Reading Comprehension

Which of these can be inferred from the passage?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

There are no comparisons to be made. This is not like war or plague or a stock market crash. We are ill-equipped, historically and psychologically, to understand it, which is one of the reasons why so many refuse to accept that it is happening.
What we are seeing, here and now, is the transformation of the atmospheric physics of this planet. Three weeks before the likely minimum, the melting of Arctic sea ice has already broken the record set in 2007. The daily rate of loss is now 50% higher than it was that year. The daily sense of loss – of the world we loved and knew – cannot be quantified so easily. 
The Arctic has been warming roughly twice as quickly as the rest of the northern hemisphere. This is partly because climate breakdown there is self-perpetuating. As the ice melts, for example, exposing the darker sea beneath, heat which would previously have been reflected back into space is absorbed.
This great dissolution, of ice and certainties, is happening so much faster than most climate scientists predicted that, one seasoned observer reports, “it feels as if everything I’ve learned has become obsolete.” In its last assessment, published in 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change noted that “in some projections, Arctic late-summer sea ice will disappear almost entirely by the latter part of the 21st century.” These were the most extreme forecasts in the panel’s range. Some scientists now forecast that the disappearance of Arctic sea ice in late summer could occur in this decade or the next.
As I’ve warned repeatedly, but to little effect, the IPCC’s assessments tend to be conservative. This is unsurprising when you see how many people have to approve them before they are published. There have been a few occasions – such as its estimate of the speed at which glaciers would be lost in the Himalayas – on which the panel has overstated the case. But it looks as if these will be greatly outnumbered by the occasions on which the panel has understated it.
The melting disperses another belief: that the temperate parts of the world – where most of the rich nations are located – will be hit last and least, while the poorer nations will be hit first and worst. New knowledge of the way in which the destruction of the Arctic sea ice affects northern Europe and North America suggests that this is no longer true. A paper published earlier this year in Geophysical Research Letters shows that Arctic warming is likely to be responsible for the extremes now hammering the once-temperate nations.
The north polar jet stream is an air current several hundred kilometres wide, travelling eastwards around the hemisphere. It functions as a barrier, separating the cold, wet weather to the north from the warmer, drier weather to the south. Many of the variations in our weather are caused by great travelling meanders – or Rossby waves – in the jet stream.
Arctic heating, the paper shows, both slows the Rossby waves and makes them steeper and wider. Instead of moving on rapidly, the weather gets stuck. Regions to the south of the stalled meander wait for weeks or months for rain; regions to the north (or underneath it) wait for weeks or months for a break from the rain. Instead of a benign succession of sunshine and showers, we get droughts or floods. During the winter a slow, steep meander can connect us directly to the polar weather, dragging severe ice and snow far to the south of its usual range.

Which of these options could be the title of the passage?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

There are no comparisons to be made. This is not like war or plague or a stock market crash. We are ill-equipped, historically and psychologically, to understand it, which is one of the reasons why so many refuse to accept that it is happening.
What we are seeing, here and now, is the transformation of the atmospheric physics of this planet. Three weeks before the likely minimum, the melting of Arctic sea ice has already broken the record set in 2007. The daily rate of loss is now 50% higher than it was that year. The daily sense of loss – of the world we loved and knew – cannot be quantified so easily. 
The Arctic has been warming roughly twice as quickly as the rest of the northern hemisphere. This is partly because climate breakdown there is self-perpetuating. As the ice melts, for example, exposing the darker sea beneath, heat which would previously have been reflected back into space is absorbed.
This great dissolution, of ice and certainties, is happening so much faster than most climate scientists predicted that, one seasoned observer reports, “it feels as if everything I’ve learned has become obsolete.” In its last assessment, published in 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change noted that “in some projections, Arctic late-summer sea ice will disappear almost entirely by the latter part of the 21st century.” These were the most extreme forecasts in the panel’s range. Some scientists now forecast that the disappearance of Arctic sea ice in late summer could occur in this decade or the next.
As I’ve warned repeatedly, but to little effect, the IPCC’s assessments tend to be conservative. This is unsurprising when you see how many people have to approve them before they are published. There have been a few occasions – such as its estimate of the speed at which glaciers would be lost in the Himalayas – on which the panel has overstated the case. But it looks as if these will be greatly outnumbered by the occasions on which the panel has understated it.
The melting disperses another belief: that the temperate parts of the world – where most of the rich nations are located – will be hit last and least, while the poorer nations will be hit first and worst. New knowledge of the way in which the destruction of the Arctic sea ice affects northern Europe and North America suggests that this is no longer true. A paper published earlier this year in Geophysical Research Letters shows that Arctic warming is likely to be responsible for the extremes now hammering the once-temperate nations.
The north polar jet stream is an air current several hundred kilometres wide, travelling eastwards around the hemisphere. It functions as a barrier, separating the cold, wet weather to the north from the warmer, drier weather to the south. Many of the variations in our weather are caused by great travelling meanders – or Rossby waves – in the jet stream.
Arctic heating, the paper shows, both slows the Rossby waves and makes them steeper and wider. Instead of moving on rapidly, the weather gets stuck. Regions to the south of the stalled meander wait for weeks or months for rain; regions to the north (or underneath it) wait for weeks or months for a break from the rain. Instead of a benign succession of sunshine and showers, we get droughts or floods. During the winter a slow, steep meander can connect us directly to the polar weather, dragging severe ice and snow far to the south of its usual range.

