Questões de Inglês

    This argument might have been halfway plausible 20 years ago – or, if you want to be generous, even 10 years ago. But today?
    Today, salt water is inundating the coastal towns of the United States, to the point that they are starting to put giant rulers in the intersections so people can tell if it is safe to drive through. The city leaders are also
posting “no wake” signs — not on canals but on the streets, to stop trucks from plowing through the water so fast as to send waves crashing into nearby homes.
    We all see the giant storms, more threatening than any in our lifetimes — and while scientists are not entirely comfortable yet drawing links between the power of these hurricanes and climate change, many people are coming to their own common-sense conclusions.
    As the challenges in the real world worsen, some senior Republicans continue to question the link between human-caused emissions and rising temperatures. Scott Pruitt, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, said this on CNBC in March:
    “I think that measuring with precision human activity on the climate is something very challenging to do and there’s tremendous disagreement about the degree of impact, so no, I would not agree that it’s a primary contributor to the global warming that we see.”
    Note that he acknowledges the planet is warming. Note that he offers no alternative hypothesis about the cause of that warming — nor will he ever, for the simple reason that there is no plausible alternative. But still, he clings to uncertainty as a reason to do nothing.

 

Nos parágrafos acima, é apresentada a ideia de que:

    Scientists urged decades ago that we buy ourselves some insurance by cutting emissions. We yawned. Even today, when millions of people have awakened to the danger, tens of millions have not. So the political demand for change is still too weak to overcome the entrenched interests that want to block it.
    In Washington, progress on climate change has stalled. The administration has announced its intent to withdraw from the global Paris climate accord. And top Trump appointees insist that the causes of climate change are too uncertain and the scientific forecasts too unreliable to be a basis for action.

 

No 2.° parágrafo acima, lemos: “The administration has announced its intent to withdraw from the global Paris climate accord.”

 

Na voz passiva, o trecho ficaria:

    Now we know how events in Texas turned out.
    Dr. Shepherd and his colleagues have spent their careers issuing a larger warning, one that much of the public still chooses to ignore. I speak, of course, about the risks of climate change.
    Because of atmospheric emissions from human activity, the ocean waters from which Harvey drew its final burst of strength were much warmer than they ought to have been, most likely contributing to the intensity of the deluge. If the forecasts from our scientists are anywhere close to right, we have seen nothing yet.
    In their estimation, the most savage heat waves that we experience today will likely become routine in a matter of decades. The coastal inundation that has already begun will grow worse and worse, forcing millions of people to flee. The immense wave of refugees that we already see moving across continents may be just the beginning.

 

O trecho acima afirma, sobre os eventos no Texas:

Climate
The Real Unknown of Climate Change: Our Behavior
Justin Gillis
BY DEGREES   SEPT. 18, 2017

    As Hurricane Harvey bore down on the Texas coast, few people in that state __________ to understand the nature of the looming danger.

    The bulletins __________ of rain falling in feet, not inches. Experts _________ with the public to wake up. J. Marshall Shepherd, head of atmospheric sciences at the University of Georgia and a leading voice in American meteorology, ________ ahead of the storm that “the most dangerous aspect of this hurricane may be days of rainfall and associated flooding.”

 

A alternativa que completa adequadamente os espaços do trecho acima é:

Psychopaths can’t tell if a person is genuinely sad or afraid, study suggests

People with psychopathic traits find it harder to tell the difference between genuine and fake emotions, a
study has suggested.
Researchers based in Australia arrived at this conclusion by asking people to look at photographs of faces
showing different emotions, such as fear or sadness.
[5] Study author Dr. Amy Dawel, of the Australian National University Research School of Psychology,
explained in a statement: “For most people, if we see someone who is genuinely upset, you feel bad for
them and it motivates you to help them. People who are very high on the psychopathy spectrum don’t show
this response.”
Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterized by amoral behavior, such as callousness, poor empathy
[10] skills and shallow affect: — the inability to experience deep emotions even when in scenarios where the
average person might be distressed. They might lack remorse or guilt in appropriate situations, and have a
disregard for social conventions and law. Balancing this is their superficial charm and ability to mimic
emotional behavior, which can help them function in society. Patrick Bateman, the murderous Wall Street
banker in American Psycho, is one of the most famous fictional depictions of psychopathy.

