综合写作：
Scientists have recently discovered a sea-dwelling microorganism possessing a structure that appears to be an eye. In several respects, the eye of the microorganism resembles eyes of larger animals, like the human eye. No other microorganism of this type has such an eye, and scientists are not sure how the eye benefits the microorganism. When it was learned that the microorganism has an eye, several theories were put forward to explain its possible purpose.
Following Prey
One theory is that the eye helps the microorganism to follow its prey. These microorganisms feed on other tiny sea life- forms, most of which are transparent. Because the microorganism’s prey is transparent, light passes through the prey’s body and shifts as the prey moves. Some scientists have suggested that the microorganism’s eye allows it to detect those light shifts and pursue its prey.
Sensing Sunlight
Another theory proposes that the eye enables the microorganism to make full use of its ability to get energy from the Sun. In addition to hunting for food, this microorganism gains some of its energy from sunlight, just as plants do. The eye may help the microorganism sense different light levels, enabling it to find a spot where the Sun’s rays are strong so that it can maximize the energy gained from sunlight.
Aiming
A final explanation is that the eye is used for aiming. The microorganism uses a sharp, spear-like body part to stab its prey while hunting for food. Scientists have theorized that the eye allows the microorganism to sense its exact position relative to its prey, allowing the microorganism to have better accuracy when using its spear to stab other tiny life-forms.
学术写作：
Your professor is teaching a class on Economics. Write a post responding to the professor’s question.
In your response, you should do the following:
- Express and support your opinion.
- Make a contribution to the discussion in your own words.
An effective response will contain at least 100 words.
Dr. Achebe
This week, we’ll be discussing solutions to air pollution. In today’s world, excessive consumption and reliance on cars are contributing significantly to this issue. Many economists suggest that the government should increase fuel taxes for cars. By raising the cost of fuel, it’s believed that this could discourage overuse of private vehicles and reduce air pollution. Do you agree with this approach? Should there be higher fuel taxes to prevent or combat air pollution? Why or why not?
Andrew
I believe increasing the fuel tax for cars is a good idea. Cars are a main source of pollution; if the government does this, it could reduce the use of private cars and encourage people to switch to public transportation or other means like cycling. Furthermore, this could significantly decrease air pollution, leading to better public health and a cleaner environment.
Claire
I disagree with increasing the car fuel tax. I feel that adding taxes for economic reasons feels somewhat like punishing the public, who are not directly responsible for this issue. So, increasing the tax would be meaningless. In other words, the solution should address the source of pollution more directly rather than simply making it more expensive for the general public to use their cars.
