专题1 第2讲 推理判断题——抽丝剥茧，秒懂言外之意（随堂演练）（Word练习）-【正禾一本通】2026年高考英语二轮专题复习高效讲义

A (2025·杭州市高三年级教学质量检测)Plastic and cheap clothes are not a glorious legacy (遗产).But a scientist exploring which items from our technological civilisation are most likely to survive for many millions of years as fossils (化石) has reached an ironic and instructive conclusion： Plastic and fast fashion will be our everlasting geological signature. “Plastic will definitely be a signature ‘technofossil’，because it is incredibly durable.We are making massive amounts of it，and it gets around the entire globe，” says Sarah Gabbott，a University of Leicester expert on fossils.“So wherever those future civilisations dig，they are going to find plastic.” Clothes will also make an abrupt entry into humanity’s fossil record.Today，the world’s growing population often wears mass-produced synthetic (合成的) clothing that is rapidly dumped and it is not as easily rotted as cotton and silk. “We are making it in ridiculous amounts，” says Gabbott.“We stick it into landfills(废物填埋场)，which are like giant mummification tombs.It is already clear that much of modern fashion will end up being truly timeless.” Fossils are not just objects left behind，but also the traces of life’s activity written into the rocks.Human activities，such as oil drilling and nuclear tests，will leave lasting scars.Humankind has also created many near-indestructible chemicals，such as dioxins and DDT.Given that similar molecules produced by bacteria have been found in rocks that are 1，600m years old in Western Australia，these chemicals appear to be here to stay.“And there is the graphite (石墨) used in pencils，” says Gabbott.“It is endearing to think that it may be the drawings of children that may survive best of all： a pencil portrait，perhaps，of a family outside a house，with the sun shining and a rainbow arcing across the sky，” she says jokingly. “The big message here is that the amount of stuff we are now making is eye-watering—it’s off the scale，” says Gabbott.All of the stuff made by humans by 1950 was a small part of all the matter on Earth.But today it outweighs all plants and animals.“This raises serious questions for us all，” she says.“Do you need that？ Do you really need to buy more？” [语篇解读]本文是说明文。文章主要说明了塑料和快时尚等人类大量制造且耐用的物品将成为人类在地质历史上永恒的标志，这引发了人们对消费行为的思考。 1.What does the author think of the legacy mentioned in Paragraph 1？ A.Troubling. B.Short-lived. C.Technologically weak. D.Environmentally harmless. A　[观点态度题。根据第一段中的“Plastic and cheap clothes are not a glorious legacy (遗产)”可知，作者认为塑料和廉价衣服并非光彩的遗产；再结合后文作者用“an ironic and instructive conclusion”暗示其负面影响，由此可推断出，作者觉得这些遗产是令人担忧的，故选A。] 2.What can be categorized as “technofossils”？ A.Dinosaur bones. B.Cotton clothing. C.Nuclear waste. D.Solid landfills. C　[细节理解题。根据第二段中的“Plastic will definitely be a signature ‘technofossil’，because it is incredibly durable”以及第五段中的“Human activities，such as oil drilling and nuclear tests，will leave lasting scars”可知，技术化石是人类技术产生的且能长久留存的物质，核废料是人类核活动产生且难以消失的，可归类为技术化石，故选C。] 3.Why is “the drawings of children” mentioned in Paragraph 5？ A.To highlight human creativity. B.To celebrate modern technology. C.To stress that warmth of life is here to stay. D.To indicate that chemicals could be fossilized. D　[推理判断题。根据第五段的内容可知，该段提到人类制造了许多几乎不可摧毁的化学物质，即这些化学物质能长久留存，接着以儿童绘画为例说了铅笔中的石墨的长久留存，所以提到儿童绘画是为了表明像石墨这样的化学物质可以被石化，被留存很久，故选D。] 4.What is Gabbott’s primary concern？ A.Biodiversity loss. B.Geological record accuracy. C.Technological progress. D.Overproduction of material goods. D　[推理判断题。根据最后一段中 Gabbott 说的话“The big message here is that...Do you really need to buy more？”可知，Gabbott强调人类现在制造的物质数量过多，并对人们的消费需求提出质疑。所以她主要关心的是物质产品的过度生产，故选D。] B (2025·武汉高中毕业生四月调研考试)In health research，determining true causes—like whether drinking wine affects health—is vital for informed decisions.But “correlation does not equal causation (因果关系)” is widely recognized.Then how do researchers move beyond correlations to find answers？ Correlations often exist without implying causation.For instance，chocolate consumption correlates with the number of Nobel Prize winners in some countries.Does eating chocolate boost Nobel wins？ No.This correlation likely exists because chocolate consumption serves as a proxy for wealth.In turn，wealth relates to education and research funding—key factors behind Nobel achievements.So，just finding a link isn’t enough.Scientists need more strong evidence to establish causation. Unlike highly controlled chemistry or physics experiments，which can easily show how X affects Y，human biology often relies on indirect evidence.It requires“inductive reasoning”—drawing general conclusions from available evidence.It’s like how a prosecutor (检察官) builds a criminal case using circumstantial evidence.While individual pieces might not be persuasive，their build-up strengthens the case.There’s one interesting contrast，however.In criminal cases，the standard of proof is “beyond reasonable doubt”，but science demands proof “based on the balance of probabilities”.This reflects scientists’ willingness to revise their beliefs when better evidence emerges. Indirect evidence is crucial for inferring causation，but it is not always conclusive.The gold standard for direct evidence of causation is the randomized controlled trial (RCT)，where participants are randomly assigned to either receive an intervention or to be a “control”.This ensures if you see a difference between the two groups，this can only be due to the effect of the intervention，which effectively proves causation.Unfortunately，ethical (道德的) considerations often prevent us conducting RCTs.For instance，we lack RCT evidence that smoking causes lung cancer because the indirect evidence is so strong that such studies would be unethical. Causation in health doesn’t work in a simple way.Factors like lifestyle，genes，and environment interact to determine disease risk.Achieving perfect health requires a variety of actions，as no single habit，superfood，or magic pill is the answer. [语篇解读]本文是说明文。文章指出有关联并不等于有因果关系，仅发现关联不够，科学家们需要掌握更有力的证据才能确定因果关系。确定因果关系的直接证据的黄金标准是随机对照试验(RCT)。遗憾的是，出于道德方面的考量，我们常常无法进行随机对照试验。 5.What does the underlined word “proxy” in Paragraph 2 mean？ A.Replacement. B.Condition. C.Indicator. D.Preference. C　[词句猜测题。画线词所在句意思是：这种相关性可能存在是因为巧克力消费量充当了财富的某种角色；根据后文的“In turn，wealth relates to education and research funding—key factors behind Nobel achievements”可知，财富与教育和研究资金相关，后两者是诺贝尔成就背后的关键因素，所以此处是说巧克力消费量能与诺贝尔奖得主数量相关是因为它能反映财富情况，C项indicator“指示信号，标志，迹象”符合语境，与画线词意思最为接近。] 6.How do scientists’ inferences differ from prosecutors’ conclusions？ A.They remain open to update. B.They guarantee absolute certainty. C.They rely largely on indirect evidence. D.They require higher standard of proof. A　[推理判断题。根据第三段中的“but science demands proof‘based on the balance of probabilities’.This reflects scientists’ willingness to revise their beliefs when better evidence emerges”可知，科学基于“概率平衡”来证明，这反映了科学家在有更好的证据出现时愿意修正自己的观点，即科学家的推断是开放的，会根据新证据更新，而检察官的标准是“beyond reasonable doubt”(排除合理怀疑)，是相对固定的，所以科学家的推断与检察官的结论不同之处在于科学家的推断保持开放以进行更新，A选项正确。] 7.Why is RCT considered the gold standard for establishing causation？ A.It offers wide application. B.It ensures fair assignment. C.It avoids ethical considerations. D.It identifies intervention effects. D　[推理判断题。根据第四段中的“where participants are randomly assigned...which effectively proves causation”可知，在随机对照试验(RCT)中，参与者被随机分配接受干预或作为“对照”，这样能确保两组间的差异只能是由于干预的效果，从而有效证明因果关系。所以RCT被认为是确立因果关系的黄金标准是因为它能确定干预效果，D选项正确。] 8.What is the author’s suggestion for health improvement？ A.Counting on good habits. B.Integrating multiple strategies. C.Taking a cure-all pill. D.Leading an active lifestyle. B　[推理判断题。根据最后一段内容可知，健康中的因果关系很复杂，生活方式、基因和环境等因素相互作用决定疾病风险，实现完美健康需要多种行动，而不是仅靠单一的习惯、超级食物或神奇药丸就能解决的。所以可以推断作者对于健康改善的建议是综合多种策略，B选项正确。] 核心 单词 A篇 Para.1：glorious adj.值得称道的，光荣的，荣耀的　Para.2：durable adj.耐用的；持久的 Para.3：abrupt adj.突然的，意外的　dump v.丢弃、扔掉、倾倒　Para.4：ridiculous adj.愚蠢的，荒谬的，荒唐的　Para.5：endearing adj.令人爱慕的，惹人喜爱的，讨人喜欢的 Para.6：outweigh v.重于，大于，超过 B篇 Para.1：correlation n.相互关系，相关，关联　Para.2：consumption n.(能量、食物或材料的)消耗，消耗量　Para.3：persuasive adj.有说服力的　emerge v.出现，浮现；暴露，露出真相，被知晓　Para.4：conclusive adj.结论性的，不容置疑的，确凿的　intervention n.干涉 核心 短语 A篇 Para.1：be likely to 很可能，有可能　reach a conclusion 得出结论 B篇 Para.1：informed decision 明智的决定　Para.2：serve as 充当，担任　Para.3：inductive reasoning 归纳推理　circumstantial evidence 旁证 词缀 变形 A篇 Para.1：instruct v.指示，命令，吩咐→instruction n.指示，命令，吩咐；[pl.]用法说明→instructive adj.富有教益的；增长知识的　Para.2：incredible adj.不能相信的，难以置信的→incredibly adv.令人难以置信；极端地，极其→incredibility n.不能相信 学科网（北京）股份有限公司 $