\t<\/span><\/font><\/p>B. when a device fastens to their wrist<\/p>
C. while a device attached to their wrist<\/p>
D. as their wrist in connection with a device<\/p>
90. <\/p>
A. with more gray matter in areas associated with processing emotions<\/p>
B. in which emotional processes conjoining with areas of gray matter<\/p>
C. showing more problems in gray areas where emotions process<\/p>
D. have close connection with the expression of feelings in grey areas<\/p>
Part 3: For questions 91-100, read the passage and fill in each of the following numbered blanks with ONE suitable word. Write your answers in the corresponding numbered boxes provided.<\/p>
Food for a Future<\/p>
Jon Wynne-Tyson was an original thinker (0) WHOSE best-known book \u201cFood for a Future\u201d was published in 1975. In this classic work, a case was (91) __________ forward for what can only be described (92) __________ a more responsible and humane attitude towards the world\u2019s food resources. It had gradually become clear to Wynne-Tyson that the economics and ecology of meat production did not (93) __________ sense. What justification was there, he argued, for using seven tonnes of cereal to produce one tonne for meat?<\/p>
Even today, the book\u2019s succinct style makes it compulsively readable. (94) __________ his approach is basically an emotional one, Wynne-Tyson goes to great lengths to back (95) __________ every statement with considerable supporting evidence and statistical data. Thus, even (96) __________ of us who are widely read (97) __________ the subject of vegetarianism will gain fresh insights from this book. It is generally agreed that his most skillful achievement is the slow revelation of his main thesis as the arguments unfold. The book concludes that a move away from an animal-based diet to one which is based on plant sources is inevitable in the long term, in (98) __________ of the fact that there is no sound nutritional, medical or social justification for meat-eating. (99) __________ of whether you agree with such a conclusion or not, the book certainly makes (100) __________ fascinating read.<\/p>
(Adapted from Cambridge Certificate of Proficiency in English)<\/p>
Part 4: For questions 101-107, read a passage about investigations into the origins of the universe. Seven paragraphs have been removed from the extract. Choose from the paragraphs A-H the one which fits each gap. There is ONE extra paragraph which you do not need to use. Write your answers in the corresponding numbered boxes provided.<\/p>
THE ORIGINS OF THE UNIVERSE<\/p>
A powerful conviction for me is the idea that as we converge on the moment of creation, the constituents and laws of the universe become ever simpler. A useful analogy here is life itself, or, more simply, a single human being. Each of us is a vastly complex entity, assembled from many different tissues and capable of countless behaviours and thoughts.<\/p>
101. __________<\/p>
Cosmology is showing us that this complexity flowed from a deep simplicity as matter metamorphosed through a series of phase transitions. Travel back in time through those phase transitions, and we see an ever- greater simplicity and symmetry, with the fusion of the fundamental forces of nature and the transformation of particles to ever-more fundamental components.<\/p>
102. __________<\/p>
Go back further still. What was there before the big bang? What was there before time began? Facing this question challenges our faith in the power of science to find explanations of nature. The existence of a singularity \u2013 in this case the given, unique state from which the universe emerged \u2014 is anathema to science, because it is beyond explanation.<\/p>
103. __________<\/p>
Cosmologists have long struggled to avoid this bad dream by seeking explanations of the universe that avoid the necessity of a beginning. Einstein, remember, refused to believe the implication of his own equations \u2013 that the universe is expanding and therefore must have had a beginning \u2013 and invented the cosmological constant to avoid it. Only when Einstein saw Hubble\u2019s observations of an expanding universe could he bring himself to believe his equations.<\/p>
104. __________ <\/p>
Stephen Hawking and J B Hartle tried to resolve the challenge differently, by arguing the singularity out of existence. Flowing from an attempt at a theory of quantum gravity, they agreed that time is finite, but without a beginning. Think of the surface of a sphere. The surface is finite, but it has no beginning or end \u2013 you can trace your finger over it continuously, perhaps finishing up where you began. Suppose the universe is a sphere of space time. Travel around the surface, and again you may finish up where you started both in space and time.<\/p>
105. __________ <\/p>
We simply do not know yet whether there was a beginning of the universe, and so the origin of space-time remains in terra incognita. No question is more fundamental, whether cast in scientific or theological terms. My conviction is that science will continue to move ever closer to the moment of creation, facilitated by the ever-greater simplicity we find there. Some physicists argue that matter is ultimately reducible to pointlike objects with certain intrinsic properties.<\/p>
