Read the passage on the left to answer the following questions: 8) Which sentence best expresses the main idea of this passage?
A)
Pet cloning is an abomination that should not be
undertaken by anyone.
B)
Scientific advances have made it possible for pet
owners to clone their pets.
09
There are many different ways that pet cloning can
go wrong and cause heartache.
D)
Pet cloning, though controversial, is an option that
should be made available to pet owners.
9) Which statement BEST explains the opposing opinions presented in this
article on animal cloning?
A)
Proponents believe animal cloning will make pet
owners happy, and opponents believe it is unnatural.
B)
Proponents believe that any animal can be cloned,
while opponents believe animal cloning is
impossible.
Proponents believe that animal cloning will save all
C) endangered species, while opponents believe cloned
animals will ruin nature.
Proponents believe cloned animals are exact replicas,
D) while opponents believe they are nothing like the
animals from which they were cloned.

8. D)  Pet cloning, though controversial, is an option that  should be made available to pet owners.

9. Proponents believe cloned animals are exact replicas,  while opponents believe they are nothing like the  animals from which they were cloned.

Explanation:

In the article, The Pet Cloning Controversy by Sean Putman, the author shows support for pet cloning. He argued that pet cloning was a useful scientific innovation that would be helpful for both humans and animals. He also strongly promoted the idea that pet owners who have lost their pets can be happy again by getting pets that looked like the lost ones.

Critics and opponents argue that it is not possible to get the exact replicas of lost pets but the author thinks that cloned animals look exactly like the lost pets.

yes as the core issue is an ever increasing majority of human workers   will become permanently unemployed as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines inevitably replace more expensive human workers with each passing year.

economic growth now and in the future requires that fewer jobs are created for human workers. this is the desirable inevitable consequence. the automation of the jobs of human workers is the most profitable economically productive activity on the planet.

so as a global society we need to have a plan to deal with this inevitable change.

automation has been, is and will always be a friend to human society if human society on a global basis is prepared to deal with the inevitable consequences.

what is key is that automation killing all jobs is only a matter of when not if.

the real question is can we get past the now invalid assumption that most humans can work for a decent wage going forward.

i spent my working career increasing automation and increasing efficiency. this consequently reduces the hours worked by humans while increasing the output economic goods and services at an ever decreasing price.

why not have ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines create the vast majority of required economic goods and services as opposed to human workers?

why not have most human workers working less and retiring earlier?

there is much more to life than working forever.

fortunately, automation has been going on for decades and will continue as an irreversible process as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines permanently replace more costly human workers.

i write this answer for the people that have an open mind and are not living in the past this is what i feel most effectively deals with the tractable issues that automation creates.

the question at hand is how we deal with automation going forward as a society.

automation is only a threat because society has yet to acknowledge automation is happening let alone effectively a having a plan to address it.

a conservative libertarian free market idea where individuals choose what economic goods and services are produced in the free market as the free market supply will respond to free market demand. this is not a centrally planned communist economy.

it is yes as the core issue is an ever increasing majority of human workers   will become permanently unemployed as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines inevitably replace more expensive human workers with each passing year.

economic growth now and in the future requires that fewer jobs are created for human workers. this is the desirable inevitable consequence. the automation of the jobs of human workers is the most profitable economically productive activity on the planet.

so as a global society we need to have a plan to deal with this inevitable change.

automation has been, is and will always be a friend to human society if human society on a global basis is prepared to deal with the inevitable consequences.

what is key is that automation killing all jobs is only a matter of when not if.

the real question is can we get past the now invalid assumption that most humans can work for a decent wage going forward.

i spent my working career increasing automation and increasing efficiency. this consequently reduces the hours worked by humans while increasing the output economic goods and services at an ever decreasing price.

why not have ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines create the vast majority of required economic goods and services as opposed to human workers?

why not have most human workers working less and retiring earlier?

there is much more to life than working forever.

fortunately, automation has been going on for decades and will continue as an irreversible process as ever cheaper ever more intelligent automated machines permanently replace more costly human workers.

i write this answer for the people that have an open mind and are not living in the past this is what i feel most effectively deals with the tractable issues that automation creates.

the question at hand is how we deal with automation going forward as a society.

automation is only a threat because society has yet to acknowledge automation is happening let alone effectively a having a plan to address it.

a conservative libertarian free market idea where individuals choose what economic goods and services are produced in the free market as the free market supply will respond to free market demand. this is not a centrally planned communist economy.

hope this