Questões aplicadas na prova de 2018, cada uma em página própria com enunciado, alternativas e gabarito.
6.600 questões encontradas. Mostrando a página 308 de 330.
No processo de evolução biológica, ao longo das gerações, ocorrem alterações nas moléculas que contêm carbono. A imagem abaixo ilustra duas espécies de peixes, separadas pelo Istmo do Panamá. Ambas surgiram a partir de uma única população, existente no local antes da elevação geológica da América Central.
O processo evolutivo que deu origem a essas duas espécies é denominado:
Em seu ciclo, um átomo de carbono pode ser incorporado a diferentes compostos por meio de processos contínuos de decomposição e formação de novas moléculas. Os átomos de carbono deste caderno de prova, por exemplo, serão degradados ao longo do tempo e, posteriormente, incorporados a outros seres vivos.
Considere que, ao se degradarem, os átomos de carbono deste caderno se distribuam igualmente entre os 7,5 bilhões de habitantes do planeta.
Sabendo que o caderno possui 90 g de massa, com 45% de carbono em sua composição, o número de átomos que será incorporado em cada habitante é igual a:
Por exemplo, “A busca pela compreensão cósmica” é uma das aulas, na qual apresento a evolução dos modelos que temos do universo. (ℓ. 23-24)
No trecho, a forma verbal sublinhada expressa uma ação que se caracteriza como:
Tempo Rei
Não me iludo
Tudo permanecerá do jeito
Que tem sido
Transcorrendo, transformando
Tempo e espaço navegando todos os sentidos
(...)
Tempo Rei, ó Tempo Rei, ó Tempo Rei
Transformai as velhas formas do viver
Ensinai-me, ó Pai, o que eu ainda não sei
Mãe Senhora do Perpétuo, socorrei
Pensamento, mesmo fundamento singular
Do ser humano, de um momento para o outro
Poderá não mais fundar nem gregos nem baianos
Mães zelosas, pais corujas
Vejam como as águas de repente ficam sujas
Não se iludam, não me iludo
Tudo agora mesmo pode estar por um segundo
Tempo Rei, ó Tempo Rei, ó Tempo Rei
(...)
GILBERTO GIL
letras.com.br
O tempo, além de relacionado aos fenômenos naturais, é também condicionador das vidas humanas.
Na letra da canção de Gilberto Gil, a dimensão do tempo histórico destacada é denominada:
Brazil must legalise drugs – its existing policy just destroys lives
For decades, guns and imprisonment have been the hallmarks of Brazil’s war against the drug trafficking. But the only way to beat the gangs is to stop creating criminals, says a top Brazilian judge
“The war raging in Rocinha, Latin America’s largest favela, has already been lost. Rooted in a dispute between gangs for control of drug trafficking, it has disrupted the daily life of the community in Rio de Janeiro since mid-September. With the sound of shots coming from all sides, schools and shops are constantly forced to close. Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist. The war is not the only thing being lost.
For decades, Brazil has had the same drug policy approach. Police, weapons and numerous arrests. It does not take an expert to conclude the obvious: the strategy has failed. Drug trafficking and consumption have only increased. […]
In a case still before the Brazilian supreme court, I voted for decriminalising the possession of marijuana for private consumption. […]
Drugs are an issue that has a profound impact on the criminal justice system, and it is legitimate for the supreme court to participate in the public debate. So here are the reasons for my views.
First, drugs are bad and it is therefore the role of the state and society to discourage consumption, treat dependents and repress trafficking. The rationale behind legalisation is rooted in the belief that it will help in achieving these goals.
Second, the war on drugs has failed. Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments. The tragic reality is that 40 years, billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of deaths later, things are worse. At least in countries like Brazil.
Third, as the American economist Milton Friedman argued, the only result of criminalisation is ensuring the trafficker’s monopoly.
With these points in mind, what would legalisation achieve?
In most countries in North America and Europe, the greatest concern of the authorities is users and the impact drugs have on their lives and on society. These are all important considerations. In Brazil, however, the principal focus must be ending the dominance drug dealers exercise over poor communities. Gangs have become the main political and economic power in thousands of modest neighbourhoods in Brazil. This scenario prevents a family of honest and hard-working people from educating their children away from the influence of criminal factions, who intimidate, co-opt and exercise an unfair advantage over any lawful activity. Crucially, this power of trafficking comes from illegality.