106. __________ <\/p>
To an engineer, the difference between nothing and practically nothing might be close enough. To a scientist, such a difference, however miniscule, would be everything. We might find ourselves experiencing Jarrow\u2019s bad dream, facing a final question: Why? \u201cWhy\u201d questions are not amenable to scientific inquiry and will always reside within philosophy and theology, which may provide solace if not material explication.<\/p>
107. __________ <\/p>
The list of cosmic coincidences required for our existence in the universe is long, moving Stephen Hawking to remark that, \u201cthe odds against a universe like ours emerging out of something like the big bang are enormous.\u201d Princeton physicist Freeman Dyson went further, and said: \u201cThe more I examine the universe and the details of its architecture, the more evidence I find that the universe in some sense must have known we were coming\u201d. This concatenation of coincidences required for our presence in this universe has been termed the anthropic principle. In fact, it is merely a statement of the obvious: Had things been different, we would not exist.<\/p>
(Adapted from The BALANCE series FOR THE REVISED CPE)<\/p>
Missing paragraphs:<\/p>
A. This, of course, requires time travel, in violation of Mach\u2019s principle. But the world of quantum mechanics, with its uncertainty principle, is an alien place in which otherworldly things can happen. It is so foreign a place that it may even be beyond human understanding.<\/p>
B. But what if the universe we see were the only one possible, the product of a singular initial state shaped by singular laws of nature? It is clear that the minutest variation in the value of a series of fundamental properties of the universe would have resulted in no universe at all, or at least a very alien universe. For instance, if the strong nuclear force had been slightly weaker, the universe would have been composed of hydrogen only. An expansion more rapid by one part in a million would have excluded the formation of stars and planets.<\/p>
C. Trace that person back through his or her life, back beyond birth to the moment of fertilisation of a single ovum by a single sperm. The individual becomes ever simpler, ultimately encapsulated as information encoded in DNA. The development that gradually transforms a DNA code into a mature individual is an unfolding, a complexification, as the information in the DNA is translated and manifested through many stages of life. So, I believe, it is with the universe. We can see how very complex the universe is now, and we are part of that complexity.<\/p>
D. Others argue that fundamental particles are extraordinarily tiny strings that vibrate to produce their properties. Either way, it is possible to envisage creation of the universe from almost nothing \u2013 not nothing, but practically nothing. Almost creation ex nihilo, but not quite. That would be a great intellectual achievement, but it may still leave us with a limit to how far scientific inquiry can go, finishing with a description of the singularity, but not an explanation of it.<\/p>
E. For many proponents of the steady state theory, one of its attractions was its provision that the universe had no beginning and no end, and therefore required no explanation of what existed before time = 0. It was known as the perfect cosmological principle.<\/p>
F. There can be no answer to why such a state existed. Is this, then, where scientific explanation breaks down and God takes over, the artificer of that singularity, that initial simplicity? The astrophysicist Robert Jastrow described such a prospect as the scientist\u2019s nightmare: \u201cHe has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.\u201d<\/p>
G. Various COBE team members and other cosmologists were on TV, radio talk shows, and in newspapers for several days. The publicity and tremendous public interest provided a unique opportunity to discuss science with a very large audience and to promote the power of human endeavour in pursuing the mysteries of nature.<\/p>
H. Go back further and we reach a point when the universe was nearly an infinitely tiny, infinitely dense concentration of energy. This increasing simplicity and symmetry of the universe as we near the point of creation gives me hope that we can understand the universe using the powers of reason and philosophy. The universe would then be comprehensible, as Einstein had yearned.<\/p>
Part 5: For questions 108-115, read the passage and choose the best option A, B, C, or D to answer the questions. Write your answers in the corresponding numbered boxes provided.<\/p>
WATER IN THE DESERT<\/p>
Rainfall is not completely absent in desert areas, but it is highly variable. An annual rainfall of four inches is often used to define the limits of a desert. The impact of rainfall upon the surface water and groundwater resources of the desert is greatly influenced by landforms. Flats and depressions where water can collect are common features, but they make up only a small part of the landscape.<\/p>
