题目内容
一般不发展为肝硬化的肝炎是( )(1990年)
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
肝硬化失代偿期病人的下列检验中，哪项不正确( )(1999年)
50岁，既往体健，查体时发现肝在右季肋2cm，质硬、无压痛，脾可触及，锌浊度试验20单位，ALT正常范围，肝穿刺病理有假小叶形成，应诊断为( )(1997年)
How"s this for a coincidence Charles Darwin and Abraham Lincoln were born in the same year, on the same day: Feb. 12, 1809. Although people hardly think of them in tandem, yet instinctively, we want to say that they belong together. It"s not just because they were both great men, and not because they happen to be exact contemporaries. Rather, it"s because the scientist and the politician each touched off a revolution that changed the world. They were both revolutionaries in the sense that both men upended realities that prevailed when they were born. They seem—and sound—modern to us, because the world they left behind them is more or less the one we still live in. So, considering the joint greatness of their contributions—and the coincidence of their conjoined birthdays—it is hard not to wonder: who was the greater man It"s an apples-and-oranges—or Superman-vs.-Santa—comparison. But if you limit the question to influence, very quickly the balance tips in Lincoln"s favor. As great as his book on evolution is, it does no harm to remember that Darwin hurried to publish The Origin of Species because he thought he was about to be scooped by his fellow naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace. In other words, there was a certain inevitability to Darwin"s theory. Ideas about evolution surfaced throughout the first part of the 19th century, and while none of them was as convincing as Darwin"s—until Wallace came along—it was not as though he was the only man who had the idea. Lincoln, in contrast, is unique. Take him out of the picture, and there is no telling what might have happened to the country. True, his election to the presidency did provoke secession and, in turn, the war itself, but that war seems inevitable—not a question of if but when. Once in office, he becomes the indispensable man. Certainly we know what happened once he was assassinated: Reconstruction was ad-ministered punitively and then abandoned, leaving the issue of racial equality to dangle for another century. If Darwin were not so irreplaceable as Lincoln, that should not negate his accomplishment. No one could have formulated his theory any more elegantly. Their identical birthdays afford us a superb opportunity to observe these men in the shared context of their time—how each was shaped by his circumstances, how each reacted to the beliefs that steered the world into which he was bom and ultimately how each reshaped his corner of that world and left it irrevocably changed. Lincoln"s contribution to the world can be best described as
How"s this for a coincidence Charles Darwin and Abraham Lincoln were born in the same year, on the same day: Feb. 12, 1809. Although people hardly think of them in tandem, yet instinctively, we want to say that they belong together. It"s not just because they were both great men, and not because they happen to be exact contemporaries. Rather, it"s because the scientist and the politician each touched off a revolution that changed the world. They were both revolutionaries in the sense that both men upended realities that prevailed when they were born. They seem—and sound—modern to us, because the world they left behind them is more or less the one we still live in. So, considering the joint greatness of their contributions—and the coincidence of their conjoined birthdays—it is hard not to wonder: who was the greater man It"s an apples-and-oranges—or Superman-vs.-Santa—comparison. But if you limit the question to influence, very quickly the balance tips in Lincoln"s favor. As great as his book on evolution is, it does no harm to remember that Darwin hurried to publish The Origin of Species because he thought he was about to be scooped by his fellow naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace. In other words, there was a certain inevitability to Darwin"s theory. Ideas about evolution surfaced throughout the first part of the 19th century, and while none of them was as convincing as Darwin"s—until Wallace came along—it was not as though he was the only man who had the idea. Lincoln, in contrast, is unique. Take him out of the picture, and there is no telling what might have happened to the country. True, his election to the presidency did provoke secession and, in turn, the war itself, but that war seems inevitable—not a question of if but when. Once in office, he becomes the indispensable man. Certainly we know what happened once he was assassinated: Reconstruction was ad-ministered punitively and then abandoned, leaving the issue of racial equality to dangle for another century. If Darwin were not so irreplaceable as Lincoln, that should not negate his accomplishment. No one could have formulated his theory any more elegantly. Their identical birthdays afford us a superb opportunity to observe these men in the shared context of their time—how each was shaped by his circumstances, how each reacted to the beliefs that steered the world into which he was bom and ultimately how each reshaped his corner of that world and left it irrevocably changed. Which of the following is true of the text
微信支付 
支付宝支付