ISEE Middle Level Reading Comprehension › Science Passages
Adapted from Anecdotes of the Habits and Instincts of Animals by Mrs. R. Lee (1852)
The Carnivora are divided by naturalists into three groups, the characters of which are taken from their feet and manner of walking. Bears rank among the Plantigrada, or those which put the whole of their feet firmly upon the ground when they walk. They are occasionally cunning and ferocious, but often evince good humor and a great love of fun. In their wild state, they are solitary the greater part of their lives. They climb trees with great facility; live in caverns, holes, and hollow trees; and in cold countries, retire to some sequestered spot during the winter, where they remain concealed and bring forth their young. Some say they are torpid, but this cannot be, for the female bears come from their retreats with cubs that have lived upon them, and it is not likely that they can have reared them and remained without food; they are, however, often very lean and wasted, and the absorption of their generally large portion of fat contributes to their nourishment. The story that they live by sucking their paws is, as may be supposed, a fable; when well-fed they always lick their paws, very often accompanying the action with a peculiar sort of mumbling noise. There are a few which will never eat flesh, and all are able to do without it. They are, generally speaking, large, clumsy, and awkward, possessing large claws for digging, and often walk on their hind feet, a facility afforded them by the peculiar formation of their thigh bone. They do not often attack in the first instance, unless impelled by hunger or danger; they are, however, formidable opponents when excited. In former times, there were few parts of the globe in which they were not to be found, but, like other wild animals, they have disappeared before the advance of man. Still they are found in certain spots from the northern regions of the world to the burning climes of Africa, Asia, and America. The latest date of their appearance in Great Britain was in Scotland during the year 1057.
The author of this passage would most likely believe that someone who had been attacked by a bear was __________.
Foolish or unlucky depending on the circumstances surrounding the attack
It is impossible to say.
Responsible for the well-being of the bear
Very unlucky to have caught a bear at the wrong moment
Extremely foolish to have gotten himself in that position
Answering this question requires you to read the passage carefully and select the relevant piece of information from which to make a prediction. Toward the end of the passage, the author says, “\[Bears\] do not often attack in the first instance, unless impelled by hunger or danger; they are, however, formidable opponents when excited.” So, in the author's opinion, bears only attack when forced by “hunger or danger"; from this, we can reasonably predict that the author of this passage would believe someone attacked by a bear would have been either foolish or unlucky—foolish if he or she made the bear feel in danger, unlucky if he or she encountered the bear when it was hungry.
"Interpreting the Copernican Revolution" by Matthew Minerd (2014)
The expressions of one discipline can often alter the way that other subjects understand themselves. Among such cases are numbered the investigations of Nicolaus Copernicus. Copernicus is best known for his views concerning heliocentrism, a view which eventually obliterated many aspects of the ancient/medieval worldview, at least from the standpoint of physical science. It had always been the natural view of mankind that the earth stood at the center of the universe, a fixed point in reference to the rest of the visible bodies. The sun, stars, and planets all rotated around the earth.
With time, this viewpoint became one of the major reference points for modern life. It provided a provocative image that was used—and often abused—by many people for various purposes. For those who wished to weaken the control of religion on mankind, it was said that the heliocentric outlook proved man’s insignificance. In contrast with earlier geocentrism, heliocentrism was said to show that man is not the center of the universe. He is merely one small being in the midst of a large cosmos. However, others wished to use the “Copernican Revolution” in a very different manner. These thinkers wanted to show that there was another “recentering” that had to happen. Once upon a time, we talked about the world. Now, however, it was necessary to talk of man as the central reference point. Just as the solar system was “centered” on the sun, so too should the sciences be centered on the human person.
However, both of these approaches are fraught with problems. Those who wished to undermine the religious mindset rather misunderstood the former outlook on the solar system. The earlier geocentric mindset did not believe that the earth was the most important body in the heavens. Instead, many ancient and medieval thinkers believed that the highest “sphere” above the earth was the most important being in the physical universe. Likewise, the so-called “Copernican Revolution” in physics was different from the one applied to the human person. Copernicus’ revolution showed that the human point of view was not the center, whereas the later forms of “Copernican revolution” wished to show just the opposite.
