Everyone knows that if a dog's ears are up and its tail is wagging vigorously, it is definitely pleased to see you. but now scientists using a robot have found that the way dogs use their tails is more complicated than we thought, and that dogs which wag them to the left may he more friendly. The animal psychologists discovered that when real dogs approached a life-sized robot dog, they were less cautious about it when it was wagging its tail to the left, while if it was wagging its tail to the right, far fewer dogs approached it in a confident manner.

    In the first experiments, 56 percent of the animals approached the model without hesitation when the tail was wagged to the left, while only 21 percent did so in the other situation. When the researchers excluded (排除) owners from being present, the result were: 31 percent of the dogs approached continuously when the tail was wagging to the left, while only 18 percent did so when it was on the right.

    Animal psychologist Roger Mugford said it added to the growing evidence that does were even more complicated communicators than the animals more closely related to man such as monkeys. He said, “We know that dogs, in a sense, have languages, but it is more complicated because it is not just them wagging their tails, but also giving out chemical displays.”

    He adds, “The research confirms earlier studies suggesting that dogs, like humans, had a left-side preference. If you are going to present a signal to a dog, it is sensible to put it on your left-hand side because that is where dogs, unlike most other animals, tend to look. It is another example of the similarity between dogs and humans. They are a lot more human than we give them credit for.”

Two good friends, Simon and Jason, met with a car accident on their way home one snowy night. The next morning, Simon woke up blind. His legs were broken. The doctor, Mr. Smith, was standing by his bed, looking at him worriedly. When he saw Simon awake, he asked, " How are you feeling, Simon?” Simon smiled and said, “Not bad, doctor. Thank you very much for doing the special operation. Mr. Smith was moved by Simon. When he was leaving, Simon said, "Please don't tell Jason about it. “Well…Well…OK,” Mr. Smith replied.

Months later when Jason's wounds healed, Simon was still very sick. He couldn't see or walk. He could do nothing but stay in his wheelchair all day long. At first, Jason stayed with him for a few days. But days later, Jason thought it boring to spend time with a disabled man like Simon. So he went to see Simon less and less. He made new friends. From then on, he didn't go to visit Simon any more. Simon didn't have any family or friends except Jason. He felt very sad.

    Things went from bad to worse. Simon died a year later. When Jason came, Mr. Smith gave him a letter from Simon. In the letter Simon said, “Dear Jason, I am disabled. But I want you to be a healthy man. So I gave my eyes to you so that you can enjoy life as a healthy man. Now you have new friends.

I'm glad to see that you are as healthy and happy as usual. I'm glad you live a happy life. You are always my best friend". Simon”. When he finished reading the letter, Mr. Smith said, “I have promised that I will keep this a secret until Simon is gone. Now you know it.

    Jason stood there like a stone. Tears ran down his face.

    Culture shock is the psychological（心理的）shock of having to adapt to new environment and new cultures which may be completely different from your own. To understand culture shock helps to understand what culture is.

    Culture shock is caused by the feelings that result from losing all familiar signs and symbols of social intercourse（交往）. Those signs include the ways with which we are familiar in daily life: When to shake hands and what to say when we meet people? When and how to give tips? How to go shopping? When to accept and when to refuse invitations? These signs, which may be words, gestures, facial expressions, customs or normals are gained by all of us in the course of growing up and are as much a part of our culture as the language we speak.

    During the first few weeks when a person enters a strange culture, most people are attracted by the new. But this “cooks tour” type of mentality（心态）does not normally last if the foreign visitor remain abroad and has to seriously deal with real conditions of life. He may feel anxious and frustrated（受挫的） People react to the frustration in the same way. During the first period, they reject the environment which causes the discomfort. “The ways of the host country are bad because they make us feel bad,” they complain about the host country and its people. The following period is homesickness. The home environment suddenly becomes so important that all difficulties and problems are forgotten and only the good things back home are remembered.

    Experiencing culture shock can be very difficult. There is a risk of sickness or emotional problems. However, culture shock can be part of a positive learning experience. Be patient! It is a process of adaptation to new situations. If you do like this, you will be a much stronger person, and you will be a citizen of the world.

    The theatre in Shakespeare's time was much different than it is today. Authors wrote plays for the masses, especially those who couldn't read or write.

    The theatre changed a lot during Shakespeare's lifetime. The authorities didn't like it and didn't allow acting in the city itself: They thought it had a bad influence on people and kept them from going to church. Queen Elizabeth, on the other hand, loved acting and helped the theatre become popular.