Another benefit of legalisation would be to prevent the mass incarceration of impoverished young people with no criminal record who are arrested for trafficking because they are caught in possession of negligible amounts of marijuana. A third of detainees in Brazil are imprisoned for drug trafficking. Once arrested, young prisoners will have to join one of the factions that control the penitentiaries – and on that day, they become dangerous.
[…]
We cannot be certain that a progressive and cautious policy of decriminalisation and legalisation will be successful. What we can affirm is that the existing policy of criminalisation has failed. We must take chances; otherwise, we risk simply accepting a terrible situation. As the Brazilian navigator Amyr Klink said: “The worst shipwreck is not setting off at all.”
Disponível em: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/nov/15/brazil-must-legalise-drugs-existing-policy-destroys-lives-luis-roberto-barroso-supreme-court-judge> .
Acesso em: 14 nov. 2017.
Brazil must legalise drugs – its existing policy just destroys lives
For decades, guns and imprisonment have been the hallmarks of Brazil’s war against the drug trafficking. But the only way to beat the gangs is to stop creating criminals, says a top Brazilian judge
“The war raging in Rocinha, Latin America’s largest favela, has already been lost. Rooted in a dispute between gangs for control of drug trafficking, it has disrupted the daily life of the community in Rio de Janeiro since mid-September. With the sound of shots coming from all sides, schools and shops are constantly forced to close. Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist. The war is not the only thing being lost.
For decades, Brazil has had the same drug policy approach. Police, weapons and numerous arrests. It does not take an expert to conclude the obvious: the strategy has failed. Drug trafficking and consumption have only increased. […]
In a case still before the Brazilian supreme court, I voted for decriminalising the possession of marijuana for private consumption. […]
Drugs are an issue that has a profound impact on the criminal justice system, and it is legitimate for the supreme court to participate in the public debate. So here are the reasons for my views.
First, drugs are bad and it is therefore the role of the state and society to discourage consumption, treat dependents and repress trafficking. The rationale behind legalisation is rooted in the belief that it will help in achieving these goals.
Second, the war on drugs has failed. Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments. The tragic reality is that 40 years, billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of deaths later, things are worse. At least in countries like Brazil.
Third, as the American economist Milton Friedman argued, the only result of criminalisation is ensuring the trafficker’s monopoly.
With these points in mind, what would legalisation achieve?
In most countries in North America and Europe, the greatest concern of the authorities is users and the impact drugs have on their lives and on society. These are all important considerations. In Brazil, however, the principal focus must be ending the dominance drug dealers exercise over poor communities. Gangs have become the main political and economic power in thousands of modest neighbourhoods in Brazil. This scenario prevents a family of honest and hard-working people from educating their children away from the influence of criminal factions, who intimidate, co-opt and exercise an unfair advantage over any lawful activity. Crucially, this power of trafficking comes from illegality.
Another benefit of legalisation would be to prevent the mass incarceration of impoverished young people with no criminal record who are arrested for trafficking because they are caught in possession of negligible amounts of marijuana. A third of detainees in Brazil are imprisoned for drug trafficking. Once arrested, young prisoners will have to join one of the factions that control the penitentiaries – and on that day, they become dangerous.
[…]
We cannot be certain that a progressive and cautious policy of decriminalisation and legalisation will be successful. What we can affirm is that the existing policy of criminalisation has failed. We must take chances; otherwise, we risk simply accepting a terrible situation. As the Brazilian navigator Amyr Klink said: “The worst shipwreck is not setting off at all.”
Disponível em: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/nov/15/brazil-must-legalise-drugs-existing-policy-destroys-lives-luis-roberto-barroso-supreme-court-judge> .
Acesso em: 14 nov. 2017.
Brazil must legalise drugs – its existing policy just destroys lives
For decades, guns and imprisonment have been the hallmarks of Brazil’s war against the drug trafficking. But the only way to beat the gangs is to stop creating criminals, says a top Brazilian judge
“The war raging in Rocinha, Latin America’s largest favela, has already been lost. Rooted in a dispute between gangs for control of drug trafficking, it has disrupted the daily life of the community in Rio de Janeiro since mid-September. With the sound of shots coming from all sides, schools and shops are constantly forced to close. Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist. The war is not the only thing being lost.