Which of these is the main point made by the author in the passage?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

There are no comparisons to be made. This is not like war or plague or a stock market crash. We are ill-equipped, historically and psychologically, to understand it, which is one of the reasons why so many refuse to accept that it is happening.
What we are seeing, here and now, is the transformation of the atmospheric physics of this planet. Three weeks before the likely minimum, the melting of Arctic sea ice has already broken the record set in 2007. The daily rate of loss is now 50% higher than it was that year. The daily sense of loss – of the world we loved and knew – cannot be quantified so easily. 
The Arctic has been warming roughly twice as quickly as the rest of the northern hemisphere. This is partly because climate breakdown there is self-perpetuating. As the ice melts, for example, exposing the darker sea beneath, heat which would previously have been reflected back into space is absorbed.
This great dissolution, of ice and certainties, is happening so much faster than most climate scientists predicted that, one seasoned observer reports, “it feels as if everything I’ve learned has become obsolete.” In its last assessment, published in 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change noted that “in some projections, Arctic late-summer sea ice will disappear almost entirely by the latter part of the 21st century.” These were the most extreme forecasts in the panel’s range. Some scientists now forecast that the disappearance of Arctic sea ice in late summer could occur in this decade or the next.
As I’ve warned repeatedly, but to little effect, the IPCC’s assessments tend to be conservative. This is unsurprising when you see how many people have to approve them before they are published. There have been a few occasions – such as its estimate of the speed at which glaciers would be lost in the Himalayas – on which the panel has overstated the case. But it looks as if these will be greatly outnumbered by the occasions on which the panel has understated it.
The melting disperses another belief: that the temperate parts of the world – where most of the rich nations are located – will be hit last and least, while the poorer nations will be hit first and worst. New knowledge of the way in which the destruction of the Arctic sea ice affects northern Europe and North America suggests that this is no longer true. A paper published earlier this year in Geophysical Research Letters shows that Arctic warming is likely to be responsible for the extremes now hammering the once-temperate nations.
The north polar jet stream is an air current several hundred kilometres wide, travelling eastwards around the hemisphere. It functions as a barrier, separating the cold, wet weather to the north from the warmer, drier weather to the south. Many of the variations in our weather are caused by great travelling meanders – or Rossby waves – in the jet stream.
Arctic heating, the paper shows, both slows the Rossby waves and makes them steeper and wider. Instead of moving on rapidly, the weather gets stuck. Regions to the south of the stalled meander wait for weeks or months for rain; regions to the north (or underneath it) wait for weeks or months for a break from the rain. Instead of a benign succession of sunshine and showers, we get droughts or floods. During the winter a slow, steep meander can connect us directly to the polar weather, dragging severe ice and snow far to the south of its usual range.

Which of these options would describe the attitude of the author towards how people view global warming?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

There are no comparisons to be made. This is not like war or plague or a stock market crash. We are ill-equipped, historically and psychologically, to understand it, which is one of the reasons why so many refuse to accept that it is happening.
What we are seeing, here and now, is the transformation of the atmospheric physics of this planet. Three weeks before the likely minimum, the melting of Arctic sea ice has already broken the record set in 2007. The daily rate of loss is now 50% higher than it was that year. The daily sense of loss – of the world we loved and knew – cannot be quantified so easily. 
The Arctic has been warming roughly twice as quickly as the rest of the northern hemisphere. This is partly because climate breakdown there is self-perpetuating. As the ice melts, for example, exposing the darker sea beneath, heat which would previously have been reflected back into space is absorbed.
This great dissolution, of ice and certainties, is happening so much faster than most climate scientists predicted that, one seasoned observer reports, “it feels as if everything I’ve learned has become obsolete.” In its last assessment, published in 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change noted that “in some projections, Arctic late-summer sea ice will disappear almost entirely by the latter part of the 21st century.” These were the most extreme forecasts in the panel’s range. Some scientists now forecast that the disappearance of Arctic sea ice in late summer could occur in this decade or the next.
As I’ve warned repeatedly, but to little effect, the IPCC’s assessments tend to be conservative. This is unsurprising when you see how many people have to approve them before they are published. There have been a few occasions – such as its estimate of the speed at which glaciers would be lost in the Himalayas – on which the panel has overstated the case. But it looks as if these will be greatly outnumbered by the occasions on which the panel has understated it.
The melting disperses another belief: that the temperate parts of the world – where most of the rich nations are located – will be hit last and least, while the poorer nations will be hit first and worst. New knowledge of the way in which the destruction of the Arctic sea ice affects northern Europe and North America suggests that this is no longer true. A paper published earlier this year in Geophysical Research Letters shows that Arctic warming is likely to be responsible for the extremes now hammering the once-temperate nations.
The north polar jet stream is an air current several hundred kilometres wide, travelling eastwards around the hemisphere. It functions as a barrier, separating the cold, wet weather to the north from the warmer, drier weather to the south. Many of the variations in our weather are caused by great travelling meanders – or Rossby waves – in the jet stream.
Arctic heating, the paper shows, both slows the Rossby waves and makes them steeper and wider. Instead of moving on rapidly, the weather gets stuck. Regions to the south of the stalled meander wait for weeks or months for rain; regions to the north (or underneath it) wait for weeks or months for a break from the rain. Instead of a benign succession of sunshine and showers, we get droughts or floods. During the winter a slow, steep meander can connect us directly to the polar weather, dragging severe ice and snow far to the south of its usual range.

