Questões Militares
Foram encontradas 6.170 questões
Resolva questões gratuitamente!
Junte-se a mais de 4 milhões de concurseiros!
How rich countries cause deforestation in poor ones
Forests are crucial to the functioning of the Earth. They provide homes for plants and animals, absorb rainfall, produce oxygen and suck up carbon dioxide, helping to keep global temperatures in check. Environmentalists are increasingly worried about their loss. Ten thousand years ago, more than half of the world’s habitable land was covered in trees; since then one third have been cut down to make way for agriculture and an ever-growing number of humans. Efforts to reverse this trend, including tree-planting programmes in America, Europe, China and India, among other places, have helped replenish some of what is left of the world’s forests.
But such gains do not tell the whole story. For all their tree-planting efforts at home, rich countries continue to contribute, through their consumption, to the levelling of vast tracts of forests in poor countries. A study, published on March 29th in Nature Ecology & Evolution, reveals the extent and location of the world’s “deforestation footprint”. Keiichiro Kanemoto and Nguyen Tien Hoang, of the Research Institute for Humanity and Nature in Japan, combined data on global forest loss with that on international trade between 2001 and 2015. They calculated that rich-country demand for goods led overwhelmingly to deforestation outside their own borders, and mostly in tropical countries. In G7 countries, for example, the area covered by forests increased every year between 2001 and 2015. But after adjusting for trade, the authors found that these countries contributed to a net loss of 20,000 square kilometers of forest in the rest of the world in 2015 alone.
Internet: <www.economist.com> (adapted).
Based on the text above, judge the following item.
It can be inferred that the more rich countries demand goods
manufactured in poor countries, the more deforestation will
take place in these poor countries.
How rich countries cause deforestation in poor ones
Forests are crucial to the functioning of the Earth. They provide homes for plants and animals, absorb rainfall, produce oxygen and suck up carbon dioxide, helping to keep global temperatures in check. Environmentalists are increasingly worried about their loss. Ten thousand years ago, more than half of the world’s habitable land was covered in trees; since then one third have been cut down to make way for agriculture and an ever-growing number of humans. Efforts to reverse this trend, including tree-planting programmes in America, Europe, China and India, among other places, have helped replenish some of what is left of the world’s forests.
But such gains do not tell the whole story. For all their tree-planting efforts at home, rich countries continue to contribute, through their consumption, to the levelling of vast tracts of forests in poor countries. A study, published on March 29th in Nature Ecology & Evolution, reveals the extent and location of the world’s “deforestation footprint”. Keiichiro Kanemoto and Nguyen Tien Hoang, of the Research Institute for Humanity and Nature in Japan, combined data on global forest loss with that on international trade between 2001 and 2015. They calculated that rich-country demand for goods led overwhelmingly to deforestation outside their own borders, and mostly in tropical countries. In G7 countries, for example, the area covered by forests increased every year between 2001 and 2015. But after adjusting for trade, the authors found that these countries contributed to a net loss of 20,000 square kilometers of forest in the rest of the world in 2015 alone.
Internet: <www.economist.com> (adapted).
Based on the text above, judge the following item.
For the last 10.000 years, at least one third of the trees which
covered the world have been cut down so that men could
grow their food, among other activities.
How rich countries cause deforestation in poor ones
Forests are crucial to the functioning of the Earth. They provide homes for plants and animals, absorb rainfall, produce oxygen and suck up carbon dioxide, helping to keep global temperatures in check. Environmentalists are increasingly worried about their loss. Ten thousand years ago, more than half of the world’s habitable land was covered in trees; since then one third have been cut down to make way for agriculture and an ever-growing number of humans. Efforts to reverse this trend, including tree-planting programmes in America, Europe, China and India, among other places, have helped replenish some of what is left of the world’s forests.
But such gains do not tell the whole story. For all their tree-planting efforts at home, rich countries continue to contribute, through their consumption, to the levelling of vast tracts of forests in poor countries. A study, published on March 29th in Nature Ecology & Evolution, reveals the extent and location of the world’s “deforestation footprint”. Keiichiro Kanemoto and Nguyen Tien Hoang, of the Research Institute for Humanity and Nature in Japan, combined data on global forest loss with that on international trade between 2001 and 2015. They calculated that rich-country demand for goods led overwhelmingly to deforestation outside their own borders, and mostly in tropical countries. In G7 countries, for example, the area covered by forests increased every year between 2001 and 2015. But after adjusting for trade, the authors found that these countries contributed to a net loss of 20,000 square kilometers of forest in the rest of the world in 2015 alone.
Internet: <www.economist.com> (adapted).
Based on the text above, judge the following item.
The text claims that over 50% of the world’s habitable land
was covered in trees ten millennia ago.
