com/business-policy/cellular-agriculture/>
All of the following are synonyms of perilous except for
Read the text below and answer the following question.
Can Cellular Agriculture Feed the World?
Within 20 years, there will be 2 billion more people than today — over 9 billion people in total. The impact to the environment could be severe. Just feeding that population using current methods is problematic.
On average, cattle ranchers need 100 times more land than corn growers to produce a gram of food. So, if that hungry world continues to eat meat like we do, the demand for land — and fresh water — will be alarming, not to mention the environmental impact of raising so many animals. Meat production aside, the large-scale monoculture of crops like corn usually results in damaging terrestrial pollution from pesticides and soil depletion. The impact to the oceans is equally perilous.
Instead of farming animals, fish and plants, cellular agriculture grows the proteins and nutrients we consume from a culture, cell by cell. With this alternative approach, the consumable meat and plant tissues produced don’t need to be harvested from animals or plants. It’s food production on an industrial scale.
The technology to do this is not new. Growing meat from a scaffold embedded in growth culture is no different in theory than making bread from yeast. The vast majority of insulin for diabetics is already manufactured by genetically engineered bacteria, as is the rennet used to culture cheese. In the past 10 years, this approach has been pioneered with a variety of foodstuffs: milk, eggs, beef, chicken, fish — even coffee.
To succeed, cellular agriculture must overcome 6,000 years of established dependence on traditional agriculture, and it has to do so via one of the most finicky human senses: taste. No one will eat manufactured meat or fish if it doesn’t have the same sensual satisfaction generated by the grown version. So, in addition to all the technical challenges in creating edible tissues from cultures, the startups pioneering this approach are working diligently to make their products tasty.
The possibilities for cellular agriculture are seemingly limitless; it may be possible to grow human organs for transplant using the method. But it is still early days.
Adaptado de: <https://earth911.com/business-policy/cellular-agriculture/>
Not so enthusiastic social media users
Based on the information the text presents, one can say that
Leia o texto para responder à questão.
“They don’t see us as a powerful economic force, which is an incredible ignorance.” – Salma Hayek, actor, denouncing sexism in Hollywood at the Cannes Film Festival; until recently, she added, studio heads believed women were interested only in seeing romantic comedies.
(Time, 01.06.2015.)
According to the information presented in the sixth paragraph,
brain growth is likely to occur due to
Leia o texto para responder à questão.
Poverty may hinder kids’ brain development, study says
Reduced gray matter, lower test scores reported for poor children
July 20, 2015
Poverty appears to affect the brain development of children, hampering the growth of gray matter and impairing their academic performance, researchers report. Poor children tend to have as much as 10 percent less gray matter in several areas of the brain associated with academic skills, according to a study published July 20 in JAMA Pediatrics. “We used to think of poverty as a ‘social’ issue, but what we are learning now is that it is a biomedical issue that is affecting brain growth,” said senior study author Seth Pollak, a professor of psychology, pediatrics, anthropology and neuroscience at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.
The results could have profound implications for the United States, where low-income students now represent the majority of kids in public schools, the study authors said in background information. Fifty-one percent of public school students came from low-income families in 2013.
Previous studies have shown that children living in poverty tend to perform poorly in school, the authors say. They have markedly lower test scores, and do not go as far in school as their well-off peers.
To see whether this is due to some physical effect that poverty might have on a child’s brain, Pollak and his colleagues analyzed MRI scans of 389 typically developing kids aged 4 to 22, assessing the amount of gray matter in the whole brain as well as the frontal lobe, temporal lobe and hippocampus. “Gray matter contains most of the brain’s neuronal cells,” Pollak said. “In other words, other parts of the brain – like white matter – carry information from one section of the brain to another. But the gray matter is where seeing and hearing, memory, emotions, speech, decision making and self-control occur.”
Children living below 150 percent of the federal poverty level – US$ 36,375 for a family of four – had 3 percent to 4 percent less gray matter in important regions of their brain, compared to the norm, the authors found. Those in families living below the federal poverty level fared even worse, with 8 percent to 10 percent less gray matter in those same brain regions. The federal poverty level in 2015 is US$ 24,250 for a family of four. These same kids scored an average of four to seven points lower on standardized tests, the researchers said.
The team estimated that as much as 20 percent of the gap in test scores could be explained by reduced brain development. A host of poverty-related issues likely contribute to developmental lags in children’s brains, Pollak said. Low-income kids are less likely to get the type of stimulation from their parents and environment that helps the brain grow, he said. For example, they hear fewer new words, and have fewer opportunities to read or play games. Their brain development also can be affected by factors related to impoverishment, such as high stress levels, poor sleep, crowding and poor nutrition, Pollak said.
This study serves as a call to action, given what’s already known about the effects of poverty on child development, said Dr. Joan Luby, a professor of child psychiatry at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. “The thing that’s really important about this study in the context of the broader literature is that there really is enough scientific evidence to take public health action at this point,” said Luby, who wrote an editorial accompanying the study. “Poverty negatively affects brain development, and we also know that early interventions are powerfully effective,” Luby said. “They are more effective than interventions later in life, and they also are cost-effective.”
(www.nlm.nih.gov. Adaptado.)