For decades, Brazil has had the same drug policy approach. Police, weapons and numerous arrests. It does not take an expert to conclude the obvious: the strategy has failed. Drug trafficking and consumption have only increased. […]
In a case still before the Brazilian supreme court, I voted for decriminalising the possession of marijuana for private consumption. […]
Drugs are an issue that has a profound impact on the criminal justice system, and it is legitimate for the supreme court to participate in the public debate. So here are the reasons for my views.
First, drugs are bad and it is therefore the role of the state and society to discourage consumption, treat dependents and repress trafficking. The rationale behind legalisation is rooted in the belief that it will help in achieving these goals.
Second, the war on drugs has failed. Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments. The tragic reality is that 40 years, billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of deaths later, things are worse. At least in countries like Brazil.
Third, as the American economist Milton Friedman argued, the only result of criminalisation is ensuring the trafficker’s monopoly.
With these points in mind, what would legalisation achieve?
In most countries in North America and Europe, the greatest concern of the authorities is users and the impact drugs have on their lives and on society. These are all important considerations. In Brazil, however, the principal focus must be ending the dominance drug dealers exercise over poor communities. Gangs have become the main political and economic power in thousands of modest neighbourhoods in Brazil. This scenario prevents a family of honest and hard-working people from educating their children away from the influence of criminal factions, who intimidate, co-opt and exercise an unfair advantage over any lawful activity. Crucially, this power of trafficking comes from illegality.
Another benefit of legalisation would be to prevent the mass incarceration of impoverished young people with no criminal record who are arrested for trafficking because they are caught in possession of negligible amounts of marijuana. A third of detainees in Brazil are imprisoned for drug trafficking. Once arrested, young prisoners will have to join one of the factions that control the penitentiaries – and on that day, they become dangerous.
[…]
We cannot be certain that a progressive and cautious policy of decriminalisation and legalisation will be successful. What we can affirm is that the existing policy of criminalisation has failed. We must take chances; otherwise, we risk simply accepting a terrible situation. As the Brazilian navigator Amyr Klink said: “The worst shipwreck is not setting off at all.”
Disponível em: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/nov/15/brazil-must-legalise-drugs-existing-policy-destroys-lives-luis-roberto-barroso-supreme-court-judge> .
Acesso em: 14 nov. 2017.
Brazil must legalise drugs – its existing policy just destroys lives
For decades, guns and imprisonment have been the hallmarks of Brazil’s war against the drug trafficking. But the only way to beat the gangs is to stop creating criminals, says a top Brazilian judge
“The war raging in Rocinha, Latin America’s largest favela, has already been lost. Rooted in a dispute between gangs for control of drug trafficking, it has disrupted the daily life of the community in Rio de Janeiro since mid-September. With the sound of shots coming from all sides, schools and shops are constantly forced to close. Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist. The war is not the only thing being lost.
For decades, Brazil has had the same drug policy approach. Police, weapons and numerous arrests. It does not take an expert to conclude the obvious: the strategy has failed. Drug trafficking and consumption have only increased. […]
In a case still before the Brazilian supreme court, I voted for decriminalising the possession of marijuana for private consumption. […]
Drugs are an issue that has a profound impact on the criminal justice system, and it is legitimate for the supreme court to participate in the public debate. So here are the reasons for my views.
First, drugs are bad and it is therefore the role of the state and society to discourage consumption, treat dependents and repress trafficking. The rationale behind legalisation is rooted in the belief that it will help in achieving these goals.
Second, the war on drugs has failed. Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments. The tragic reality is that 40 years, billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of deaths later, things are worse. At least in countries like Brazil.
Third, as the American economist Milton Friedman argued, the only result of criminalisation is ensuring the trafficker’s monopoly.
With these points in mind, what would legalisation achieve?
In most countries in North America and Europe, the greatest concern of the authorities is users and the impact drugs have on their lives and on society. These are all important considerations. In Brazil, however, the principal focus must be ending the dominance drug dealers exercise over poor communities. Gangs have become the main political and economic power in thousands of modest neighbourhoods in Brazil. This scenario prevents a family of honest and hard-working people from educating their children away from the influence of criminal factions, who intimidate, co-opt and exercise an unfair advantage over any lawful activity. Crucially, this power of trafficking comes from illegality.