Of course, there are many complexities in the history of such important changes in scientific outlook. Nevertheless, it is fascinating to see the wide-reaching effects of such discoveries, even when they have numerous, ambiguous effects.
Which of the following would be a direct consequence of belief in geocentrism?
That the earth does not move
That all bodies in space have independent orbits
That even the stars in space move
That the sun is stationary
That the universe is finite in size
The theory of geocentrism held that the earth was the center of the solar system (indeed of all things) and that it was fixed in its location. This means that the earth presumably did not move at all. It was "a fixed point in reference to the rest of the visible bodies." They all rotated around it.
Adapted from Anecdotes of the Habits and Instincts of Animals by Mrs. R. Lee (1852)
The Carnivora are divided by naturalists into three groups, the characters of which are taken from their feet and manner of walking. Bears rank among the Plantigrada, or those which put the whole of their feet firmly upon the ground when they walk. They are occasionally cunning and ferocious, but often evince good humor and a great love of fun. In their wild state, they are solitary the greater part of their lives. They climb trees with great facility; live in caverns, holes, and hollow trees; and in cold countries, retire to some sequestered spot during the winter, where they remain concealed and bring forth their young. Some say they are torpid, but this cannot be, for the female bears come from their retreats with cubs that have lived upon them, and it is not likely that they can have reared them and remained without food; they are, however, often very lean and wasted, and the absorption of their generally large portion of fat contributes to their nourishment. The story that they live by sucking their paws is, as may be supposed, a fable; when well-fed they always lick their paws, very often accompanying the action with a peculiar sort of mumbling noise. There are a few which will never eat flesh, and all are able to do without it. They are, generally speaking, large, clumsy, and awkward, possessing large claws for digging, and often walk on their hind feet, a facility afforded them by the peculiar formation of their thigh bone. They do not often attack in the first instance, unless impelled by hunger or danger; they are, however, formidable opponents when excited. In former times, there were few parts of the globe in which they were not to be found, but, like other wild animals, they have disappeared before the advance of man. Still they are found in certain spots from the northern regions of the world to the burning climes of Africa, Asia, and America. The latest date of their appearance in Great Britain was in Scotland during the year 1057.
How are the Carnivora divided by naturalists?
According to their manner of walking
According to their size
According to the levels of aggression they show
According to what they eat
According to where they live
Answering this question requires you to read carefully in detail. At the beginning of the passage, the author says, “The Carnivora are divided by naturalists into three tribes, the characters of which are taken from their feet and manner of walking.” So, you can determine that the Carnivora are divided “according to their manner of walking.” The author goes on to explain how bears fit into this system of classification.
"Interpreting the Copernican Revolution" by Matthew Minerd (2014)
The expressions of one discipline can often alter the way that other subjects understand themselves. Among such cases are numbered the investigations of Nicolaus Copernicus. Copernicus is best known for his views concerning heliocentrism, a view which eventually obliterated many aspects of the ancient/medieval worldview, at least from the standpoint of physical science. It had always been the natural view of mankind that the earth stood at the center of the universe, a fixed point in reference to the rest of the visible bodies. The sun, stars, and planets all rotated around the earth.
With time, this viewpoint became one of the major reference points for modern life. It provided a provocative image that was used—and often abused—by many people for various purposes. For those who wished to weaken the control of religion on mankind, it was said that the heliocentric outlook proved man’s insignificance. In contrast with earlier geocentrism, heliocentrism was said to show that man is not the center of the universe. He is merely one small being in the midst of a large cosmos. However, others wished to use the “Copernican Revolution” in a very different manner. These thinkers wanted to show that there was another “recentering” that had to happen. Once upon a time, we talked about the world. Now, however, it was necessary to talk of man as the central reference point. Just as the solar system was “centered” on the sun, so too should the sciences be centered on the human person.