Which of these options gives an analogous example to the way in which people understand the problem of global warming?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

There are no comparisons to be made. This is not like war or plague or a stock market crash. We are ill-equipped, historically and psychologically, to understand it, which is one of the reasons why so many refuse to accept that it is happening.
What we are seeing, here and now, is the transformation of the atmospheric physics of this planet. Three weeks before the likely minimum, the melting of Arctic sea ice has already broken the record set in 2007. The daily rate of loss is now 50% higher than it was that year. The daily sense of loss – of the world we loved and knew – cannot be quantified so easily. 
The Arctic has been warming roughly twice as quickly as the rest of the northern hemisphere. This is partly because climate breakdown there is self-perpetuating. As the ice melts, for example, exposing the darker sea beneath, heat which would previously have been reflected back into space is absorbed.
This great dissolution, of ice and certainties, is happening so much faster than most climate scientists predicted that, one seasoned observer reports, “it feels as if everything I’ve learned has become obsolete.” In its last assessment, published in 2007, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change noted that “in some projections, Arctic late-summer sea ice will disappear almost entirely by the latter part of the 21st century.” These were the most extreme forecasts in the panel’s range. Some scientists now forecast that the disappearance of Arctic sea ice in late summer could occur in this decade or the next.
As I’ve warned repeatedly, but to little effect, the IPCC’s assessments tend to be conservative. This is unsurprising when you see how many people have to approve them before they are published. There have been a few occasions – such as its estimate of the speed at which glaciers would be lost in the Himalayas – on which the panel has overstated the case. But it looks as if these will be greatly outnumbered by the occasions on which the panel has understated it.
The melting disperses another belief: that the temperate parts of the world – where most of the rich nations are located – will be hit last and least, while the poorer nations will be hit first and worst. New knowledge of the way in which the destruction of the Arctic sea ice affects northern Europe and North America suggests that this is no longer true. A paper published earlier this year in Geophysical Research Letters shows that Arctic warming is likely to be responsible for the extremes now hammering the once-temperate nations.
The north polar jet stream is an air current several hundred kilometres wide, travelling eastwards around the hemisphere. It functions as a barrier, separating the cold, wet weather to the north from the warmer, drier weather to the south. Many of the variations in our weather are caused by great travelling meanders – or Rossby waves – in the jet stream.
Arctic heating, the paper shows, both slows the Rossby waves and makes them steeper and wider. Instead of moving on rapidly, the weather gets stuck. Regions to the south of the stalled meander wait for weeks or months for rain; regions to the north (or underneath it) wait for weeks or months for a break from the rain. Instead of a benign succession of sunshine and showers, we get droughts or floods. During the winter a slow, steep meander can connect us directly to the polar weather, dragging severe ice and snow far to the south of its usual range.

All of these options are true in the light of the contents of the passage EXCEPT

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

Every day, we face thousands of decisions both major and minor — from whether to eat that decadent chocolate cupcake to when to pursue a new romantic relationship or to change careers. How does the brain decide? A new study suggests that it relies on two separate networks to do so: one that determines the overall value — the risk versus reward — of individual choices and another that guides how you ultimately behave.
“Cognitive control and value-based decision-making tasks appear to depend on different brain regions within the prefrontal cortex,” says Jan Glascher, lead author of the study and a visiting associate at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, referring to the seat of higher-level reasoning in the brain.
Study co-author Ralph Adolphs, a professor of psychology at Caltech, explains the distinction by way of a grocery shopping example: “Your valuation network is always providing you with information about what’s rewarding around you — the things you want to buy — but also lots of distracting things like junk food and other items popping into your vision off the shelves.”
Cognitive control is what keeps this network in check. “To be able to get to the checkout counter with what you planned, you need to maintain a goal in mind, such as perhaps only buying the salad you needed for dinner,” says Adolphs. “That’s your cognitive control network maintaining an overall goal despite lots of other information”.
Understanding how the brain parcels out specific decision-making tasks can offer insight into conditions in which such networks go awry, such as in the case of psychiatric disorders. Depressed people, for example, clearly have difficulty with value-based decision making: because nothing feels good or seems appealing, all options appear equally bleak and making choices becomes impossible. Hoarding disorder, in contrast, may involve overvaluation of certain possessions and impairment of the cognitive control needed to shift one’s attention away from them. That explains why hoarding becomes more important than other life goals like maintaining relationships.
To tease out the distinct roles of these brain areas, the researchers analyzed data on nearly 350 people with damage, or lesions, in specific regions of the frontal lobes believed to be involved with particular tasks. Such studies of brain lesions are better at helping scientists understand cause and effect than imaging studies alone: if a damaged region is linked with impairment on a particular cognitive test, you know that task requires involvement from that region; with imaging studies, however, researchers can never be sure whether brain activity in certain regions is crucial to the task at hand, or whether it resulted from extraneous factors like a participant being distracted in the scanner.

Which of these decisions does not require a person to use both the networks involved in decision making in the brain?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

Every day, we face thousands of decisions both major and minor — from whether to eat that decadent chocolate cupcake to when to pursue a new romantic relationship or to change careers. How does the brain decide? A new study suggests that it relies on two separate networks to do so: one that determines the overall value — the risk versus reward — of individual choices and another that guides how you ultimately behave.
“Cognitive control and value-based decision-making tasks appear to depend on different brain regions within the prefrontal cortex,” says Jan Glascher, lead author of the study and a visiting associate at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, referring to the seat of higher-level reasoning in the brain.
Study co-author Ralph Adolphs, a professor of psychology at Caltech, explains the distinction by way of a grocery shopping example: “Your valuation network is always providing you with information about what’s rewarding around you — the things you want to buy — but also lots of distracting things like junk food and other items popping into your vision off the shelves.”
Cognitive control is what keeps this network in check. “To be able to get to the checkout counter with what you planned, you need to maintain a goal in mind, such as perhaps only buying the salad you needed for dinner,” says Adolphs. “That’s your cognitive control network maintaining an overall goal despite lots of other information”.
Understanding how the brain parcels out specific decision-making tasks can offer insight into conditions in which such networks go awry, such as in the case of psychiatric disorders. Depressed people, for example, clearly have difficulty with value-based decision making: because nothing feels good or seems appealing, all options appear equally bleak and making choices becomes impossible. Hoarding disorder, in contrast, may involve overvaluation of certain possessions and impairment of the cognitive control needed to shift one’s attention away from them. That explains why hoarding becomes more important than other life goals like maintaining relationships.
To tease out the distinct roles of these brain areas, the researchers analyzed data on nearly 350 people with damage, or lesions, in specific regions of the frontal lobes believed to be involved with particular tasks. Such studies of brain lesions are better at helping scientists understand cause and effect than imaging studies alone: if a damaged region is linked with impairment on a particular cognitive test, you know that task requires involvement from that region; with imaging studies, however, researchers can never be sure whether brain activity in certain regions is crucial to the task at hand, or whether it resulted from extraneous factors like a participant being distracted in the scanner.

