Question

An annoying problem for humans, who like to boast (夸耀) about all the distant planets and moons we have explored, is that we've never taken a good look right under our noses. The inside of the earth is relatively close, but how can we get there?
The deepest oil well enters a mere six miles into the crust (地殼) (the center of the earth is about 4,000 miles deeper). Russian scientists dug the deepest hole in Siberia, but bottomed out at about 7.5 miles below the surface. The Mohole project, a U.S. plan in the 1950s, called for drilling a hole 25 miles down to the boundary between the hard rocks of the crust and the soft mantle (地幔). Sadly the project involved government supporting.
It gets harder and harder to drill deep into the earth because rocks get softer and softer. Hard but easily broken at the surface, rocks become plastic at depth, and the pressure caused by the weight of the overlaying crust ---  about 52,800 pounds per square inch at a depth of ten miles, makes further drilling impossible.
What little we know about the inside of the earth (like the fact that there's a crust, a mantle, and a core) comes from indirect evidence, such as the analysis of earthquakes.
So maybe it's time for a thorough new method to explore the earth's inside. Scientist David Stevenson says we should forget about drilling holes. Instead, we should open a crack (裂縫).
Stevenson suggests digging a crack about a half mile long, a yard wide, and a half mile deep (not with a shovel) but with an explosion on the scale of a nuclear bomb. Next, he'd pour a few hundred thousand tons of molten (熔化的) iron into the crack, along with a robot. The iron, thicker than the surrounding crust, would move downward at about 16 feet per second, carrying the robot with it and opening the crack deeper and deeper. The iron mass would drop for about a week and 2,000 miles to the outer edge of the earth core, the robot sending out data to the surface.
Stevenson compares his idea to space exploration. "We're going somewhere we haven't been before,"he says. "In all possibility, there will be surprises.”
This idea can probably be put in the drawer marked with Isn't Going To Happen. The robot would have to survive temperatures that would melt pretty much anything. But Stevenson's idea may inspire a new look at an old problem. Great things can come from what seems like impossible ideas.

1. 1.
   Going inside the earth is _____ than going into space.
   1. A.
      more interesting
   2. B.
      more possible
   3. C.
      easier
   4. D.
      more challenging
2. 2.
   How deep have we gone into the earth until now?
   1. A.
      6 miles.
   2. B.
      4,000 miles.
   3. C.
      7.5 miles.
   4. D.
      25 miles.
3. 3.
   Which of the following is TRUE about David Stevenson's idea?
   1. A.
      It is an inspiring but not practical idea now.
   2. B.
      It is a practical proposal that has come into use now.
   3. C.
      It is a good proposal that will soon be put into practice.
   4. D.
      It is a false theory that cannot be carried out at all.
4. 4.
   What might be the most suitable title for the text?
   1. A.
      An Annoying Problem for Humans
   2. B.
      To the Center of the Earth
   3. C.
      The Mohole Project
   4. D.
      David Stevenson's Proposal

Answer 1

DCAB
1.推理判斷題。從第一段以及全文可知深入地殼比進入太空更富有挑戰(zhàn)性。
2.細節(jié)理解題。由第二段的but bottomed out about 7.5 miles below the surface可知。
3.推理判斷題。從最后一段可知Steveson的想法只是一個鼓舞人心但目前不可行的建議。
4.歸納標題題。全文主要講的是怎樣深入地球進行探索。