Arid lands, surprisingly, contain some of the world\u2019s largest river systems, such as the Murray-Darling in Australia, the Rio Grande in North America, the Indus in Asia, and the Nile in Africa. These rivers and river systems are known as \u201cexogenous\u201d because their sources lie outside the arid zone. They are vital for sustaining life in some of the driest parts of the world. For centuries, the annual floods of the Nile, Tigris, and Euphrates, for example, have brought fertile silts and water to the inhabitants of their lower valleys. Today, river discharges are increasingly controlled by human intervention, creating a need for international river-basin agreements. The filling of the Ataturk and other dams in Turkey has drastically reduced flows in the Euphrates, with potentially serious consequences for Syria and Iraq.<\/p>
The flow of exogenous rivers varies with the season. The desert sections of long rivers respond several months after rain has fallen outside the desert, so that peak flows may be in the dry season. This is useful for irrigation, but the high temperatures, low humidity, and different day lengths of the dry season, compared to the normal growing season, can present difficulties with some crops.<\/p>
Regularly flowing rivers and streams that originate within arid lands are known as \u201cendogenous\u201d. These are generally fed by groundwater springs, and many issues from limestone massifs, such as the Atlas Mountains in Morocco. Basaltic rocks also support springs, notably at the Jabal Al-Arab on the Jordan-Syria border. (I) Endogenous rivers often do not reach the sea but drain into inland basins, where the water evaporates or is lost in the ground. (II) Most desert streambeds are normally dry, but they occasionally receive large flows of water and sediment. (III)<\/p>
Deserts contain large amounts of groundwater when compared to the amounts they hold in surface stores such as lakes and rivers. (IV) But only a small fraction of groundwater enters the hydrological cycle \u2013 feeding the flows of streams, maintaining lake levels, and being recharged (or refilled) through surface flows and rainwater. In recent years, groundwater has become an increasingly important source of freshwater for desert dwellers. The United Nations Environment Programme and the World Bank have funded attempts to survey the groundwater resources of arid lands and to develop appropriate extraction techniques. Such programs are much needed because in many arid lands there is only a vague idea of the extent of groundwater resources. It is known, however, that the distribution of groundwater is uneven, and that much of it lies at great depths.<\/p>
Groundwater is stored in the pore spaces and joints of rocks and unconsolidated (unsolidified) sediments or in the openings widened through fractures and weathering. The water-saturated rock or sediment is known as an \u201caquifer\u201d. Because they are porous, sedimentary rocks, such as sandstones and conglomerates, are important potential sources of groundwater. Large quantities of water may also be stored in limestones when joints and cracks have been enlarged to form cavities. Most limestone and sandstone aquifers are deep and extensive but may contain groundwaters that are not being recharged. Most shallow aquifers in sand and gravel deposits produce lower yields, but they can be rapidly recharged. Some deep aquifers are known as \u201cfossil\u201d waters. The term \u201cfossil\u201d describes water that has been present for several thousand years. These aquifers became saturated more than 10,000 years ago and are no longer being recharged.<\/p>
Water does not remain immobile in an aquifer but can seep out at springs or leak into other aquifers. The rate of movement may be very slow: in the Indus plain, the movement of saline (salty) groundwaters has still not reached equilibrium after 70 years of being tapped. The mineral content of groundwater normally increases with the depth, but even quite shallow aquifers can be highly saline.<\/p>
(Adapted from Official TOEFL iBT\u00ae Tests)<\/p>
108. Which of the following statements about annual rainfall can be inferred from paragraph 1?<\/p>
A. Flat desert areas receive more annual rainfall than desert areas with mountains.<\/p>
B. Areas that receive more than four inches of rain per year are not considered deserts.<\/p>
C. Many areas receive less than four inches of annual rainfall, but only a few are deserts.<\/p>
D. Annual rainfall has no impact on the groundwater resources of desert areas.<\/p>
109. In paragraph 2, why does the author mention the Ataturk and other dams in Turkey?<\/p>
A. To contrast the Euphrates River with other exogenous rivers<\/p>
B. To illustrate the technological advances in dam building<\/p>
C. To argue that dams should not be built on the Euphrates River<\/p>
D. To support the idea that international river-basin agreements are needed<\/p>