What is the main purpose of the author in writing the passage?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

Every day, we face thousands of decisions both major and minor — from whether to eat that decadent chocolate cupcake to when to pursue a new romantic relationship or to change careers. How does the brain decide? A new study suggests that it relies on two separate networks to do so: one that determines the overall value — the risk versus reward — of individual choices and another that guides how you ultimately behave.
“Cognitive control and value-based decision-making tasks appear to depend on different brain regions within the prefrontal cortex,” says Jan Glascher, lead author of the study and a visiting associate at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, referring to the seat of higher-level reasoning in the brain.
Study co-author Ralph Adolphs, a professor of psychology at Caltech, explains the distinction by way of a grocery shopping example: “Your valuation network is always providing you with information about what’s rewarding around you — the things you want to buy — but also lots of distracting things like junk food and other items popping into your vision off the shelves.”
Cognitive control is what keeps this network in check. “To be able to get to the checkout counter with what you planned, you need to maintain a goal in mind, such as perhaps only buying the salad you needed for dinner,” says Adolphs. “That’s your cognitive control network maintaining an overall goal despite lots of other information”.
Understanding how the brain parcels out specific decision-making tasks can offer insight into conditions in which such networks go awry, such as in the case of psychiatric disorders. Depressed people, for example, clearly have difficulty with value-based decision making: because nothing feels good or seems appealing, all options appear equally bleak and making choices becomes impossible. Hoarding disorder, in contrast, may involve overvaluation of certain possessions and impairment of the cognitive control needed to shift one’s attention away from them. That explains why hoarding becomes more important than other life goals like maintaining relationships.
To tease out the distinct roles of these brain areas, the researchers analyzed data on nearly 350 people with damage, or lesions, in specific regions of the frontal lobes believed to be involved with particular tasks. Such studies of brain lesions are better at helping scientists understand cause and effect than imaging studies alone: if a damaged region is linked with impairment on a particular cognitive test, you know that task requires involvement from that region; with imaging studies, however, researchers can never be sure whether brain activity in certain regions is crucial to the task at hand, or whether it resulted from extraneous factors like a participant being distracted in the scanner.

Which of these options, if true, weakens the argument that studies on brain damaged patients are useful?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

Every day, we face thousands of decisions both major and minor — from whether to eat that decadent chocolate cupcake to when to pursue a new romantic relationship or to change careers. How does the brain decide? A new study suggests that it relies on two separate networks to do so: one that determines the overall value — the risk versus reward — of individual choices and another that guides how you ultimately behave.
“Cognitive control and value-based decision-making tasks appear to depend on different brain regions within the prefrontal cortex,” says Jan Glascher, lead author of the study and a visiting associate at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, referring to the seat of higher-level reasoning in the brain.
Study co-author Ralph Adolphs, a professor of psychology at Caltech, explains the distinction by way of a grocery shopping example: “Your valuation network is always providing you with information about what’s rewarding around you — the things you want to buy — but also lots of distracting things like junk food and other items popping into your vision off the shelves.”
Cognitive control is what keeps this network in check. “To be able to get to the checkout counter with what you planned, you need to maintain a goal in mind, such as perhaps only buying the salad you needed for dinner,” says Adolphs. “That’s your cognitive control network maintaining an overall goal despite lots of other information”.
Understanding how the brain parcels out specific decision-making tasks can offer insight into conditions in which such networks go awry, such as in the case of psychiatric disorders. Depressed people, for example, clearly have difficulty with value-based decision making: because nothing feels good or seems appealing, all options appear equally bleak and making choices becomes impossible. Hoarding disorder, in contrast, may involve overvaluation of certain possessions and impairment of the cognitive control needed to shift one’s attention away from them. That explains why hoarding becomes more important than other life goals like maintaining relationships.
To tease out the distinct roles of these brain areas, the researchers analyzed data on nearly 350 people with damage, or lesions, in specific regions of the frontal lobes believed to be involved with particular tasks. Such studies of brain lesions are better at helping scientists understand cause and effect than imaging studies alone: if a damaged region is linked with impairment on a particular cognitive test, you know that task requires involvement from that region; with imaging studies, however, researchers can never be sure whether brain activity in certain regions is crucial to the task at hand, or whether it resulted from extraneous factors like a participant being distracted in the scanner.

Which of these describes the attitude of the author towards brain science research?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

Every day, we face thousands of decisions both major and minor — from whether to eat that decadent chocolate cupcake to when to pursue a new romantic relationship or to change careers. How does the brain decide? A new study suggests that it relies on two separate networks to do so: one that determines the overall value — the risk versus reward — of individual choices and another that guides how you ultimately behave.
“Cognitive control and value-based decision-making tasks appear to depend on different brain regions within the prefrontal cortex,” says Jan Glascher, lead author of the study and a visiting associate at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, referring to the seat of higher-level reasoning in the brain.
Study co-author Ralph Adolphs, a professor of psychology at Caltech, explains the distinction by way of a grocery shopping example: “Your valuation network is always providing you with information about what’s rewarding around you — the things you want to buy — but also lots of distracting things like junk food and other items popping into your vision off the shelves.”
Cognitive control is what keeps this network in check. “To be able to get to the checkout counter with what you planned, you need to maintain a goal in mind, such as perhaps only buying the salad you needed for dinner,” says Adolphs. “That’s your cognitive control network maintaining an overall goal despite lots of other information”.
Understanding how the brain parcels out specific decision-making tasks can offer insight into conditions in which such networks go awry, such as in the case of psychiatric disorders. Depressed people, for example, clearly have difficulty with value-based decision making: because nothing feels good or seems appealing, all options appear equally bleak and making choices becomes impossible. Hoarding disorder, in contrast, may involve overvaluation of certain possessions and impairment of the cognitive control needed to shift one’s attention away from them. That explains why hoarding becomes more important than other life goals like maintaining relationships.
To tease out the distinct roles of these brain areas, the researchers analyzed data on nearly 350 people with damage, or lesions, in specific regions of the frontal lobes believed to be involved with particular tasks. Such studies of brain lesions are better at helping scientists understand cause and effect than imaging studies alone: if a damaged region is linked with impairment on a particular cognitive test, you know that task requires involvement from that region; with imaging studies, however, researchers can never be sure whether brain activity in certain regions is crucial to the task at hand, or whether it resulted from extraneous factors like a participant being distracted in the scanner.