Another benefit of legalisation would be to prevent the mass incarceration of impoverished young people with no criminal record who are arrested for trafficking because they are caught in possession of negligible amounts of marijuana. A third of detainees in Brazil are imprisoned for drug trafficking. Once arrested, young prisoners will have to join one of the factions that control the penitentiaries – and on that day, they become dangerous.
[…]
We cannot be certain that a progressive and cautious policy of decriminalisation and legalisation will be successful. What we can affirm is that the existing policy of criminalisation has failed. We must take chances; otherwise, we risk simply accepting a terrible situation. As the Brazilian navigator Amyr Klink said: “The worst shipwreck is not setting off at all.”
Disponível em: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/nov/15/brazil-must-legalise-drugs-existing-policy-destroys-lives-luis-roberto-barroso-supreme-court-judge> .
Acesso em: 14 nov. 2017.
Brazil must legalise drugs – its existing policy just destroys lives
For decades, guns and imprisonment have been the hallmarks of Brazil’s war against the drug trafficking. But the only way to beat the gangs is to stop creating criminals, says a top Brazilian judge
“The war raging in Rocinha, Latin America’s largest favela, has already been lost. Rooted in a dispute between gangs for control of drug trafficking, it has disrupted the daily life of the community in Rio de Janeiro since mid-September. With the sound of shots coming from all sides, schools and shops are constantly forced to close. Recently, a stray bullet killed a Spanish tourist. The war is not the only thing being lost.
For decades, Brazil has had the same drug policy approach. Police, weapons and numerous arrests. It does not take an expert to conclude the obvious: the strategy has failed. Drug trafficking and consumption have only increased. […]
In a case still before the Brazilian supreme court, I voted for decriminalising the possession of marijuana for private consumption. […]
Drugs are an issue that has a profound impact on the criminal justice system, and it is legitimate for the supreme court to participate in the public debate. So here are the reasons for my views.
First, drugs are bad and it is therefore the role of the state and society to discourage consumption, treat dependents and repress trafficking. The rationale behind legalisation is rooted in the belief that it will help in achieving these goals.
Second, the war on drugs has failed. Since the 1970s, under the influence and leadership of the US, the world has tackled this problem with the use of police forces, armies, and armaments. The tragic reality is that 40 years, billions of dollars, hundreds of thousands of prisoners and thousands of deaths later, things are worse. At least in countries like Brazil.
Third, as the American economist Milton Friedman argued, the only result of criminalisation is ensuring the trafficker’s monopoly.
With these points in mind, what would legalisation achieve?
In most countries in North America and Europe, the greatest concern of the authorities is users and the impact drugs have on their lives and on society. These are all important considerations. In Brazil, however, the principal focus must be ending the dominance drug dealers exercise over poor communities. Gangs have become the main political and economic power in thousands of modest neighbourhoods in Brazil. This scenario prevents a family of honest and hard-working people from educating their children away from the influence of criminal factions, who intimidate, co-opt and exercise an unfair advantage over any lawful activity. Crucially, this power of trafficking comes from illegality.
Another benefit of legalisation would be to prevent the mass incarceration of impoverished young people with no criminal record who are arrested for trafficking because they are caught in possession of negligible amounts of marijuana. A third of detainees in Brazil are imprisoned for drug trafficking. Once arrested, young prisoners will have to join one of the factions that control the penitentiaries – and on that day, they become dangerous.
[…]
We cannot be certain that a progressive and cautious policy of decriminalisation and legalisation will be successful. What we can affirm is that the existing policy of criminalisation has failed. We must take chances; otherwise, we risk simply accepting a terrible situation. As the Brazilian navigator Amyr Klink said: “The worst shipwreck is not setting off at all.”
Disponível em: <https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/nov/15/brazil-must-legalise-drugs-existing-policy-destroys-lives-luis-roberto-barroso-supreme-court-judge> .
Acesso em: 14 nov. 2017.