110. According to paragraph 2, which of the following is TRUE of the Nile River?<\/p>
A. The Nile\u2019s flow in its desert sections is at its lowest during the dry season.<\/p>
B. The Nile\u2019s sources are located in one of the most arid zones of the world.<\/p>
C. The Nile\u2019s annual floods bring fertile silts and water to its lower valley.<\/p>
D. The Nile\u2019s periodic flooding hinders the growth of some crops.<\/p>
111. Paragraph 5 supports all of the following statements about the groundwater in deserts EXCEPT __________.<\/p>
A. The groundwater is consistently found just below the surface.<\/p>
B. A small part of the groundwater helps maintain lake levels.<\/p>
C. Most of the groundwater is not recharged through surface water.<\/p>
D. The groundwater is increasingly used as a source of freshwater.<\/p>
112. According to paragraph 6, which of the following statements about aquifers in deserts is TRUE?<\/p>
A. Water from limestone and sandstone aquifers is generally better to drink than water from sand and gravel aquifers.<\/p>
B. Sand and gravel aquifers tend to contain less groundwater than limestone or sandstone aquifers.<\/p>
C. Groundwater in deep aquifers is more likely to be recharged than groundwater in shallow aquifers.<\/p>
D. Sedimentary rocks, because they are porous, are not capable of storing large amounts of groundwater.<\/p>
113. The word immobile in the passage is CLOSEST in meaning to __________.<\/p>
A. enclosed\t<\/span>B. permanent\t<\/span>C. motionless\t<\/span>D. intact<\/font><\/p>114. The passage supports which of the following statements about water in the desert?<\/p>
A. The most visible forms of water are not the most widespread forms of water in the desert.<\/p>
B. Groundwater in the desert cannot become a source of drinking water but can be used for irrigation.<\/p>
C. Most of the water in the desert is contained in shallow aquifers that are being rapidly recharged.<\/p>
D. Desert areas that lack endogenous or exogenous rivers and streams cannot support life.<\/p>
115. Where would the following sentence best fit?<\/p>
These sudden floods provide important water supplies but can also be highly destructive.<\/p>
A. (I)\t<\/span>B. (II)\t<\/span>C. (III)\t<\/span>D. (IV)<\/font><\/p>Part 6: For questions 116-125, read the passage and do the tasks that follow.<\/p>
The Climate Changers<\/p>
A. The romantic notion that early humans lived in harmony with their environment has taken quite a battering lately. Modern humans may have started eliminating other species right from the start; our ancestors stand accused of wiping out megafauna \u2013 from giant flightless birds in Australia to mammoths in Asia and the ground sloth of North America \u2013 as they spread across the planet. Even so, by around 6,000 years ago there were only about 12 million people on earth \u2013 less than a quarter of the current population of Great Britain. That\u2019s a far cry from today\u2019s 6.6 billion, many of us guzzling fossil fuels, churning out greenhouse gases, and messing with our planet\u2019s climate like there\u2019s no tomorrow. So it may seem far-fetched to suggest that humans have been causing global warming ever since our ancestors started burning and cutting forests to make way for fields at least 7,000 years ago.<\/p>
B. Yet that\u2019s the view of retired climate scientist William Ruddiman, formerly of the University of Virginia, Charlottesville. Ancient farmers were pumping climate-warming carbon dioxide and methane into the atmosphere long before recorded history began, he says. Far from causing a catastrophe, however, early farmers halted the planet\u2019s descent into another ice age and kept Earth warm and stable for thousands of years. Could a few primitive farmers really have changed the climate of the entire globe? If you find this hard to believe, you\u2019re not the only one. Ruddiman\u2019s idea has been hugely controversial ever since he proposed it in 2003. \u201cMost new ideas, especially controversial ones, die out pretty fast. It doesn\u2019t take science long to weed them out,\u201d he says. Yet five years on, his idea is still not dead. On the contrary, he says the latest evidence strengthens his case. \u201cIt has become clear that natural explanations for the rise in greenhouse gases over the past few thousand years are the ones that are not measuring up, and we can reject them,\u201d he claims.<\/p>
C. There is no doubt that the soaring levels of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that we see in the atmosphere today \u2013 causing a 0.70C rise in average global temperature during the 20th century \u2013 are the result of human activities. In the late 1990s, however, Ruddiman started to suspect that our contribution to the global greenhouse began to become significant long before the Industrial Age began. This was when an ice core drilled at the Vostok station in Antarctica revealed how atmospheric CO2 and methane levels have changed over the past 400,000 years. Bubbles trapped in the ice provide a record of the ancient atmosphere during the past three interglacials.<\/p>