Which of the following is possibly the most appropriate title for the passage?

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The price of gold has gone up from \$256 an ounce in 2001 to \$1,424. Meanwhile, price levels have struggled or crashed with respect to almost all other asset classes. Central banks have slashed interest rates. Yet, gold prices, it has been predicted, may go up and up. The many reasons for this renewed love are convincing. Interestingly, not long ago, pundits had predicted the end of gold as the world's default asset class and were clubbing it with commodities. It appears that the yellow metal is making a comeback to reassert the pre-eminence it has enjoyed for 5,000 years of history.
Its supply is falling. No new mines have been discovered. The existing ones are getting exhausted, and miners are digging as deep as 5 km. Gold content in ore has come down from almost 12 gm a tonne to 2 gm. And it costs more and more to take that out. Environmental concerns have also contributed to mine owners' problems. The wages of miners are going up; so is the cost of providing them safety and security.
Emerging economies such as China and India are accumulating gold: China has 1,054 tonnes and India 565 tonnes. No wonder, as emerging economic superpowers, China and India want to add to their reserves. Industrial use of gold is on the rise the world over. With the US economy still drifting with the threat of the dollar losing its undisputed position of reserve currency, the rush to gold is increasing.
Added to all this is the rekindled investor preference for gold. Money is moving away from mutual funds and equities and the once fashionable and often discredited hedge funds are also getting into gold. Exchange traded funds (ETFs) are channelling ever more funds to gold. Some pension funds are increasing the proportion of gold in their basket of assets. Given all this, gold can go nowhere but up. That is the consensus.
Everyone seems to be joining the new gold rush. But is everything well with gold? Or is it a bubble building up?
Consider the conventional wisdom. Money generally gets distributed, though not in any fixed proportion, among assets stocks, cash, government securities, gold, investments in factories and equilibrium in a global economy, across geographical boundaries.  As long as the flow and the increase in returns are consistent, everyone rushes to the same destination. Excess demand, though often artificial, creates excess supply, as in the case of real estate.
Excess supply leads to price crashes. Is something similar happening in gold? The general consensus is 'no'. Gold is different. It has never let anyone down in 5,000 years. It is indestructible. Its supply is limited. The argument in the case of gold is that excess demand cannot create excess supply as the total world supply is limited. But this time it is different. Is it really so? Gold has also gone up and down in the past. It was \$424 an ounce in 1990 before crashing to \$255 in 2001. Still, it moves only within a range and huge fluctuations are not possible in gold, argue some people. Actually, gold gave much better returns in the 1980s, only to stagnate and lose those gains in the 1990s.
A crash of gold prices could be the ultimate crash, nothing like we have seen. No one has managed to discredit the yellow metal in 5,000 years. But it appears that for the first time in history the ETFs, the hedge funds and the governments are about to do the undoable. The fact that it has not already happened is no guarantee that it will not happen. Look at all the easy money coming into gold. All those who have shifted money from real estate, mutual funds, pension funds, hedge funds and stocks are pouring it into gold. Gold ETFs are the fastest growing investment vehicles today. This is all real quick money, but can evaporate at the click of a key. Of course, governments such as China and India are also betting on gold and increasing their reserves. But then whoever said governments can make no mistakes?
The intrinsic value of gold has not gone up from $255 to $1,424 in 10 years. Gold is not consumed heavily like oil or grain. Industrial use of gold is limited. Gold is the most recycled commodity. Of the annual production of 2,500 tonnes, about 50 per cent goes to make jewellery and it is almost entirely recycled. The rest goes to industrial and other uses, and even here the recycling rate is high. In other words, all that demand is artificial and can be deflated in no time. There is no need to have excess supply to lead to a price crash, unlike other products. The sheer fact that gold is only a hedge instrument and does not serve any practical use by itself will negate the 'there-is-new-supply' theory. Someone somewhere is watching for the perfect moment to disgorge the hoard, to create sudden panic and buy up following a crash.
There is no sign that a crash is going to come tomorrow, or for that matter next year or the year after. It may still go up for two or five or even 10 years. But crash it will, if we are to go by the economic history of boom and bust. Also, the higher it goes and the longer it stays there, the more painful the crash is going to be, especially for India. Indians sit on an estimated 18,000 tonnes. India has always had the largest gold reserve with individuals. Imagine what will happen to millions of Indians if gold were to crash. A crash of gold will be the crash of the Indian economy.
That should make us more responsible. That makes it imperative for our economists to track gold movement. That makes it important for our financial wizards to prevent a bubble in gold. That should force us to act before it happens. Never in history have we had so much idle money chasing so little gold. Gold is losing its respect as the default and fail-safe asset class and becoming a speculative instrument. This shift of gold from being an item of passive wealth to an instrument of speculation is dangerous. Gold is being talked up by crafty speculators and unsuspecting governments. And these predictions are being made by those sitting on gold worth billions of dollars bought at yesterday's prices.