However, both of these approaches are fraught with problems. Those who wished to undermine the religious mindset rather misunderstood the former outlook on the solar system. The earlier geocentric mindset did not believe that the earth was the most important body in the heavens. Instead, many ancient and medieval thinkers believed that the highest “sphere” above the earth was the most important being in the physical universe. Likewise, the so-called “Copernican Revolution” in physics was different from the one applied to the human person. Copernicus’ revolution showed that the human point of view was not the center, whereas the later forms of “Copernican revolution” wished to show just the opposite.
Of course, there are many complexities in the history of such important changes in scientific outlook. Nevertheless, it is fascinating to see the wide-reaching effects of such discoveries, even when they have numerous, ambiguous effects.
Which of the following would be a direct consequence of belief in geocentrism?
That the earth does not move
That all bodies in space have independent orbits
That even the stars in space move
That the sun is stationary
That the universe is finite in size
The theory of geocentrism held that the earth was the center of the solar system (indeed of all things) and that it was fixed in its location. This means that the earth presumably did not move at all. It was "a fixed point in reference to the rest of the visible bodies." They all rotated around it.
Adapted from Scientific American Supplement No. 1082 Vol. XLII (September 26th, 1896)
There is no more eager contest than that which has been going on for some time between gas and electricity. Which of these two systems of lighting will triumph? Will electricity suppress gas, as gas has dethroned the oil lamp? A few years ago, the answer to this question would not have been doubtful, and it seemed as if gas in such a contest must play the role of the earthen pot against the iron one. At present the case is otherwise.
The Auer burner has reestablished the equilibrium, and the Denayrouze burner is perhaps going to decide the fate of electricity. As naturalists say, the function creates the organ, and it is truly interesting to observe that in measure as the need of a more intense and cheaper light grows with us, science makes it possible for us to satisfy it by giving us new systems of lighting or by improving those that we already have at our disposal.
What a cycle traversed in twenty years! What progress made! Let us remember that the electric light scarcely became industrial until the time of the Exposition (1878), and that the Auer burner obtained the freedom of the city only five or six years ago. Is there any need of recalling the advantages of these two lights? In the first, a feeble disengagement of caloric, automatic lighting and a steadier light; in the second, a better utilization of the gas, which gives more light and less heat.
A description of the Auer burner will not be expected from us. It is now so widely employed as to render a new description useless. As an offset, we think that our readers will be more interested in a description of the Denayrouze burner, the industrial application of which has but just begun. This burner has been constructed in view of the best possible utilization of the gas, in approaching a complete theoretical combustion. In order that it may give its entire illuminating power, gas, as we know, must be burned in five and a half times its volume of air. In the Denayrouze burner, the gas burns in four and four-tenths its volume of air. The result reached is, consequently, very appreciable.
Which of the following best describes the primary advantage of the Denayrouze burner?
It allows gas to burn in a smaller quantity of air.
It is cheaper and easier to produce than an Auer burner.
It can be maintained more easily.
It provides light more efficiently than electricity does.
It lasts longer and breaks less frequently.
Answering this question requires you to read carefully in detail. In the last paragraph, the author says, “gas, as we know, must be burned in five and a half times its volume of air. In the Denayrouze burner, the gas burns in four and four-tenths its volume of air. The result reached is, consequently, very appreciable.” Here, the author is praising the Denayrouze burner for the fact that it allows gas to burn in a smaller volume of air than had previously been possible. This is the only advantage that the author directly states to support his adoration of the Denayrouze burner.
Adapted from “The Stars” by Sir Robert S. Ball in Wonders of Earth, Sea, and Sky (1902, ed. Edward Singleton Holden)
The group of bodies that cluster around our sun forms a little island in the extent of infinite space. We may illustrate this by drawing a map in which we shall endeavor to show the stars placed at their proper relative distances.
