閱讀跟讀來啦！
姚老師根據大家的需求錄了閱讀原文！
第一段：
For many environmentalists, all human influence on the planet is bad. Many natural scientists implicitly share this outlook. This is not unscientific, but it can create the impression that greens and environmental scientists are authoritarian tree-huggers who value nature above people. That doesn't play well with mainstream society, as the apparent backlash against climate science reveals.
對於很多環境學家來說，人類在地球上所有的影響都是負面的。很多自然科學家私底下也同意這個觀點。這符合科學的特徵，但是這個觀點也給人們造成一種印象：綠黨和環境科學家是一群獨裁的環境保護狂，他們重視自然超過重視人類。正如大家明顯地反對氣候科學這件事反應的一樣，他們的觀點跟主流社會不符。
第二段：
Environmentalists need to find a new story to tell. Like it or not, we now live in the anthropogene—an age in which humans are perturbing many of the planet’s natural systems, from the water to the acidity of the oceans. We cannot wish that away, we must recognize it and manage our impacts.
環境學家需要來點新意的。不管願不願意承認，我們現在處於人類紀-在這個時代，人類一直在擾亂地球的很多自然體系，從水資源到海洋的酸度。我們不能就想想，必須意識到我們的影響，並加以控制。
第三段：
Johan Rockstrom, head of the Stockholm Environment Institute in Sweden, and colleagues have distilled recent research on how Earth system work into a list of nine "planetary boundaries" that we must stay within to live sustainably. It is preliminary work, and many will disagree with where the boundaries are set. But the point is to offer a new way of thinking about our relationship with the environment-a science-based picture that accepts a certain level of human impact and even allows us some room to expand. The result is a breath of fresh air: though we are already well past three of the boundaries, we haven't trashed the place yet.
約翰，羅科思卓和同事們一起在最近的地球系統研究當中提煉出9大行星邊界。我們必須活在這些邊界內才能可持續生活下去。這還只是個初步的工作，有很多人不同意邊界的設定位置。但是這件事的真正意義是給我們提供了一個新的角度，去思考我們和環境的關係-那就是以科學為依據，接受一定程度的人類影響，甚至還允許我們一定程度的擴張。這件事的結果就是我們有幸能喘一口氣：儘管我們已經越過三個邊界，但是我們還沒有丟棄整個地球。
第四段：
It is in the same spirit that we also probe the basis for key claims in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's 2007 report on climate impacts. This report has been much discussed since our revelations about its unsubstantiated statement on melting Himalayan glaciers. Why return to the topic? Because there is a sense that the IPCC shares the same anti-human agenda and, as a result, is too dangerous of unverified numbers. While the majority of the report is assuredly rigorous, there is no escaping the fact that parts of it make claims that go beyond the science.
正是本著同樣的精神，我們探究了2007年政府間關於環境變化的會議報導的關鍵聲明。自從我們揭示了關於喜馬拉雅冰川不斷融化的未經證實的聲明以後，關於這個報導一直議論紛紛。為什麼又回到了這個主題？因為有種氣息傳遞著IPCC也持有反對人類活動的態度，這樣一來，對於這些未經證實的數字太危險了。儘管報導的大多數確實嚴謹，毋庸置疑這裡面還是有部分觀點超出了科學層面。
第五段：
For example, the chapter on Africa exaggerates a claim about crashes in farm yields, and also highlights projections of increased water stress in some regions while ignoring projections in the same study that point to reduced water stress in other regions. These errors are not trifling. They are among the report’s headline conclusions.
比如說，關於非洲的章節誇大了在農村田野裡的崩潰場景。在某些領域預測了水資源不斷升高的壓力，在另外一些地方，還是這個研究，卻忽略預測不斷減少的水資源的壓力。這些錯誤不是小錯誤，他們都出現在標題上。
第六段：
Above all, we need a dispassionate view of the state of the planet and our likely future impact on it. There is no room for complacency: Rockstrom's analysis shows us that we face real dangers, but exaggerating our problems is not the way to solve them.
最重要的是，我們對於地球的狀況以及我們將來可能產生的影響需要心平氣和。現在不是自滿的時候：羅科思卓的分析顯示出我們面臨真正的危險，但是誇大其詞並不是解決危險的辦法。
點擊下方藍字學習更多：▼
2021年醫學考博講座
中國科學技術大學生命科學與醫學部2021年臨床醫學博士研究生公開招考（申請-考核制）公告
2021年醫學考博試聽課
醫博全程班 雅思全程班 暑期火熱開班！！
別告訴我你努力過了，看看別人的努力
醫學考博出分啦~
2021年雅思講座
雅思你還可以拯救一下
我們的師資！！！
金牌講師姚老師微信！！！
助教小姐姐微信！！！