Directions: Choose the word, which is most similar in meaning to the word printed in bold as used in the passage.

Limited

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The price of gold has gone up from \$256 an ounce in 2001 to \$1,424. Meanwhile, price levels have struggled or crashed with respect to almost all other asset classes. Central banks have slashed interest rates. Yet, gold prices, it has been predicted, may go up and up. The many reasons for this renewed love are convincing. Interestingly, not long ago, pundits had predicted the end of gold as the world's default asset class and were clubbing it with commodities. It appears that the yellow metal is making a comeback to reassert the pre-eminence it has enjoyed for 5,000 years of history.
Its supply is falling. No new mines have been discovered. The existing ones are getting exhausted, and miners are digging as deep as 5 km. Gold content in ore has come down from almost 12 gm a tonne to 2 gm. And it costs more and more to take that out. Environmental concerns have also contributed to mine owners' problems. The wages of miners are going up; so is the cost of providing them safety and security.
Emerging economies such as China and India are accumulating gold: China has 1,054 tonnes and India 565 tonnes. No wonder, as emerging economic superpowers, China and India want to add to their reserves. Industrial use of gold is on the rise the world over. With the US economy still drifting with the threat of the dollar losing its undisputed position of reserve currency, the rush to gold is increasing.
Added to all this is the rekindled investor preference for gold. Money is moving away from mutual funds and equities and the once fashionable and often discredited hedge funds are also getting into gold. Exchange traded funds (ETFs) are channelling ever more funds to gold. Some pension funds are increasing the proportion of gold in their basket of assets. Given all this, gold can go nowhere but up. That is the consensus.
Everyone seems to be joining the new gold rush. But is everything well with gold? Or is it a bubble building up?
Consider the conventional wisdom. Money generally gets distributed, though not in any fixed proportion, among assets stocks, cash, government securities, gold, investments in factories and equilibrium in a global economy, across geographical boundaries.  As long as the flow and the increase in returns are consistent, everyone rushes to the same destination. Excess demand, though often artificial, creates excess supply, as in the case of real estate.
Excess supply leads to price crashes. Is something similar happening in gold? The general consensus is 'no'. Gold is different. It has never let anyone down in 5,000 years. It is indestructible. Its supply is limited. The argument in the case of gold is that excess demand cannot create excess supply as the total world supply is limited. But this time it is different. Is it really so? Gold has also gone up and down in the past. It was \$424 an ounce in 1990 before crashing to \$255 in 2001. Still, it moves only within a range and huge fluctuations are not possible in gold, argue some people. Actually, gold gave much better returns in the 1980s, only to stagnate and lose those gains in the 1990s.
A crash of gold prices could be the ultimate crash, nothing like we have seen. No one has managed to discredit the yellow metal in 5,000 years. But it appears that for the first time in history the ETFs, the hedge funds and the governments are about to do the undoable. The fact that it has not already happened is no guarantee that it will not happen. Look at all the easy money coming into gold. All those who have shifted money from real estate, mutual funds, pension funds, hedge funds and stocks are pouring it into gold. Gold ETFs are the fastest growing investment vehicles today. This is all real quick money, but can evaporate at the click of a key. Of course, governments such as China and India are also betting on gold and increasing their reserves. But then whoever said governments can make no mistakes?
The intrinsic value of gold has not gone up from $255 to $1,424 in 10 years. Gold is not consumed heavily like oil or grain. Industrial use of gold is limited. Gold is the most recycled commodity. Of the annual production of 2,500 tonnes, about 50 per cent goes to make jewellery and it is almost entirely recycled. The rest goes to industrial and other uses, and even here the recycling rate is high. In other words, all that demand is artificial and can be deflated in no time. There is no need to have excess supply to lead to a price crash, unlike other products. The sheer fact that gold is only a hedge instrument and does not serve any practical use by itself will negate the 'there-is-new-supply' theory. Someone somewhere is watching for the perfect moment to disgorge the hoard, to create sudden panic and buy up following a crash.
There is no sign that a crash is going to come tomorrow, or for that matter next year or the year after. It may still go up for two or five or even 10 years. But crash it will, if we are to go by the economic history of boom and bust. Also, the higher it goes and the longer it stays there, the more painful the crash is going to be, especially for India. Indians sit on an estimated 18,000 tonnes. India has always had the largest gold reserve with individuals. Imagine what will happen to millions of Indians if gold were to crash. A crash of gold will be the crash of the Indian economy.
That should make us more responsible. That makes it imperative for our economists to track gold movement. That makes it important for our financial wizards to prevent a bubble in gold. That should force us to act before it happens. Never in history have we had so much idle money chasing so little gold. Gold is losing its respect as the default and fail-safe asset class and becoming a speculative instrument. This shift of gold from being an item of passive wealth to an instrument of speculation is dangerous. Gold is being talked up by crafty speculators and unsuspecting governments. And these predictions are being made by those sitting on gold worth billions of dollars bought at yesterday's prices.

Directions: Choose the word, which is most similar in meaning to the word printed in bold as used in the passage.