    The theatre in Shakespeare's time was full of life. People did not sit all the time and it was not quiet during the performance. The audience could walk around, eat and drink during the play.

    Theaters were open arenas or playhouses that had room for up to three thousand people. There was almost no scenery because the dialogue was the most important part of the play. Colourful and well-designed costumes were very important and told the people about the status of a character. Women never performed in plays, 80 young boys played female characters. The performances took place in the afternoon because it was too dark at night.

    There was no stage crew as there is today. Actors had to do everything themselves-from making costumes to setting the stage. Plays were organized by acting companies. They performed about 6 different plays each week because they needed money to survive. They had almost no time to rehearse (排练).

    The companies in Shakespeare's time had a rank system. The company belonged to shareholders and managers. They were responsible for everything and got most of the money when the company was successful. Sometimes they even owned their own buildings. Actors worked for the managers and after some time became a permanent member of the company. Apprentices (学徒) were young boys and were allowed to act in unimportant role. They also played female characters in plays.

    Government in Tibet have denied the permanent( 永久的) closure of Mount Qomolangma National Nature Reserve.

    The announcement came after a report went viral online claiming the base camp of the world's highest mountain was "permanently closed due to heavy pollution" and caused a universal misunderstanding.

    Mount Qomolangma National Nature Reserve was set up in 1988. Covering an area of more than 33, 800 square km, it is home to one of the world's most weak ecosystems(生态系统).

    Kelsang, deputy director of the reserves administration, said ordinary tourists are allowed to visit areas around Rongpo Monastery, almost 5,000 meters above sea level. As for travelers who have a climbing permit, they can go to the base camp at an altitude of 5,200 meters. The mountaineering activities have been permitted by the regional forestry department.

    To conserve the environment surrounding Mount Qomolangma, China carried out three major clean-ups at an altitude of 5, 200 meters and above last spring, collecting eight tonnes of household wastes, human wastes and mountaineering trash. This year, the clean-up will continue, and the remains of mountaineering victims(受害者) above 8,000 meters will be centrally dealt  with for the first  time. Meanwhile, the number of people who stay at the base camp will be kept under 300.

Recently, there are 85 wildlife protectors in the reserve, and 1,000 herders have part-time jobs going around and cleaning up garbage.

These measures aim to strike a balance between various demands such as environmental protection, local poverty relief, mountaineering and education, said Wang Shen, county chief of Dingri at the mountain foot.

    Eating red meat is linked to cancer and heart disease, but are the risks big enough to justify giving up juicy burgers and delicious steaks? Probably not, according to researchers who reviewed data from 12 clinical trials involving about 54,000 people. In a series of controversial papers, the researchers argue that the increased health risks tied to red meat are small and uncertain, and that cutting back likely wouldn't be worth it for people who enjoy meat.

    Those conclusions go against established medical advice. They were swiftly attacked by a group of famous U.S. scientists who took the unusual step of trying to stop the papers from being published until their criticisms were addressed.

    The new work does not say red or processed meats like hot dogs and bacon are healthy, or that people should eat more of them. The team's reviews of past studies generally support the ties to cancer, heart disease and other bad health outcomes. But the authors say the evidence is weak, and that there's not much certainty meat is really the cause, since other diet and lifestyle factors could be at play.

    If the latest example of how divisive nutrition research has become, with its uncertainties leaving the door open for conflicting advice. Critics say findings often aren't backed by strong evidence. Defenders counter that nutrition studies can rarely be conclusive because of the difficulty of measuring the effects of any single food, but that methods have improved.

    Based on their analyses, the researchers said people do not have to cut back for health reasons. But they noted that their own advice is weak, and acknowledged that they didn't consider factors such as animal welfare and the environment. Indeed, the case that meat production is bad for animal welfare and the environment is stronger than the case that it's bad for human health, according to an editorial that accompanies the report.

    Not all of the report authors agreed with its conclusions. Three of the 14 researchers said they support reducing red and processed meats. A coauthor of one of the reviews is also among those who called for a publication delay.

    Those who pushed to postpone publication also questioned why certain studies were included in the reviews while others were left out.

    As for his own diet, Dr. Gordon Guyatt, a member of the international research team that conducted the reviews, said he no longer thinks red or processed meats have significant health risks. But he said he still avoids them out of habit, and for animal welfare and environmental reasons.