Test 3
Question 1
Flag this item
Questions 1 and 2 refer to the following information
By Lester Haines, The Register 30/04/2009.
South Korean scientists say they've cooked up a quartet of glow-in-the-dark beagles, boasting
red nails and abdomens even under normal light and which emit a spooky red glow when
subject to ultraviolet.
The four transgenic mutts - all dubbed "Ruppy" (Ruby + Puppy) - were produced by a team
from Seoul National University led by Professor Lee Byeong-chun, AP reports. The scientists
injected fluorescent genes from an unspecified source* into beagle skin cells, injected these
into egg cells which were in turn implanted into a surrogate mum. The result was six puppies
born in December last year, and although two subsequently died, the South Koreans are
suitably chuffed with the results of their fluorescent beagle experiment.
Lee insisted to AP that the glow-in-the-dark pooch is not merely a novelty, but could shed
light on developing future cures for human diseases. He told AP: "What's significant in this
work is not the dogs expressing red colours but that we planted genes into them."
The scientist did, though, remain tight-lipped on exact details of the research, saying it was
still "under way". Those of you who may be a tad skeptical and inclined to think Lee is
simply trying to tap into press enthusiasm for self-illuminating animals should note that his
claims have been backed by veterinary professor Kong Il-keun of South Korea's Gyeongsang
National University, who brewed up a fluorescent cat himself in 2007.
He confirmed he'd seen Lee's puppies (whether under visible or ultraviolet light is not noted,
and described them as "genuine clones".
1. The professor Lee Byeong-chun, who cooked up the
quartet of glow-in-the-dark beagles, although his exact
method is still secret, justifies his actions thus:
2.
That ‘we successfully planted genes into them’.
It could shed light on developing future cures for human diseases.
His research is backed by professor Kong Il-keun.
He is continuing the work of Professor Kong Il-keun.
,Correct Answer: B
Explanation:
Option A → No. This is the result but not a justification; it is ‘what’s significant’.
Option B → Yes. “Lee insisted to AP that the glow-in-the-dark pooch is not merely a
novelty, but could shed light on developing future cures for human diseases.”
Option C → Yes it is but this is not why he performed the therapy so this option is incorrect.
Option D → No. He has replicated a similar experiment with a different species and a
different colour, but this is not a continuation of professor Kong Il-keun’s work.
Question 2
Flag this item
Questions 1 and 2 refer to the following information
By Lester Haines, The Register 30/04/2009.
South Korean scientists say they've cooked up a quartet of glow-in-the-dark beagles, boasting
red nails and abdomens even under normal light and which emit a spooky red glow when
subject to ultraviolet.
The four transgenic mutts - all dubbed "Ruppy" (Ruby + Puppy) - were produced by a team
from Seoul National University led by Professor Lee Byeong-chun, AP reports. The scientists
injected fluorescent genes from an unspecified source* into beagle skin cells, injected these
into egg cells which were in turn implanted into a surrogate mum. The result was six puppies
born in December last year, and although two subsequently died, the South Koreans are
suitably chuffed with the results of their fluorescent beagle experiment.
Lee insisted to AP that the glow-in-the-dark pooch is not merely a novelty, but could shed
light on developing future cures for human diseases. He told AP: "What's significant in this
work is not the dogs expressing red colours but that we planted genes into them."
The scientist did, though, remain tight-lipped on exact details of the research, saying it was
still "under way". Those of you who may be a tad skeptical and inclined to think Lee is
simply trying to tap into press enthusiasm for self-illuminating animals should note that his
claims have been backed by veterinary professor Kong Il-keun of South Korea's Gyeongsang
National University, who brewed up a fluorescent cat himself in 2007.
He confirmed he'd seen Lee's puppies (whether under visible or ultraviolet light is not noted,
and described them as "genuine clones".
2. Support gained for this project has been significantly
weakened by claims Lee is not actually performing this
gene therapy to help the human race but instead to sell
the results to the ever-growing and ravenous pet
market.
Which of the following best opposes this claim?
, Claims have been backed by veterinary professor Kong Il-keun of South Korea's
Gyeongsang National University, who brewed up a fluorescent cat himself in 2007.
Lee’s research has been given funding upon his discovery that the research could
prevent skin cancer.
That two in six of his therapy recipients die, indicating his methodology is not sound.
Lee’s research has been given funding upon his discovery that they planted genes
into the beagles.
Correct Answer: B
Explanation:
Option A → No this supports it.
Option B → Yes, if this were the case it would oppose the claim.
Option C → In-correct. Well this could oppose research continuing, but his methodology is
outside the scope of the argument and this fact does nothing for either side of the claim.
Option D → No this could support it.
Question 3
Flag this item
The following table represents the results of a survey of people whose marriages had ended.
3. Assuming that this table represent a perfectly random
sample of British divorcees, we can infer that among
the British:
4.
A higher proportion of divorced men than divorced women regret the divorce.
A higher proportion of divorced women than divorced men regret the divorce.
, Women are more ambivalent about divorce than men.
Both B and C.
Correct Answer: A
Explanation:
According to the table, 51% of divorced men answered “Yes” to the question ‘Would you
have preferred to stay married?”. And, only 28% of women answered “Yes” to the same
question. That means a higher proportion of divorced men than women regret the divorce.
Question 4
Flag this item
4. Which of the following sequences do not adhere to the
same underlying mathematics?
5.
5, 13, 17, 29, 41
17, 29, 37, 41, 53
17, 29, 41, 53, 65
29, 41, 53, 81, 97
Correct Answer: C
Explanation:
Do they all progress in 12’s? No. The numbers are all primes which are the sums of two
squares.
Primes:
2,3,5,7,11,13,17,19,23,29,31,37,41,43,47,53,59,61,67,71,73,79,83,89,97,101,103,107,109,11
3
Squares:
1,4,9,16,25,36,49,64,81,100,121,144,169,196,225,256
Question 5
Flag this item
I think it would be perverse to call the organisms of these hypothetical species ‘inanimate’,
but the terminology is not really important. The point is that although all known life is based
on replicators, what the phenomenon of life is really about is knowledge. We can give a
definition of adaptation directly in terms of knowledge: an entity is adapted to its niche if it
embodies knowledge that causes the niche to keep that knowledge in existence. Now we are
getting closer to the reason why life is fundamental. Life is about physical embodiment of
