Questões de Concurso
Comentadas para vestibular
Foram encontradas 622 questões
Resolva questões gratuitamente!
Junte-se a mais de 4 milhões de concurseiros!
1) Friedrich Ratzel foi o geógrafo considerado como um dos principais teóricos clássicos da Geografia, o precursor do Determinismo Geográfico e da Geopolítica. Sua principal obra publicada e que repercutiu consideravelmente nos meios acadêmicos foi a Antropogeografia.
2) O Ambientalismo, termo que é bastante utilizado na análise geográfica, refere-se, de uma maneira ampla, ao reconhecimento da importância que o ambiente ou meio ambiente apresenta em relação à vida dos seres vivos.
3) Existe na Geografia uma dupla tradição metodológica, algo que já se reconhece há muito tempo, ou seja as confrontações clássicas entre determinismo e possibilismo.
4) O Principio do Uniformitarismo, bastante empregado na análise geoambiental defende que a superfície terrestre evoluiu a partir de sucessivas catástrofes, algumas das quais teriam promovido extinção em massa da biodiversidade.
5) A Geomorfologia, um dos ramos da Geografia Humana, foi excluída da análise geográfica ambiental e substituída pela Geografia dos Riscos Naturais, sobretudo na interpretação dos problemas ambientais de áreas montanhosas.
Estão corretas:
Sobre esses aspectos referidos no texto, é correto dizer que:
1) a rápida proliferação dos reservatórios e as grandes dimensões assumidas por esses ecossistemas artificiais têm produzido inúmeras alterações nos sistemas hidrológico, atmosférico, biológico e social, nas regiões em que são construídos e nas áreas por eles atingidas.
2) ao interceptar o fluxo de água de um rio, além de causar inúmeras modificações num amplo espectro de atividades e processos ao longo da bacia hidrográfica, as represas interferem nos processos de evolução das comunidades de organismos aquáticos e na composição química do sedimento e da água.
3) um dos determinantes essenciais do funcionamento das represas é sua estrutura espacial horizontal e vertical, muito mais homogênea que a dos lagos, por depender dos níveis de entrada da água dos rios e da altura da saída da água.
4) as grandes represas estão na interface ar-água, mas não são capazes de propiciar alterações no ciclo hidrológico local e no balanço hídrico, conforme se pode constatar no Lago de Sobradinho, no Nordeste brasileiro.
5) as represas construídas nas bacias hidrográficas não propiciam novas possibilidades de dispersão e colonização para os organismos aquáticos, mas podem se transformar em barreiras geográficas para comunidades terrestres.
Estão corretas:
Essa realidade, embora distante, no tempo da escravidão legalmente aceita, remete à reflexão acerca do processo que culminou com a abolição da escravatura no Brasil, sobre o qual é possível salientar que:
1) O regime fascista originou-se na Itália, sob a liderança de Benito Mussolini.
2) O Fascismo foi adotado na Inglaterra durante o governo de Winston Churchill.
3) A Espanha vivenciou o regime fascista durante a presidência do general Franco.
4) A Guerra Civil Espanhola (1936) extinguiu o Fascismo na Espanha.
5) O Fascismo foi adotado em Portugal no governo de Antônio Salazar.
Estão corretas as afirmativas apenas:
Read the text below and answer the following question based on it.
Is gene editing ethical?
Gene editing holds the key to preventing or treating debilitating genetic diseases, giving hope to millions of people around the world. Yet the same technology could unlock the path to designing our future children, enhancing their genome by selecting desirable traits such as height, eye color, and intelligence.
While this concept is not new, a real breakthrough came 5 years ago when several scientists saw the potential of a system called CRISPR/Cas9 to edit the human genome.
CRISPR/Cas9 allows us to target specific locations in the genome with much more precision than previous techniques. This process allows a faulty gene to be replaced with a non-faulty copy, making this technology attractive to those looking to cure genetic diseases.
The technology is not foolproof, however. Scientists have been modifying genes for decades, but there are always trade-offs. We have yet to develop a technique that works 100 percent and doesn't lead to unwanted and uncontrollable mutations in other locations in the genome.
In a laboratory experiment, these so-called off-target effects are not the end of the world. But when it comes to gene editing in humans, this is a major stumbling block.
The fact that gene editing is possible in human embryos has opened a Pandora's box of ethical issues.
Here, the ethical debate around gene editing really gets off the ground.
When gene editing is used in embryos — or earlier, on the sperm or egg of carriers of genetic mutations — it is called germline gene editing. The big issue here is that it affects both the individual receiving the treatment and their future children.
This is a potential game-changer as it implies that we may be able to change the genetic makeup of entire generations on a permanent basis.
Read the text below and answer the following question based on it.
Is gene editing ethical?
Gene editing holds the key to preventing or treating debilitating genetic diseases, giving hope to millions of people around the world. Yet the same technology could unlock the path to designing our future children, enhancing their genome by selecting desirable traits such as height, eye color, and intelligence.
While this concept is not new, a real breakthrough came 5 years ago when several scientists saw the potential of a system called CRISPR/Cas9 to edit the human genome.
CRISPR/Cas9 allows us to target specific locations in the genome with much more precision than previous techniques. This process allows a faulty gene to be replaced with a non-faulty copy, making this technology attractive to those looking to cure genetic diseases.
The technology is not foolproof, however. Scientists have been modifying genes for decades, but there are always trade-offs. We have yet to develop a technique that works 100 percent and doesn't lead to unwanted and uncontrollable mutations in other locations in the genome.
In a laboratory experiment, these so-called off-target effects are not the end of the world. But when it comes to gene editing in humans, this is a major stumbling block.
The fact that gene editing is possible in human embryos has opened a Pandora's box of ethical issues.
Here, the ethical debate around gene editing really gets off the ground.
When gene editing is used in embryos — or earlier, on the sperm or egg of carriers of genetic mutations — it is called germline gene editing. The big issue here is that it affects both the individual receiving the treatment and their future children.
This is a potential game-changer as it implies that we may be able to change the genetic makeup of entire generations on a permanent basis.
Read the text below and answer the following question based on it.
Is gene editing ethical?
Gene editing holds the key to preventing or treating debilitating genetic diseases, giving hope to millions of people around the world. Yet the same technology could unlock the path to designing our future children, enhancing their genome by selecting desirable traits such as height, eye color, and intelligence.
While this concept is not new, a real breakthrough came 5 years ago when several scientists saw the potential of a system called CRISPR/Cas9 to edit the human genome.
CRISPR/Cas9 allows us to target specific locations in the genome with much more precision than previous techniques. This process allows a faulty gene to be replaced with a non-faulty copy, making this technology attractive to those looking to cure genetic diseases.
The technology is not foolproof, however. Scientists have been modifying genes for decades, but there are always trade-offs. We have yet to develop a technique that works 100 percent and doesn't lead to unwanted and uncontrollable mutations in other locations in the genome.
In a laboratory experiment, these so-called off-target effects are not the end of the world. But when it comes to gene editing in humans, this is a major stumbling block.
The fact that gene editing is possible in human embryos has opened a Pandora's box of ethical issues.
Here, the ethical debate around gene editing really gets off the ground.
When gene editing is used in embryos — or earlier, on the sperm or egg of carriers of genetic mutations — it is called germline gene editing. The big issue here is that it affects both the individual receiving the treatment and their future children.
This is a potential game-changer as it implies that we may be able to change the genetic makeup of entire generations on a permanent basis.