How rich countries cause deforestation in poor ones
Forests are crucial to the functioning of the Earth. They provide homes for plants and animals, absorb rainfall, produce oxygen and suck up carbon dioxide, helping to keep global temperatures in check. Environmentalists are increasingly worried about their loss. Ten thousand years ago, more than half of the world’s habitable land was covered in trees; since then one third have been cut down to make way for agriculture and an ever-growing number of humans. Efforts to reverse this trend, including tree-planting programmes in America, Europe, China and India, among other places, have helped replenish some of what is left of the world’s forests.
But such gains do not tell the whole story. For all their tree-planting efforts at home, rich countries continue to contribute, through their consumption, to the levelling of vast tracts of forests in poor countries. A study, published on March 29th in Nature Ecology & Evolution, reveals the extent and location of the world’s “deforestation footprint”. Keiichiro Kanemoto and Nguyen Tien Hoang, of the Research Institute for Humanity and Nature in Japan, combined data on global forest loss with that on international trade between 2001 and 2015. They calculated that rich-country demand for goods led overwhelmingly to deforestation outside their own borders, and mostly in tropical countries. In G7 countries, for example, the area covered by forests increased every year between 2001 and 2015. But after adjusting for trade, the authors found that these countries contributed to a net loss of 20,000 square kilometers of forest in the rest of the world in 2015 alone.
Internet: <www.economist.com> (adapted).
Based on the text above, judge the following item.
Two reasons why forests are crucial to the functioning of the
Earth are the production of carbon dioxide and the
absorption of rainfall.
Texto 1A1-I
Quando você recebe a dose de uma vacina tradicional, inclusive algumas das feitas contra o novo coronavírus, as partículas de vírus atenuadas ou inativas presentes no imunizante desencadeiam uma resposta imunológica no seu organismo, de modo a treiná-lo a enfrentar a doença. A mesma lógica pode valer, do ponto de vista psicológico, contra outra “epidemia” atual — a de desinformação, manipulação de informações e disseminação de fake news (notícias falsas).
Pesquisadores da Universidade de Cambridge, no Reino Unido, estão estudando o quanto pequenas doses preventivas e “atenuadas” de técnicas de desinformação podem proteger as pessoas contra o ambiente de notícias falsas ou distorcidas na Internet, particularmente em tempos de covid-19.
“O objetivo é criar uma espécie de resistência psicológica contra a persuasão, para que, no futuro, quando você estiver exposto à desinformação, ela seja menos convincente, porque você terá ‘anticorpos’”, explica Jon Roozenbeek, pesquisador do Laboratório de Tomada de Decisões Sociais do Departamento de Psicologia da Universidade de Cambridge. “Em outras palavras, se você conhece as técnicas e os truques usados para enganar as pessoas ou persuadi-las, você terá menos probabilidade de cair neles”.
Uma dessas vacinas em teste é um jogo online chamado Go Viral! (“Viralize”, em tradução livre), com duração de pouco mais de cinco minutos. Nele, o jogador assume o personagem de alguém que quer viralizar na Internet a qualquer custo. Nesse papel, ele coloca em prática as táticas mais usadas para disseminar desinformação e notícias falsas, tais como: explorar as emoções do espectador — notícias falsas costumam ser redigidas ou manipuladas de forma a nos causar raiva, indignação, medo, angústia e, por consequência, provocar o ímpeto de rapidamente compartilharmos aquele conteúdo; inventar especialistas para sustentar alegações, quaisquer que elas sejam, dando a elas um falso lastro ou uma falsa aura de importância; alimentar teorias da conspiração que forneçam a seus seguidores explicações coerentes (mesmo que falsas) e bodes expiatórios ideais para complexos problemas globais. Atraentes, essas teorias costumam gerar bastante engajamento na Internet.
Em estudo publicado no periódico Big Data & Society, Roozenbeek e seus colegas submeteram usuários do Go Viral! a questionários e identificaram que, de modo geral, os jogadores aumentaram a percepção a respeito do que é e do que não é manipulação no noticiário da pandemia de covid-19.
Os jogadores também ganharam mais confiança em sua habilidade de identificar conteúdo manipulador — e, por consequência, muitos deixaram de compartilhar essas fake news com outras pessoas.
Agora, os pesquisadores querem entender quanto tempo dura essa imunização, ou seja, por quanto tempo o entendimento dessas técnicas de manipulação permanece “fresco” na mente dos jogadores.
Internet: <www.bbc.com/portuguese> (com adaptações).
Com relação aos sentidos e aos aspectos linguísticos do texto 1A1-I, julgue o item a seguir.
Sem prejuízo do sentido e da correção gramatical do texto, o
trecho “Roozenbeek e seus colegas submeteram usuários do
Go Viral! a questionários” (primeiro período do quinto
parágrafo) poderia ser reescrito da seguinte forma:
Roozenbeek aplicou questionários a seus colegas e usuários
do Go Viral!.