D. What we see is a regular pattern of rises and falls with a period of about 100,000 years, coinciding with the coming and going of ice ages. There are good explanations for these cycles: periodic changes in the planet\u2019s orbit and the axis of rotation alter the amount of sunlight reaching the Earth. We are now in one of the relatively brief, warm interglacial periods that follow an ice age. Within this larger pattern, there are regular peaks in methane every 22,000 years that coincide with the times when the Earth\u2019s orbit makes summers in the northern hemisphere warmest. This makes sense because warm northern summers drive strong tropical monsoons in southern Asia that both encourage the growth of vegetation and cause flooding, during which vegetation rotting in oxygen-poor water will emit methane. Around the Arctic, hot summers thaw wetlands for longer, again promoting both vegetation growth and methane emission.<\/p>
E. In recent times, however, this regular pattern has changed. The last methane peak occurred around 11,000 years ago, at about 700 parts per billion (ppb), after which levels began to fall. But instead of continuing to fall to what Ruddiman says should have been a minimum of about 450 ppb today, the atmospheric methane began to climb again 5,000 years ago. Working with climate modellers Stephen Serves and John Kutzbach, Ruddiman has shown that if the levels of these gases had continued to fall rather than rising when they did, ice sheets would now cover swathes of northern Canada and Siberia. The world would be heading into another ice age. So why did both methane and CO2 rise over the past few thousand years? In other words, why has this interglacial period been different from previous ones? Could humans be to blame?<\/p>
F. Agriculture emerged around the eastern Mediterranean some 11,000 years ago, then shortly afterwards in China and several thousand years later in the Americas. Farming can release greenhouse gases in various ways: clearing forests liberates lots of stored carbon as the wood rots or is burned, for instance, while flooded rice paddies release methane just as wetlands do. To find out more about early farming, Ruddiman began to dig around in studies of agricultural history. These revealed that there was a sharp rise in rice cultivation in Asia around 5,000 years ago, with the practice spreading across China and south-east Asia. Here at least was a possible source for the unexpected methane rise.<\/p>
(Adapted from IELTS Reading Academic Actual Tests)<\/p>
Questions 116-120:<\/p>
Complete the summary. Choose NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS from the passage for each answer. Write your answers in the corresponding numbered boxes provided.<\/p>
To many people the controversial idea that our (116) __________ were responsible for global warming appears (117) __________, yet Ruddiman believes that high levels of carbon dioxide and methane \u2013 both (118) __________, or greenhouse gases \u2013 were being released into the Earth\u2019s atmosphere in times prior to (119) __________. However, Ruddiman claims that this had a positive effect, as it may well have saved us from another (120) __________.<\/p>
Questions 121-125:<\/p>
Do the following statements agree with the information given in the text? Write your answers in the corresponding numbered boxes provided.<\/p>
TRUE (T)\t\t\t<\/span>if the statement agrees with the information<\/font><\/p>FALSE (F)\t\t\t<\/span>if the statement contradicts the information<\/font><\/p>NOT GIVEN (NG)\t\t<\/span>if there is no information on this<\/font><\/p>121. Some megafauna has been eliminated by humans in the past 100 years.<\/p>
122. Ruddiman\u2019s idea caused a great deal of argument among scientists.<\/p>
123. New scientific evidence proves for certain that Ruddiman\u2019s theory is correct.<\/p>
124. The 20th century has seen the greatest ever increase in global temperatures.<\/p>
125. Changes in the Earth\u2019s orbit can affect global temperatures.<\/p>
V. WRITING (5.0 points)<\/p>
Part 1: SENTENCE TRANSFORMATION (2.0 points)<\/p>
A. For questions 126-130, rewrite the second sentence so that it has the same meaning as the first one. You MUST write the complete sentences in the corresponding numbered boxes provided.<\/p>
126. The moment Ms. Green finished her presentation, her colleagues left the room.<\/p>
\uf0e0 Barely had _____________________________________________________________________<\/p>
127. The inhabitants in this village were far worse-off ten years ago than they are now.<\/p>
\uf0e0 The inhabitants in this village are nowhere ____________________________________________<\/p>
128. Bill was really jealous when he caught sight of his brother\u2019s new villa.<\/p>
\uf0e0 Bill was green __________________________________________________________________<\/p>
129. The English pilot Stephen Cameron made a miraculous recovery thanks to the efforts of the Vietnamese medical staff.<\/p>
\uf0e0 Had it ________________________________________________________________________<\/p>
130. My younger sister is very good at cooking spaghetti.<\/p>
\uf0e0 My younger sister is a dab