"I’ve never met a human worth cloning," says cloning expert Mark Westhusin from the cramped confines of his lab at Texas A & M University. "It’s a stupid endeavor.’ That’s an interesting choice of adjective, coming from a man who has spent millions of dollars trying to clone a 13-year-old dog named Missy. So far, he and his team have not succeeded, though they have cloned two calves and expect to clone a cat soon. They just might succeed in cloning Missy later this year--or perhaps not for another five years. It seems the reproductive system of man’s best friend is one of the mysteries of modem science.
Westhusin’s experience with cloning animals leaves him vexed by all this talk of human cloning. In three years of work on the Missyplicity project, using hundreds upon hundreds of canine eggs, the A&M team has produced only a dozen or so embryos carrying Missy’s DNA. None have survived the transfer to a surrogate mother. The wastage of eggs and the many spontaneously aborted fetuses may be acceptable when you’re dealing with cats or bulls, he argues, but not with humans. "Cloning is incredibly inefficient, and also dangerous," he says.
Even so, dog cloning is a commercial opportunity, with a nice research payoff. Ever since Dolly, the sheep, was cloned in 1997, Westhusin’s phone at A&M College of Veterinary Medicine has been ringing busily. Cost is no obstacle for customers like Missy’s mysterious owner, who wishes him remain unknown to protect his privacy. He’s plopped down $ 3. 7 million so far to fund the research because he wants a twin to carry on Missy’s fine qualities after she dies. But he knows her clone may not have her temperament. In a statement of purpose, Missy’s owner and the A&M team say they are "both looking forward to studying the ways that her clone differs from Missy."
The fate of the dog samples will depend on Westhusin’s work. He knows that even if he gets a dog viably pregnant, the offspring, should they survive, will face the problems shown at birth by other cloned animals: abnormalities like immature lungs and heart and weight problems. "Why would you ever want to clone humans," Westhusin asks, "when we’re not even close to getting it worked out in animals yet/
Which of the following best represents Mr. Westhusin’s attitude toward cloning

A:Animal cloning is a stupid attempt. B:Human cloning is not yet close to getting it worked out. C:Cloning is too inefficient and should be stopped. D:Animals cloning yes, and human cloning at least not now.

Scholastic thinkers held a wide variety of doctrines in both philosophy and theology, the study of religion. What gives unity to the whole Scholastic movement, the academic practice in Europe from the 9th to the 17th centuries, are the common aims, attitudes, and methods generally accepted by all its members. The chief concern of the Scholastics was net to discover new facts but to integrate the knowledge already acquired separately by Greek reasoning and Christian revelation. This concern is one of the most characteristic differences between Scholasticism and modern thought since the Renaissance.
The basic aim of the Scholastics determined certain common attitudes, the most important of which was their conviction of the fundamental harmony between reason and revelation. The Scholastics maintained that because the same God was the source of both types of knowledge and truth was one of his chief attributes, he could not contradict himself in these two ways of speaking. Any apparent opposition between revelation and reason could be traced either to an incorrect use of reason or to an inaccurate interpretation of the words of revelation. Because the Scholastics believed that revelation was the direct teaching of God, it possessed for them a higher degree of truth and certainty than did natural reason. In apparent conflicts between religious faith and philosophic reasoning, faith was thus always the supreme arbiter; the theologian’s decision overruled that of the philosopher. After the early 13th century, Scholastic thought emphasized more the independence of philosophy within its own domain. Nonetheless, throughout the Scholastic period, philosophy was called the servant of theology, not only because the truth of philosophy was subordinated to that of theology, but also because the theologian used philosophy to understand and explain revelation.
This attitude of Scholasticism stands in sharp contrast to the so-called double-truth theory of the Spanish Arab philosopher and physician Averroes. His theory assumed that truth was accessible to both philosophy and Islamic theology but that only philosophy could attain it perfectly. The so-called truths of theology served, hence, as imperfect imaginative expressions for the common people of the authentic truth accessible only to philosophy. Averroe’s maintained that philosophic truth could even contradict, at least verbally, the teachings of Islamic theology.
As a result of their belief in the harmony between faith and reason, the Scholastics attempted to determine the precise scope and competence of each of these faculties. Many early Scholastics, such as the Italian ecclesiastic and philosopher St. Anselm, did not clearly distinguish the two and were overconfident that reason could prove certain doctrines of revelation. Later, at the height of the mature period of Scholasticism, the Italian theologian and philosopher St. Thomas Aquinas worked out a balance between reason and revelation.
Which of the following is most likely to be discussed in the part succeeding this text

A:Relations of St. T. Aquinas’s achievements to previous efforts. B:How St. T. Aquinas worked out in the balance in discussion. C:Other endeavors on the relationship of reason and revelation. D:Outstanding features of the mature period of Scholasticism.