We first open the compasses one inch, and thus draw a little circle to represent the path of Earth. We are not going to put in all the planets; we take Neptune, the outermost, at once. To draw its path, I open the compasses to thirty inches, and draw a circle with that radius. That will do for our solar system, though the comets no doubt will roam beyond these limits.
To complete our map, we ought to put in some stars. There are a hundred million to choose from, and we shall begin with the brightest. It is often called the Dog Star, but astronomers know it better as Sirius. Let us see where it is to be placed on our map. Sirius is a good deal further off than Neptune; so I try at the edge of the drawing-board; I have got a method of making a little calculation that I do not intend to trouble you with, but I can assure you that the results it leads me to are quite correct; they show me that this board is not big enough. But could a board which was big enough fit into this lecture theatre? No; in fact, the board would have to go out through the wall of the theatre, out through London. Indeed, big as London is, it would not be large enough to contain the drawing-board that I should require. It would have to stretch about twenty miles from where we are now assembled. We may therefore dismiss any hope of making a practical map of our system on this scale if Sirius is to have its proper place.
Let us, then, take some other star. We shall naturally try with the nearest of all. It is one that we do not know in this part of the world, but those that live in the southern hemisphere are well acquainted with it. The name of this star is Alpha Centauri. Even for this star, we should require a drawing three or four miles long if the distance from the earth to the sun is to be taken as one inch.
You see what an isolated position our sun and its planets occupy. The stars might be very troublesome neighbors if they were very much closer to our system; it is therefore well they are so far off. If they were near at hand, they would drag us into unpleasantly great heat by bringing us too close to the sun, or produce a coolness by pulling us away from the sun, which would be quite as disagreeable.
Which of these statements about Alpha Centauri is true?
It cannot be seen in the Northern Hemisphere.
It is the brightest star in the night sky.
It is the biggest star in the night sky.
It is the star farthest from Earth and still observable.
None of the other answers is true.
Answering this question requires you to read carefully in detail and be able to translate what the author means in certain sentences. When discussing Alpha Centauri, the author tells you, “We shall naturally try with the nearest \[star\] of all. It is one that we do not know in this part of the world, but those that live in the southern hemisphere are well acquainted with it. The name of this star is Alpha Centauri.” When the author says “we do not know in this part of the world,” he means we cannot see it in the Northern Hemisphere. This can be confirmed by the fact that the author says that “those . . . in the southern hemisphere are well acquainted with it.”
Adapted from “In Mammoth Cave” by John Burroughs (1894)
Some idea of the impression which Mammoth Cave makes upon the senses, irrespective even of sight, may be had from the fact that blind people go there to see it, and are greatly struck with it. I was assured that this is a fact. The blind seem as much impressed by it as those who have their sight. When the guide pauses at a more interesting point, or lights the scene up with a great torch or with small flares, and points out the more striking features, the blind exclaim, "How wonderful! How beautiful!" They can feel it, if they cannot see it. They get some idea of the spaciousness when words are uttered. The voice goes forth in these colossal chambers like a bird. When no word is spoken, the silence is of a kind never experienced on the surface of the earth, it is so profound and abysmal. This, and the absolute darkness, to a sighted person makes him feel as if he were face to face with the primordial nothingness. The objective universe is gone; only the subjective remains; the sense of hearing is inverted, and reports only the murmurs from within. The blind miss much, but much remains to them. The great cave is not merely a spectacle to the eye; it is a wonder to the ear, a strangeness to the smell and to the touch. The body feels the presence of unusual conditions through every pore.
Which of the following answer choices is supported by the author’s statement that inside Mammoth Cave, “The objective universe is gone”?
The experience of the cave alters perceived reality.
Blind people experience the cave in the same way as people with sight.
The universe is more clearly understood within Mammoth Cave.
Every individual should visit Mammoth Cave.
Sound is the primary sensory experience within the cave.