Consumed

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The price of gold has gone up from \$256 an ounce in 2001 to \$1,424. Meanwhile, price levels have struggled or crashed with respect to almost all other asset classes. Central banks have slashed interest rates. Yet, gold prices, it has been predicted, may go up and up. The many reasons for this renewed love are convincing. Interestingly, not long ago, pundits had predicted the end of gold as the world's default asset class and were clubbing it with commodities. It appears that the yellow metal is making a comeback to reassert the pre-eminence it has enjoyed for 5,000 years of history.
Its supply is falling. No new mines have been discovered. The existing ones are getting exhausted, and miners are digging as deep as 5 km. Gold content in ore has come down from almost 12 gm a tonne to 2 gm. And it costs more and more to take that out. Environmental concerns have also contributed to mine owners' problems. The wages of miners are going up; so is the cost of providing them safety and security.
Emerging economies such as China and India are accumulating gold: China has 1,054 tonnes and India 565 tonnes. No wonder, as emerging economic superpowers, China and India want to add to their reserves. Industrial use of gold is on the rise the world over. With the US economy still drifting with the threat of the dollar losing its undisputed position of reserve currency, the rush to gold is increasing.
Added to all this is the rekindled investor preference for gold. Money is moving away from mutual funds and equities and the once fashionable and often discredited hedge funds are also getting into gold. Exchange traded funds (ETFs) are channelling ever more funds to gold. Some pension funds are increasing the proportion of gold in their basket of assets. Given all this, gold can go nowhere but up. That is the consensus.
Everyone seems to be joining the new gold rush. But is everything well with gold? Or is it a bubble building up?
Consider the conventional wisdom. Money generally gets distributed, though not in any fixed proportion, among assets stocks, cash, government securities, gold, investments in factories and equilibrium in a global economy, across geographical boundaries.  As long as the flow and the increase in returns are consistent, everyone rushes to the same destination. Excess demand, though often artificial, creates excess supply, as in the case of real estate.
Excess supply leads to price crashes. Is something similar happening in gold? The general consensus is 'no'. Gold is different. It has never let anyone down in 5,000 years. It is indestructible. Its supply is limited. The argument in the case of gold is that excess demand cannot create excess supply as the total world supply is limited. But this time it is different. Is it really so? Gold has also gone up and down in the past. It was \$424 an ounce in 1990 before crashing to \$255 in 2001. Still, it moves only within a range and huge fluctuations are not possible in gold, argue some people. Actually, gold gave much better returns in the 1980s, only to stagnate and lose those gains in the 1990s.
A crash of gold prices could be the ultimate crash, nothing like we have seen. No one has managed to discredit the yellow metal in 5,000 years. But it appears that for the first time in history the ETFs, the hedge funds and the governments are about to do the undoable. The fact that it has not already happened is no guarantee that it will not happen. Look at all the easy money coming into gold. All those who have shifted money from real estate, mutual funds, pension funds, hedge funds and stocks are pouring it into gold. Gold ETFs are the fastest growing investment vehicles today. This is all real quick money, but can evaporate at the click of a key. Of course, governments such as China and India are also betting on gold and increasing their reserves. But then whoever said governments can make no mistakes?
The intrinsic value of gold has not gone up from $255 to $1,424 in 10 years. Gold is not consumed heavily like oil or grain. Industrial use of gold is limited. Gold is the most recycled commodity. Of the annual production of 2,500 tonnes, about 50 per cent goes to make jewellery and it is almost entirely recycled. The rest goes to industrial and other uses, and even here the recycling rate is high. In other words, all that demand is artificial and can be deflated in no time. There is no need to have excess supply to lead to a price crash, unlike other products. The sheer fact that gold is only a hedge instrument and does not serve any practical use by itself will negate the 'there-is-new-supply' theory. Someone somewhere is watching for the perfect moment to disgorge the hoard, to create sudden panic and buy up following a crash.
There is no sign that a crash is going to come tomorrow, or for that matter next year or the year after. It may still go up for two or five or even 10 years. But crash it will, if we are to go by the economic history of boom and bust. Also, the higher it goes and the longer it stays there, the more painful the crash is going to be, especially for India. Indians sit on an estimated 18,000 tonnes. India has always had the largest gold reserve with individuals. Imagine what will happen to millions of Indians if gold were to crash. A crash of gold will be the crash of the Indian economy.
That should make us more responsible. That makes it imperative for our economists to track gold movement. That makes it important for our financial wizards to prevent a bubble in gold. That should force us to act before it happens. Never in history have we had so much idle money chasing so little gold. Gold is losing its respect as the default and fail-safe asset class and becoming a speculative instrument. This shift of gold from being an item of passive wealth to an instrument of speculation is dangerous. Gold is being talked up by crafty speculators and unsuspecting governments. And these predictions are being made by those sitting on gold worth billions of dollars bought at yesterday's prices.

Which of the following is/are the general opinions about gold? A. Its supply, although limited, will be able to meet its demand. B. The price of gold will keep on increasing. C. It is the best investment at present.

Directions: Answer the given question based on the following passage:

The price of gold has gone up from \$256 an ounce in 2001 to \$1,424. Meanwhile, price levels have struggled or crashed with respect to almost all other asset classes. Central banks have slashed interest rates. Yet, gold prices, it has been predicted, may go up and up. The many reasons for this renewed love are convincing. Interestingly, not long ago, pundits had predicted the end of gold as the world's default asset class and were clubbing it with commodities. It appears that the yellow metal is making a comeback to reassert the pre-eminence it has enjoyed for 5,000 years of history.
Its supply is falling. No new mines have been discovered. The existing ones are getting exhausted, and miners are digging as deep as 5 km. Gold content in ore has come down from almost 12 gm a tonne to 2 gm. And it costs more and more to take that out. Environmental concerns have also contributed to mine owners' problems. The wages of miners are going up; so is the cost of providing them safety and security.
Emerging economies such as China and India are accumulating gold: China has 1,054 tonnes and India 565 tonnes. No wonder, as emerging economic superpowers, China and India want to add to their reserves. Industrial use of gold is on the rise the world over. With the US economy still drifting with the threat of the dollar losing its undisputed position of reserve currency, the rush to gold is increasing.
Added to all this is the rekindled investor preference for gold. Money is moving away from mutual funds and equities and the once fashionable and often discredited hedge funds are also getting into gold. Exchange traded funds (ETFs) are channelling ever more funds to gold. Some pension funds are increasing the proportion of gold in their basket of assets. Given all this, gold can go nowhere but up. That is the consensus.
Everyone seems to be joining the new gold rush. But is everything well with gold? Or is it a bubble building up?
Consider the conventional wisdom. Money generally gets distributed, though not in any fixed proportion, among assets stocks, cash, government securities, gold, investments in factories and equilibrium in a global economy, across geographical boundaries.  As long as the flow and the increase in returns are consistent, everyone rushes to the same destination. Excess demand, though often artificial, creates excess supply, as in the case of real estate.
Excess supply leads to price crashes. Is something similar happening in gold? The general consensus is 'no'. Gold is different. It has never let anyone down in 5,000 years. It is indestructible. Its supply is limited. The argument in the case of gold is that excess demand cannot create excess supply as the total world supply is limited. But this time it is different. Is it really so? Gold has also gone up and down in the past. It was \$424 an ounce in 1990 before crashing to \$255 in 2001. Still, it moves only within a range and huge fluctuations are not possible in gold, argue some people. Actually, gold gave much better returns in the 1980s, only to stagnate and lose those gains in the 1990s.
A crash of gold prices could be the ultimate crash, nothing like we have seen. No one has managed to discredit the yellow metal in 5,000 years. But it appears that for the first time in history the ETFs, the hedge funds and the governments are about to do the undoable. The fact that it has not already happened is no guarantee that it will not happen. Look at all the easy money coming into gold. All those who have shifted money from real estate, mutual funds, pension funds, hedge funds and stocks are pouring it into gold. Gold ETFs are the fastest growing investment vehicles today. This is all real quick money, but can evaporate at the click of a key. Of course, governments such as China and India are also betting on gold and increasing their reserves. But then whoever said governments can make no mistakes?
The intrinsic value of gold has not gone up from $255 to $1,424 in 10 years. Gold is not consumed heavily like oil or grain. Industrial use of gold is limited. Gold is the most recycled commodity. Of the annual production of 2,500 tonnes, about 50 per cent goes to make jewellery and it is almost entirely recycled. The rest goes to industrial and other uses, and even here the recycling rate is high. In other words, all that demand is artificial and can be deflated in no time. There is no need to have excess supply to lead to a price crash, unlike other products. The sheer fact that gold is only a hedge instrument and does not serve any practical use by itself will negate the 'there-is-new-supply' theory. Someone somewhere is watching for the perfect moment to disgorge the hoard, to create sudden panic and buy up following a crash.
There is no sign that a crash is going to come tomorrow, or for that matter next year or the year after. It may still go up for two or five or even 10 years. But crash it will, if we are to go by the economic history of boom and bust. Also, the higher it goes and the longer it stays there, the more painful the crash is going to be, especially for India. Indians sit on an estimated 18,000 tonnes. India has always had the largest gold reserve with individuals. Imagine what will happen to millions of Indians if gold were to crash. A crash of gold will be the crash of the Indian economy.
That should make us more responsible. That makes it imperative for our economists to track gold movement. That makes it important for our financial wizards to prevent a bubble in gold. That should force us to act before it happens. Never in history have we had so much idle money chasing so little gold. Gold is losing its respect as the default and fail-safe asset class and becoming a speculative instrument. This shift of gold from being an item of passive wealth to an instrument of speculation is dangerous. Gold is being talked up by crafty speculators and unsuspecting governments. And these predictions are being made by those sitting on gold worth billions of dollars bought at yesterday's prices.

What do we do in our deathbed?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question:

There was a rich merchant who had 4 wives. He loved the 4^th wife the most and adorned her with rich robes and treated her to delicacies. He took great care of her and gave her nothing but the best. 

He also loved the 3^rd wife very much. He's very proud of her and always wanted to show off her to his friends. However, the merchant is always in great fear that she might run away with some other men.
He too, loved his 2^nd wife. She is a very considerate person, always patient and in fact is the merchant's confidante. Whenever the merchant faced some problems, he always turned to his 2^nd wife and she would always help him out and tide him through difficult times. 

Now, the merchant's 1^st wife is a very loyal partner and has made great contributions in maintaining his wealth and business as well as taking care of the household. However, the merchant did not love the first wife and although she loved him deeply, he hardly took notice of her. 

One day, the merchant fell ill. Before long, he knew that he was going to die soon. He thought of his luxurious life and told himself, "Now I have 4 wives with me. But when I die, I'll be alone. How lonely I'll be!"
Thus, he asked the 4^th wife, "I loved you most, endowed you with the finest clothing and showered great care over you. Now that I'm dying, will you follow me and keep me company?". "No way!" replied the 4^th wife and she walked away without another word. 

The answer cut like a sharp knife right into the merchant's heart. The sad merchant then asked the 3^rd wife, "I have loved you so much for all my life. Now that I'm dying, will you follow me and keep me company?". "No!" replied the 3^rd wife. "Life is so good over here! I'm going to remarry when you die!" The merchant's heart sank and turned cold. 

He then asked the 2^nd wife, "I always turned to you for help and you've always helped me out. Now I need your help again. When I die, will you follow me and keep me company?". "I'm sorry, I can't help you out this time!" replied the 2^nd wife. "At the very most, I can only send you to your grave." The answer came like a bolt of thunder and the merchant was devastated. 

Then a voice called out : "I'll leave with you. I'll follow you no matter where you go." The merchant looked up and there was his first wife. She was so skinny, almost like she suffered from malnutrition. Greatly grieved, the merchant said, "I should have taken much better care of you while I could have !"
Actually, we all have 4 wives in our lives
a. The 4^th wife is our body. No matter how much time and effort we lavish in making it look good, it'll leave us when we die. 

b. Our 3^rd wife? Our possessions, status and wealth. When we die, they all go to others. 

c. The 2^nd wife is our family and friends. No matter how close they had been there for us when we're alive, the furthest they can stay by us is up to the grave. 

d. The 1^st wife is in fact our soul, often neglected in our pursuit of material, wealth and sensual pleasure.