题目内容（请给出正确答案）

[单选题]

Many notables will attend this evening’s news conference.

A.guests

B.officials

C.delegates

D.VIPs

查看答案

如搜索结果不匹配，请联系老师获取答案

您可能会需要：

重置密码查看订单联系客服

安装上学吧APP，拍照搜题省时又省心！

更多“Many notables will attend this…”相关的问题

第1题

Construction is expanding all over China, no doubt many materials will be needed at a very big amount in future.

A．China, no doubt many materials will be needed for a very big amount

B．China, no doubt many materials will be needed in a very big amount

C．China; no doubt many materials will be needed in large amounts

D．China; no doubt many materials will be needed for large amounts

点击查看答案

第2题

Construction is expanding all over China, no doubt many materials will be needed at a very big amount in future.

A．China, no doubt many materials will be needed for a very big amount

B．China, no doubt many materials will be needed in a very big amount

C．China; no doubt many materials will be needed in large amounts

D．China; no doubt many materials will be needed for large amounts

点击查看答案

第3题

Leading a dog’s life in America isn’t such a bad thing. Many grocery stores sell pet foods to owners eager to please their pets. In Houston, Texas, dogs can have their dinner delivered to their homes, just like pizza. Well-to-do canines can attend doggy daycare centers while their owners work. Pets can even accompany their owners on vacation. Fancy hotels are beginning to accommodate both man and beast. Furry guests in hotels can enjoy gourmet meals served on fine china and sleep in soft beds.

Beneath the furry luxuries, there lies a basic American belief: Pets have a right to be treated well. At least 75 animal welfare organizations exist in America. These provide care and adoption services for homeless and abused animals. Vets can give animals an incredible level of medical care for an incredible price. To pay for the high-tech health care, people can buy health insurance for their pets. And when it’s time to say good -bye, owners can bury their pets in a respectable pet cemetery.

The average American enjoys having pets around, and for good reason. Researchers have discovered that interacting with animals lowers a person’s blood pressure. Dogs can offer protection from burglars and unwelcome visitors. Cats can help rid the home of unwanted pests. Little creatures of all shapes and sizes can provide companionship and love. In many cases, having a pet prepares a young couple for the responsibilities of parenthood. Pets even encourage social relationships: They give their owners an appearance of friendliness, and they provide a good topic of conversation.

Pets are as basic to American culture as hot dogs or apple pies. To Americans, pets are not just property, but a part of the family. After all, pets are people, too.

(1)The word “please” in paragraph 1 line 2 means ().

A、to make somebody glad

B、to make somebody unhappy

C、to invite somebody

D、to treat somebody badly

(2)The topic sentence in paragraph 2 is ().

A、At least 75 animal welfare organizations exist in America

B、Vets can give animals an incredible level of medical care for an incredible price

C、To pay for the high-tech health care, people can buy health insurance for their pets

D、Beneath the furry luxuries, there lies a basic American belief: Pets have a right to be treated well

(3)“When it’s time to say good-bye” in paragraph 2 line 5 means ().

A、when the pet says “good-bye” to the host

B、when the host says “good-bye” to the pet

C、when the pet dies

D、when the pet has to leave

(4)Paragraph 3 mainly tells us ().

A、every American enjoys having pets

B、having pets can do people something good

C、dogs and cats are people’s good friends

D、pets do not encourage social relationships

(5)The author writes the last paragraph to show ().

A、pets are the same as hot dogs and apple pies

B、pets are people

C、pets are just property

D、pets are important

点击查看答案

第4题

We now find that a great many things we thought were Natural Laws are really human conventions. You know that even in the remotest depth of stellar space there are still three feet to a yard. That is.no doubt, a very remarkable fact, but you would hardly call it a law of nature. And a great many things that have been regarded as laws of nature are of that kind. (1)On the other hand, where you can get down to any knowledge of what atoms actually do, you will find that they are much less subject to law than people thought, and that the laws at which you arrive are sta tistical averages of just the sort that would emerge from chance. There is, as we all know, a law that if you throw dice you will get double sixes only about once in thirty-six times, and we do not regard that as evidence that the fall of the dice is regulated by design;on the contrary, if the double sixes came every time we should think that there was design.

The laws of nature are of that sort a s regards to a great many of them. They are statistical averages such as would emerge from the laws of chance;and that makes the whole business of natural law much less impressive than it formerly was. (2) Quite apart from that, which represents the momentary state of science that may change tomorrow, the whole idea that natural laws imply a law-giver is due to a confusion between natural and human laws.

Human laws are behests commanding you to behave a certain way, in which way you may choose to behave, or you may choose not to behave; (3) but natural laws are a description of how things do in fact behave, and, being a mere description of what they in fact do, you cannot argue that there must be somebody who told them to do that, because even supposing that there were you are then faced with the question, Why did God issue just those natural laws and not others?

If you say that he did it simply from his own good pleasure, and without any reason, you then find that there is something which is not subject to law, and so your train of natural law is interrupted. If you say, as more orthodox theologians do, that in all the laws which God issues he had a reason for giving those laws rather than others—the reason, of course, being to create the best universe, although you would never think to look at it—if there was a reason for the laws which God gave, then God himself was subject to law and therefore you do not get any advantage by introducing God as an intermediary.

(4) You really have a law outside and anterior to the divine edicts, and God does not serve your purpose, because he is not the ultimate law-giver. In short, this whole argument from natural law no longer has anything like the strength that it used to have. I am traveling on in time in my review of these arguments. The arguments that are used for the existence of God change their character as time goes on. (5) They were at first hard intellectual arguments embodying certain quite definite fallacies. As we come to modem times they become less respectable intellectually and more affected by a kind of moralizing vagueness.

(61)

点击查看答案