The author states that in the darkness of the cave, “the objective universe is gone; only the subjective remains; the sense of hearing is inverted, and reports only the murmurs from within.” When the author says that the objective is gone and the subjective remains he means that the experience of the cave causes people to perceive things as they would individually, within the quiet of their own minds, rather than based on observable and generally agreed upon facts and prejudices. The author believes that the experience of the cave alters the perception of those who are undergoing the experience.
Adapted from “The Stars” by Sir Robert S. Ball in Wonders of Earth, Sea, and Sky (1902, ed. Edward Singleton Holden)
The group of bodies that cluster around our sun forms a little island in the extent of infinite space. We may illustrate this by drawing a map in which we shall endeavor to show the stars placed at their proper relative distances.
We first open the compasses one inch, and thus draw a little circle to represent the path of Earth. We are not going to put in all the planets; we take Neptune, the outermost, at once. To draw its path, I open the compasses to thirty inches, and draw a circle with that radius. That will do for our solar system, though the comets no doubt will roam beyond these limits.
To complete our map, we ought to put in some stars. There are a hundred million to choose from, and we shall begin with the brightest. It is often called the Dog Star, but astronomers know it better as Sirius. Let us see where it is to be placed on our map. Sirius is a good deal further off than Neptune; so I try at the edge of the drawing-board; I have got a method of making a little calculation that I do not intend to trouble you with, but I can assure you that the results it leads me to are quite correct; they show me that this board is not big enough. But could a board which was big enough fit into this lecture theatre? No; in fact, the board would have to go out through the wall of the theatre, out through London. Indeed, big as London is, it would not be large enough to contain the drawing-board that I should require. It would have to stretch about twenty miles from where we are now assembled. We may therefore dismiss any hope of making a practical map of our system on this scale if Sirius is to have its proper place.
Let us, then, take some other star. We shall naturally try with the nearest of all. It is one that we do not know in this part of the world, but those that live in the southern hemisphere are well acquainted with it. The name of this star is Alpha Centauri. Even for this star, we should require a drawing three or four miles long if the distance from the earth to the sun is to be taken as one inch.
You see what an isolated position our sun and its planets occupy. The stars might be very troublesome neighbors if they were very much closer to our system; it is therefore well they are so far off. If they were near at hand, they would drag us into unpleasantly great heat by bringing us too close to the sun, or produce a coolness by pulling us away from the sun, which would be quite as disagreeable.
Which of these statements about Alpha Centauri is true?
It cannot be seen in the Northern Hemisphere.
It is the brightest star in the night sky.
It is the biggest star in the night sky.
It is the star farthest from Earth and still observable.
None of the other answers is true.
Answering this question requires you to read carefully in detail and be able to translate what the author means in certain sentences. When discussing Alpha Centauri, the author tells you, “We shall naturally try with the nearest \[star\] of all. It is one that we do not know in this part of the world, but those that live in the southern hemisphere are well acquainted with it. The name of this star is Alpha Centauri.” When the author says “we do not know in this part of the world,” he means we cannot see it in the Northern Hemisphere. This can be confirmed by the fact that the author says that “those . . . in the southern hemisphere are well acquainted with it.”
Adapted from Volume Four of The Natural History of Animals: The Animal Life of the World in Its Various Aspects and Relations by James Richard Ainsworth Davis (1903)
The examples of protective resemblance so far quoted are mostly permanent adaptations to one particular sort of surrounding. There are, however, numerous animals which possess the power of adjusting their color more or less rapidly so as to harmonize with a changing environment.
Some of the best known of these cases are found among those mammals and birds that inhabit countries more or less covered with snow during a part of the year. A good instance is afforded by the Irish or variable hare, which is chiefly found in Ireland and Scotland. In summer, this looks very much like an ordinary hare, though rather grayer in tint and smaller in size, but in winter it becomes white with the exception of the black tips to the ears. Investigations that have been made on the closely allied American hare seem to show that the phenomenon is due to the growth of new hairs of white hue.