"I’ve never met a human worth cloning," says cloning expert Mark Westhusin from the cramped confines of his lab at Texas A & M University. "It’s a stupid endeavor.’ That’s an interesting choice of adjective, coming from a man who has spent millions of dollars trying to clone a 13-year-old dog named Missy. So far, he and his team have not succeeded, though they have cloned two calves and expect to clone a cat soon. They just might succeed in cloning Missy later this year--or perhaps not for another five years. It seems the reproductive system of man’s best friend is one of the mysteries of modem science.
Westhusin’s experience with cloning animals leaves him vexed by all this talk of human cloning. In three years of work on the Missyplicity project, using hundreds upon hundreds of canine eggs, the A&M team has produced only a dozen or so embryos carrying Missy’s DNA. None have survived the transfer to a surrogate mother. The wastage of eggs and the many spontaneously aborted fetuses may be acceptable when you’re dealing with cats or bulls, he argues, but not with humans. "Cloning is incredibly inefficient, and also dangerous," he says.
Even so, dog cloning is a commercial opportunity, with a nice research payoff. Ever since Dolly, the sheep, was cloned in 1997, Westhusin’s phone at A&M College of Veterinary Medicine has been ringing busily. Cost is no obstacle for customers like Missy’s mysterious owner, who wishes him remain unknown to protect his privacy. He’s plopped down $ 3. 7 million so far to fund the research because he wants a twin to carry on Missy’s fine qualities after she dies. But he knows her clone may not have her temperament. In a statement of purpose, Missy’s owner and the A&M team say they are "both looking forward to studying the ways that her clone differs from Missy."
The fate of the dog samples will depend on Westhusin’s work. He knows that even if he gets a dog viably pregnant, the offspring, should they survive, will face the problems shown at birth by other cloned animals: abnormalities like immature lungs and heart and weight problems. "Why would you ever want to clone humans," Westhusin asks, "when we’re not even close to getting it worked out in animals yet"

A:Animal cloning is a stupid attempt. B:Human cloning is not yet close to getting it worked out. C:Cloning is too inefficient and should be stopped. D:Animals cloning yes, and human cloning at least not now.

Tom had once worked in a city office in London, but now he is out of work. He had a large family to support, so he often found himself in difficulty. He often visited Mr. White on Sundays, told him about his troubles, and asked for two or three pounds.
Mr.White, a man with a kind heart, found it difficult to refuse the money, though he himself was poor. Tom had already received more than thirty pounds from Mr. White, but he always seemed to be in need of some more.
One day, after telling Mr. White a long story of his troubles, Tom asked [or five pounds.
Mr. White had heard this sort of thing before, but he listened patiently to the end. Then he said, "I understand your difficulties, Tom. I’ d like to help you. But I’m not going to give you five pounds this time. I’ll lend you the money, and you can pay me off next time you see me. "
Tom took the money, but he never appeared again.

A:worked in a city office and was poorly paid B:was poorly paid and had a large family to support C:was poorly paid and always spent money carelessly D:was out of work anti had a large family to support

Passage Three
Tom had once worked in a city office in London, but now he is out of work. He had a large family to support, so he often found himself in difficulty. He often visited Mr. White on Sundays, told him about his troubles, and asked for two or three pounds.
Mr. White, a man with a kind hear(, found it difficult to refuse the money, though he himself was poor. Tom had already received more than thirty pounds from Mr. White, but he always seemed to be in need of some more.
One day, after telling Mr. White a long story of his troubles, Tom asked for five pounds.
Mr. White had heard this sort of thing before, but he listened patiently to the end. Then he said, "I understand your difficulties, Tom. I’ d like to help you. But I’ m not going to give you five pounds this time. I’ll lend you the money, and you can pay me off next time you see me."
Tom took the money, but he never appeared again.

A:worked in a city office and was poorly paid B:was poorly paid and had a large family to support C:was poorly paid and always spent money carelessly D:was out of work and had a large family to support

They worked ______ the cost of the holiday and decided if they could afford it.

A:at B:out C:off D:for

They worked ______ the cost of the holiday and decided if they could afford it.

A:at B:out C:off D:for

Passage Three Tom had once worked in a city office in London, but now he is out of work. He had a large family to support, so he often found himself in difficulty. He often visited Mr. White on Sundays, told him about his troubles, and asked for two or three pounds. Mr. White, a man with a kind hear(, found it difficult to refuse the money, though he himself was poor. Tom had already received more than thirty pounds from Mr. White, but he always seemed to be in need of some more. One day, after telling Mr. White a long story of his troubles, Tom asked for five pounds. Mr. White had heard this sort of thing before, but he listened patiently to the end. Then he said, "I understand your difficulties, Tom. I’ d like to help you. But I’ m not going to give you five pounds this time. I’ll lend you the money, and you can pay me off next time you see me." Tom took the money, but he never appeared again.

A:worked in a city office and was poorly paid B:was poorly paid and had a large family to support C:was poorly paid and always spent money carelessly D:was out of work and had a large family to support