Apparently everyone knows that global warming only makes climate more extreme. A hot, dry summer has triggered another flood of such claims. And, while many interests are at work, one of the players that benefits the most from this story are the media: the notion of “extreme” climate simply makes for more compelling news.
Consider Paul Krugman writing breathlessly in The New York Times about the “rising incidence of extreme events,” He claims that global warming caused the current drought in America’s Midwest, and that supposedly record-high corn prices could cause a global food crisis.
But the United Nations climate panel’s latest assessment tells us precisely the opposite. For “North America there is medium confidence that there has an overall slight tendency toward less dryness” Moreover, there is no way that Krugman could have identified this drought as being caused by global warming without a time machine; Climate models estimate that such detection will be possible by 2048, at the earliest.
And, fortunately, this year’s drought appears unlikely to cause a food crisis, as global rice and wheat supplies retain plentiful. Moreover, Krugman overlooks inflation: Prices have increased six-fold since 1969. So, while corn futures (期货) did set a record of about $8 per bushel (葡式耳) in late July, the inflation-adjusted price of corn was higher throughout most of the 1970s, reaching 516 in 1974.
Finally, Krugman conveniently forgets that concerns about global warming are the main reason that corn prices have skyrocketed since 2005. Nowadays 40 percent of corn grown in the United States is used to produce ethanol (乙醇), which does absolutely nothing for the climate, but certainly distorts the price of corn — at the expense of many of the world’s poorest people.
1. In what way do the media benefit from extreme weather?
2. What is the author’s comment on Krugman’s claim about the current drought in America’s Midwest?
3. What is the chief reason for the rise in corn prices according to the author?
问题1选项
A.They can attract people’s attention to their reports.
B.They can choose from a greater variety of topics.
C.They can make themselves better known.
D.They can give voice to different views.
问题2选项
A.A time machine is needed to testify to its truth.
B.It is based on an erroneous climate model.
C.It will eventually get proof in 2048.
D.There is no way to prove its validity.
问题3选项
A.Demand for food has been rising in the developing countries.
B.A considerable portion of corn is used to produce green fuel.
C.Climate change has caused corn yields to drop markedly.
D.Inflation rates have been skyrocketing since the 1970s.
第1题:
【选项释义】
In what way do the media benefit from extreme weather? 极端天气对媒体有什么好处？