[15]    The team behind the study published in the journal Personality Disorders recruited 140 participants, and
tested them for psychopathic traits. They were also shown photos of facial expressions. In some images, the
emotions where genuine, while others were faked.
Those who scored low on the psychopathy report were better able to pick up genuine and fabricated
emotions. The higher a participant scored, the harder they found it to differentiate between genuine and fake
[20] feelings of sadness or fear. They could, however, detect genuine happiness, anger, and disgust.
“The results were very specific to expressions of distress,” said Dawel. “We found people with high levels
of psychopathic traits don’t feel any worse for someone who is genuinely upset than someone who is faking
it.”
 “They also seem to have problems telling if the upset is real or fake. As a result, they are not nearly as
[25] willing to help someone who is expressing genuine distress as most people are.”
The researchers hope their paper will form the basis of further work into pinpointing and treat psychopathy,
particularly by identifying it in childhood.
“There seems to be a genetic contribution to these traits, we see the start of them quite early in childhood,”
said Dawel.
[30] “Understanding exactly what is going wrong with emotions in psychopathy will help us to identify these
problems early and hopefully intervene in ways that promote moral development.”
The research is the latest to delve into psychopathic traits. Last year, Harvard University researchers
published the results of a study into almost 50 prisoners. They found the brains of those with psychopathic
traits were wired to value immediate reward, while not considering long-term consequences.
[35] Commenting on the paper published in Neuron, study author Josh Buckholtz, associate professor of
psychology at Harvard University, said in a statement: “For years, we have been focused on the idea that
psychopaths are people who cannot generate emotion and that’s why they do all these terrible things.
“But what we care about with psychopaths is not the feelings they have or don’t have, it’s the choices they
make. Psychopaths commit an astonishing amount of crime, and this crime is both devastating to victims
[40] and astronomically costly to society as a whole.”

Fonte: GANDER, Kashmira. Psychopaths can’t tell if a person is genuinely sad or afraid, study sugests. Disponível em: http://www.newsweek.com/psychopaths-cant-tell-if-person-genuinely-sad-or-afraid-study suggests-1055599. Publicado em: 8 março 2018. Acesso em: 14 out. 2018.

Considerando o assunto sobre a psicopatia, assinale a alternativa CORRETA.

Psychopaths can’t tell if a person is genuinely sad or afraid, study suggests

People with psychopathic traits find it harder to tell the difference between genuine and fake emotions, a
study has suggested.
Researchers based in Australia arrived at this conclusion by asking people to look at photographs of faces
showing different emotions, such as fear or sadness.
[5] Study author Dr. Amy Dawel, of the Australian National University Research School of Psychology,
explained in a statement: “For most people, if we see someone who is genuinely upset, you feel bad for
them and it motivates you to help them. People who are very high on the psychopathy spectrum don’t show
this response.”
Psychopathy is a personality disorder characterized by amoral behavior, such as callousness, poor empathy
[10] skills and shallow affect: — the inability to experience deep emotions even when in scenarios where the
average person might be distressed. They might lack remorse or guilt in appropriate situations, and have a
disregard for social conventions and law. Balancing this is their superficial charm and ability to mimic
emotional behavior, which can help them function in society. Patrick Bateman, the murderous Wall Street
banker in American Psycho, is one of the most famous fictional depictions of psychopathy.

[15]    The team behind the study published in the journal Personality Disorders recruited 140 participants, and
tested them for psychopathic traits. They were also shown photos of facial expressions. In some images, the
emotions where genuine, while others were faked.
Those who scored low on the psychopathy report were better able to pick up genuine and fabricated
emotions. The higher a participant scored, the harder they found it to differentiate between genuine and fake
[20] feelings of sadness or fear. They could, however, detect genuine happiness, anger, and disgust.
“The results were very specific to expressions of distress,” said Dawel. “We found people with high levels
of psychopathic traits don’t feel any worse for someone who is genuinely upset than someone who is faking
it.”
 “They also seem to have problems telling if the upset is real or fake. As a result, they are not nearly as
[25] willing to help someone who is expressing genuine distress as most people are.”
The researchers hope their paper will form the basis of further work into pinpointing and treat psychopathy,
particularly by identifying it in childhood.
“There seems to be a genetic contribution to these traits, we see the start of them quite early in childhood,”
said Dawel.
[30] “Understanding exactly what is going wrong with emotions in psychopathy will help us to identify these
problems early and hopefully intervene in ways that promote moral development.”
The research is the latest to delve into psychopathic traits. Last year, Harvard University researchers
published the results of a study into almost 50 prisoners. They found the brains of those with psychopathic
traits were wired to value immediate reward, while not considering long-term consequences.
[35] Commenting on the paper published in Neuron, study author Josh Buckholtz, associate professor of
psychology at Harvard University, said in a statement: “For years, we have been focused on the idea that
psychopaths are people who cannot generate emotion and that’s why they do all these terrible things.
“But what we care about with psychopaths is not the feelings they have or don’t have, it’s the choices they
make. Psychopaths commit an astonishing amount of crime, and this crime is both devastating to victims
[40] and astronomically costly to society as a whole.”

Fonte: GANDER, Kashmira. Psychopaths can’t tell if a person is genuinely sad or afraid, study sugests. Disponível em: http://www.newsweek.com/psychopaths-cant-tell-if-person-genuinely-sad-or-afraid-study suggests-1055599. Publicado em: 8 março 2018. Acesso em: 14 out. 2018.

De acordo com o texto, é INCORRETO afirmar que: