- 最后登录
- 2012-5-18
- 在线时间
- 40 小时
- 寄托币
- 242
- 声望
- 2
- 注册时间
- 2010-3-13
- 阅读权限
- 15
- 帖子
- 1
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 194
- UID
- 2779438
- 声望
- 2
- 寄托币
- 242
- 注册时间
- 2010-3-13
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 1
|
Do you agree with the following statement? Government should focus more on environment preservation rather than economic development.
In my point of view, I agree with the statement listed above. To support my idea, I have several reasons to name.
First, people's good health largely by virtual of a good environment, not only physical but also mental health. Clean water and fresh air both do good to our body while soft breeze and morning birds' singing can contribute to a positive mood. A positive mood and a healthy body would improve each other to a better level.
In addition, protecting environment is of great significence for researchers in the field of biology to investigate some precious creatures. Once the environment been damaged, sorts of animals will loss their habitates, lack of substance, even facing the edge of extinction. There is an example worths mentioning, when a forest been cut down, some kinds of small animals like birds or rabbits would leave the forest, accordingly, some plants who relies on the animals to transmit their seeds may be extinct.
Further, it's stupid for us not to focus on the environment preservation. With the loss of grass and forests, human is facing a severe problem, namely, the desert. Each spring in almost any city in north of China is confused by the sand storm. Our government pays huge of money to solve the problem, however, the solutions not that works. Imagine this, if we paid enough attention to the environment preservation, will we worried about the bad weather even the financial loss due to sand storm?
With all the details mentioned above, I totally agree with the statement that our govornment should focus more on environment preservation rather than economic development.
综合作文
First, the professor points out that when Austen’s family gave permission to use the portrait as an illustration in an edition of her letters it was already 70 years after Austen’s death. Therefore, it’s unfair to say so the portrait is Austen.
Second, the professor makes us aware of the fact that the portrait may despicts Austen’s relatives such as her nephew, because the time and they were so much alike, just depends on the features of the painting to decide the portrait is Austen may somehow unconving.
In addition, the professor finally tells us the portrait of Austen sold in London is much older than the young girl appears in the portrait.
In a word, with the three evidents given by the professor, we can figure out that the girl in the portrait is not Austen.
|
|