A. They can attract people’s attention to their reports. A. 他们可以吸引人们的注意力到他们的报道上。
B. They can choose from a greater variety of topics. B. 他们可以从更多种类的话题中选择。
C. They can make themselves better known. C. 他们可以让自己更出名。
D. They can give voice to different views. D. 他们可以表达不同的观点。
【答案】A
【考查点】事实细节题。
【解题思路】根据题干定位到原文第一段的最后一句“而且，虽然有许多利益因素在起作用，但从这个故事中受益最多的参与者之一是媒体（media），极端气候（extreme climate）的概念只会让新闻更引人注目（more compelling news）”由此可见，极端天气可以吸引人们对新闻的注意力，所以选项A正确。
【干扰项排除】
B、C、D选项原文没有提及，属于无中生有。
第2题:
【选项释义】
What is the author’s comment on Krugman’s claim about the current drought in America’s Midwest? 对于克鲁格曼关于美国中西部当前干旱的说法，作者有何评论？
A. A time machine is needed to testify to its truth. A. 需要一台时间机器来证明它的真实性。
B. It is based on an erroneous climate model. B. 它是基于一个错误的气候模型。
C. It will eventually get proof in 2048. C. 它最终会在2048年得到证明。
D. There is no way to prove its validity. D. 没有办法证明它的真实性。
【答案】D
【考查点】推理判断题。
【解题思路】根据题干定位到原文第三段最后一句“此外，克鲁格曼不可能（no way）在没有时间机器的情况下就认定干旱是由全球变暖引起的（identified this drought as being caused by global warming）”由此可知，关于克鲁格曼的说法，作者认为是没有办法证明其真实性的，所以选项D正确。
【干扰项排除】
A选项“需要一台时间机器来证明它的真实性”，原文第三段最后一句提到“时间机器”是为了说明这个事情的真实性是没有办法证明的，且作者也不是真的想要一台时间机器，属于曲解原文；
B选项“它是基于一个错误的气候模型”，原文没有提及，属于无中生有；
C选项“它最终会在2048年得到证明”，与原文第三段最后一句提到的“气候模型估计，这种探测最早也要到2048年才能实现”不符，属于曲解原文。
第3题:
【选项释义】
What is the chief reason for the rise in corn prices according to the author? 作者认为玉米价格上涨的主要原因是什么？
A. Demand for food has been rising in the developing countries. A. 发展中国家对粮食的需求一直在上升。
B. A considerable portion of corn is used to produce green fuel. B. 相当一部分玉米被用来生产绿色燃料。
C. Climate change has caused corn yields to drop markedly. C. 气候变化导致玉米产量显著下降。
D. Inflation rates have been skyrocketing since the 1970s. D. 自20世纪70年代以来，通货膨胀率一直在飙升。
【答案】A
【考查点】推理判断题。
【解题思路】根据题干定位到原文最后一段的最后一句“现在美国40%的玉米种植用于生产乙醇，这对于气候来说绝对没有任何意义，但是肯定扭曲了玉米的价格（distorts the price of corn）——以世界上最贫穷的人为代价（at the expense of many of the world’s poorest people）”由此可知，玉米的价格影响到的是世界上最贫穷的人，也就是发展中国家。所以选项A符合原文。
【干扰项排除】
B选项“相当一部分玉米被用来生产绿色燃料”，原文最后一段提到了“美国40%的玉米种植用于生产乙醇”这种绿色燃料，但是这并不是玉米价格上涨的主要原因，属于曲解原文；
C选项“气候变化导致玉米产量显著下降”，原文没有提及，属于无中生有；
D选项“自20世纪70年代以来，通货膨胀率一直在飙升”，原文第四段最后一句提到“在20世纪70年代的大部分时间里，经通货膨胀调整后的玉米价格都比较高”，由此可知原文提到的是“玉米价格比较高”而不是“通货膨胀”，该选项属于张冠李戴。
【文章来源】2013年英语六级真题
【参考译文】
显然，每个人都知道全球变暖只会让气候变得更极端。一个炎热干燥的夏天又引发了大量的这种说法。而且，虽然有很多利益在起作用，但从这个故事中受益最多的是媒体：“极端”气候的概念只会让新闻更引人注目。
想想保罗•克鲁格曼在《纽约时报》上屏息写着“极端事件发生率上升”的文章吧。他声称，全球变暖导致了美国中西部目前的干旱，而据推测，创纪录的玉米价格可能会引发全球粮食危机。
但联合国气候小组的最新评估结果却恰恰相反。对于“北美有中等的信心，总体上有轻微的不那么干旱的趋势”。此外，如果没有时间机器，克鲁格曼不可能把这场干旱确定为全球变暖造成的；气候模型估计，这种检测最早将在2048年成为可能。
幸运的是，今年的干旱似乎不太可能引发粮食危机，因为全球大米和小麦供应仍然充足。此外，克鲁格曼忽视了通货膨胀：自1969年以来，物价已经上涨了6倍。因此，尽管玉米期货在7月底创下了每蒲式耳约8美元的纪录，但在1970年代的大部分时间里，经通胀因素调整后的玉米价格都更高，在1974年达到了516美元。
最后，克鲁格曼轻易地忘记了，对全球变暖的担忧是2005年以来玉米价格飙升的主要原因。如今，美国种植的40%的玉米被用于生产乙醇，这对气候完全没有任何影响，但肯定会扭曲玉米的价格——以世界上许多最贫穷的人的利益为代价。