The common stoat is subject to similar color change in the northern parts of its range. In summer it is of a bright reddish brown color with the exception of the under parts, which are yellowish white, and the end of the tail, which is black. But in winter, the entire coat, save only the tip of the tail, becomes white, and in that condition the animal is known as an ermine. A similar example is afforded by the weasel. The seasonal change in the vegetarian Irish hare is purely of protective character, but in such an actively carnivorous creature as a stoat or weasel, it is aggressive as well, rendering the animal inconspicuous to its prey.
A stoat might also be called __________.
an ermine, depending on its fur color
a weasel, depending on where it lives
a weasel, depending on its fur color
an ermine, depending on where it lives
a weasel, depending on what it eats
The passage’s last paragraph provides the information we need to answer this question. The paragraph begins by describing “the common stoat.” Eventually, it says, “But in winter, the entire coat, save only the tip of the tail, becomes white, and in that condition the animal is known as an ermine.” While this sentence is followed by “A similar example is afforded by the weasel,” this means that the weasel is another example of an animal that changes its fur color, not that a stoat can be called a weasel. It means that a weasel is a distinct type of animal. The correct answer is that a stoat might also be called “an ermine, depending on its fur color.”
Adapted from Cassell’s Natural History by Francis Martin Duncan (1913)
The penguins are a group of birds inhabiting the southern ocean, for the most part passing their lives in the icy waters of the Antarctic seas. Like the ratitae, penguins have lost the power of flight, but the wings are modified into swimming organs and the birds lead an aquatic existence and are scarcely seen on land except in the breeding season. They are curious-looking creatures that appear to have no legs, as the limbs are encased in the skin of the body and the large flat feet are set so far back that the birds waddle along on land in an upright position in a very ridiculous manner, carrying their long narrow flippers held out as if they were arms. When swimming, penguins use their wings as paddles while the feet are used for steering.
Penguins are usually gregarious—in the sea, they swim together in schools, and on land, assemble in great numbers in their rookeries. They are very methodical in their ways, and on leaving the water, the birds always follow well-defined tracks leading to the rookeries, marching with much solemnity one behind the other in soldierly order.
The largest species of penguins are the king penguin and the emperor penguin, the former being found in Kerguelen Land, the Falklands, and other southern islands, and the latter in Victoria Land and on the pack ice of the Antarctic seas. As they are unaccustomed from the isolation of their haunts to being hunted and persecuted by man, emperor penguins are remarkably fearless, and Antarctic explorers invading their territory have found themselves objects of curiosity rather than fear to the strange birds who followed them about as if they were much astonished at their appearance.
The emperor penguin lays but a single egg and breeds during the intense cold and darkness of the Antarctic winter. To prevent contact with the frozen snow, the bird places its egg upon its flat webbed feet and crouches down upon it so that it is well covered with the feathers. In spite of this precaution, many eggs do not hatch and the mortality amongst the young chicks is very great.
Where do emperor penguins live?
On ice in the Antarctic seas
Kerguelen Land
The Falklands
Northern Canada
Greenland
In its third paragraph, the passage states, “The largest species of penguins are the king penguin and the emperor penguin, the former being found in Kerguelen Land, the Falklands, and other southern islands, and the latter in Victoria Land and on the pack ice of the Antarctic seas.” The phrasing of this might be a bit confusing, so it’s good to pause and work it out. The author is referring to the king penguin when he says “the former,” since he mentions the king penguin first, and he is referring to the emperor penguin when he says “the latter,” since he mentions the emperor penguin second. This means that when the author writes “the latter \[being found\] in Victoria Land and on the pack ice of the Antarctic seas,” he is describing where the emperor penguin lives. This means that “On ice in the Antarctic seas” is the correct answer. “Kerguelen Land” and “the Falklands” are mentioned as places where the king penguin lives, and the passage doesn’t mention Northern Canada or Greenland at all.