A propalada crise climática global atual tem, como uma de suas causas, a emissão de dióxido de carbono (CO²) na atmosfera. A criação de Créditos de Carbono foi umas das supostas saídas encontradas para o problema.
Sobre os Créditos de Carbono, informe se é verdadeiro (V) ou falso (F) o que se afirma a seguir e assinale a alternativa com a sequência correta.
( ) Cada Crédito de Carbono é equivalente a 1T (uma tonelada) de CO² não emitida ou retirada da atmosfera por um País.
( ) Os Créditos de Carbono foram criados, em 1997, no Japão, quando houve a assinatura do Protocolo de Kyoto pelos países que se comprometeram a assinar esse acordo.
( ) Os Estados Unidos, maior emissor de gases poluentes do mundo, lidera a aplicação das políticas definidas no Protocolo de Kyoto.
( ) Créditos de Carbono são certificados negociados como mercadorias nas bolsas de valores.
DESENREDO
Adélia Prado
Grande admiração me causam os navios
e a letra de certas pessoas que esforço por imitar.
Dos meus, só eu conheço o mar.
Conto e reconto, eles dizem “anh”.
E continuam cercando o galinheiro de tela.
Falo da espuma, do tamanho cansativo das águas,
eles nem lembram que tem o Quênia,
nem de leve adivinham que estou pensando em Tanzânia.
Afainosos me mostram o lote: aqui vai ser a cozinha,
logo ali a horta de couve.
Não sei o que fazer com o litoral.
Fazia tarde bonita quando me inseri na janela, entre meus tios,
e vi o homem com a braguilha aberta,
o pé de rosa-doida enjerizado de rosas.
Horas e horas conversamos inconscientemente em português
como se fora esta a única língua do mundo.
Antes e depois da fé eu pergunto cadê os meus que se foram,
porque sou humana, com capricho tampo o restinho de molho na panela.
Saberemos viver uma vida melhor que esta,
quando mesmo chorando é tão bom estarmos juntos?
Sofrer não é em língua nenhuma.
Sofri e sofro em Minas Gerais e na beira do oceano.
Estarreço de estar viva. Ó luar do sertão,
ó matas que não preciso ver pra me perder,
ó cidades grandes, Estados do Brasil que amo como se os tivesse inventado.
Ser brasileiro me determina de modo emocionante
e isto, que posso chamar de destino, sem pecar,
descansa meu bem querer.
Tudo junto é inteligível demais e eu não suporto.
Valha-me noite que me cobre de sono.
O pensamento da morte não se acostuma comigo.
Estremecerei de susto até dormir.
E no entanto é tudo tão pequeno.
Para o desejo do meu coração
o mar é uma gota.
Disponível em: <http://bernardesdemoura.blogspot.com.br/2004/12/adlia-prado.html> . Acesso em: 24 nov. 2017.
Ao ler o poema apresentado, que faz uma leitura do Brasil considerando vários elementos
da paisagem, do território e da formação do País a partir da perspectiva de uma geografia
histórica, é correto afirmar que
“A Espanha, assim como inúmeros outros Estados atualmente constituídos, é um território multinacional, ou seja, é formada por várias nações ou por diversos grupos étnicos regionais com identidade nacional diferenciada àquela do país ao qual pertencem. Nesse sentido, esse território é um dos principais locais do mundo em que há movimentos separatistas, com um forte clamor pela independência local em busca da constituição de um novo país.”
Disponível em: <http://mundoeducacao.bol.uol.com.br/geografia/movimentos-separatistas-na-catalunha.htm> . Acesso em: 23 nov. 2017.
Referente às diversas nacionalidades que coexistem no território estatal da Espanha, assinale a alternativa correta.
“O acidente em Mariana ficou conhecido no Brasil como o maior desastre ambiental da história e deixou 19 pessoas mortas, além de destruir o distrito de Bento Rodrigues, contaminar a Bacia Hidrográfica do Rio Doce e comprometer o abastecimento de água e a produção de alimentos em diversas cidades da região.”
Disponível em: <http://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/geral/noticia/2017-08/juiz-suspende-acao-criminal-contra-mineradoras-por-acidente-em-mariana >. Acesso em: 21 nov. 2017.
Sobre o rompimento da Barragem Fundão em Mariana, é correto afirmar que
