gaussalgo/Canard_Wiki-augmented huggingface dataset:
Good Charlotte

Context: Good Charlotte's third album, The Chronicles of Life and Death, was released by Epic Records in 2004. The album received mixed reactions from both the music press and Good Charlotte's fan base. The album sold 2.2 million copies. The album has been widely considered a departure from the band's previous two albums, mixing new elements such as lyrical topics into Good Charlotte's youthful sound. Singles released from the album include the two hits "Predictable" and "I Just Wanna Live", as well as "The Chronicles of Life and Death" and "We Believe". The only single from The Chronicles of Life and Death which managed to chart on the U.S. Hot 100 was the hit "I Just Wanna Live". All of the singles released from the album went top 30 in the UK, except for "We Believe". The band would then go on tour with Sum 41.  In May 2005, after much speculation from fans, it was officially confirmed that Chris Wilson had left the band citing personal health reasons. Benji also told Kerrang! magazine that, for him, "Chris leaving the band was the worst part of 2005." Chris then joined the pop/punk band The Summer Obsession until 2011. He currently plays drums for JMSN.  On Good Charlotte's "Noise to the World" Tour, performing with Simple Plan and Relient K, the band recruited Dean Butterworth (who had previously played for Morrissey) as the band's temporary drummer. Later, in March 2007, Butterworth was confirmed as the band's permanent drummer.  Benji Madden has claimed in interviews that he feels this record was not as successful as the previous record due to it being "too selfish." CANNOTANSWER

Question: Was Chris Wilson replaced in the band Good Charlotte?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
Good Charlotte

Context: Good Charlotte's third album, The Chronicles of Life and Death, was released by Epic Records in 2004. The album received mixed reactions from both the music press and Good Charlotte's fan base. The album sold 2.2 million copies. The album has been widely considered a departure from the band's previous two albums, mixing new elements such as lyrical topics into Good Charlotte's youthful sound. Singles released from the album include the two hits "Predictable" and "I Just Wanna Live", as well as "The Chronicles of Life and Death" and "We Believe". The only single from The Chronicles of Life and Death which managed to chart on the U.S. Hot 100 was the hit "I Just Wanna Live". All of the singles released from the album went top 30 in the UK, except for "We Believe". The band would then go on tour with Sum 41.  In May 2005, after much speculation from fans, it was officially confirmed that Chris Wilson had left the band citing personal health reasons. Benji also told Kerrang! magazine that, for him, "Chris leaving the band was the worst part of 2005." Chris then joined the pop/punk band The Summer Obsession until 2011. He currently plays drums for JMSN.  On Good Charlotte's "Noise to the World" Tour, performing with Simple Plan and Relient K, the band recruited Dean Butterworth (who had previously played for Morrissey) as the band's temporary drummer. Later, in March 2007, Butterworth was confirmed as the band's permanent drummer.  Benji Madden has claimed in interviews that he feels this record was not as successful as the previous record due to it being "too selfish." CANNOTANSWER

Question: What happened to the band Good Charlotte in 2007?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
Hardy Rodenstock

Context: In 2005, U.S. art and wine collector Bill Koch, who had bought some of the bottles attributed to Thomas Jefferson, prepared to exhibit items from his collection at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, including the Jefferson bottles. The museum asked for provenance of the items to be displayed. Koch had bought four bottles in 1988, Chateau Lafite and Branne-Mouton (present-day Chateau Mouton-Rothschild) of the 1784 and 1787 vintages, at a U.S. wine auction house (Chicago Wine Company) and a UK rare wine dealer (Farr Vintners), and paid a total of about 500,000 U.S. dollars for them. When Koch's staff couldn't find anything except Michael Broadbent's authentification of the bottles to confirm their provenance, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation at Monticello, Charlottesville, Virginia was contacted. The foundation's curator replied that based on Jefferson's records, the foundation didn't think that the bottles had been in the possession of Thomas Jefferson. Inquiries at Chicago Wine Company and Farr Vintners came up with the result that all four of Koch's bottles originated with Rodenstock.  After initial attempts at contacts with Rodenstock gave no significant results, Koch hired a retired Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent to form a team to start private investigations into Rodenstock's sales of wine. David Molyneux-Berry, former head of Sotheby's wine department was hired as a consultant, and several forensic investigations were conducted on the wines, bottles, and engravings; Koch alleges that the engravings were made with an electric power tool, which would not have been possible in the eighteenth century and would indicate modern forgery.  On August 31, 2006, Koch filed a civil lawsuit against Rodenstock (a.k.a. Gorke) in a New York federal court, claiming that he had been the victim of fraud. The reason that Rodenstock personally was named as defendant, rather than Chicago Wine Company or Farr Vintners, was that Koch claimed that Rodenstock had orchestrated an ongoing scheme to defraud wine collectors. Koch's lawsuit included many results from his team's forensic investigations. This lawsuit was then the subject of many legal turns during 2007 and 2008, primarily focused on procedural and statutory issues. A default judgment was entered against Rodenstock in May 2010. Rodenstock refused to participate in the trial. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did Hardy Rodenstock own any wine from TJ's vineyard?
Answer: In 2005, U.S. art and wine collector Bill Koch, who had bought some of the bottles attributed to Thomas Jefferson,
Hardy Rodenstock

Context: In 2005, U.S. art and wine collector Bill Koch, who had bought some of the bottles attributed to Thomas Jefferson, prepared to exhibit items from his collection at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, including the Jefferson bottles. The museum asked for provenance of the items to be displayed. Koch had bought four bottles in 1988, Chateau Lafite and Branne-Mouton (present-day Chateau Mouton-Rothschild) of the 1784 and 1787 vintages, at a U.S. wine auction house (Chicago Wine Company) and a UK rare wine dealer (Farr Vintners), and paid a total of about 500,000 U.S. dollars for them. When Koch's staff couldn't find anything except Michael Broadbent's authentification of the bottles to confirm their provenance, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation at Monticello, Charlottesville, Virginia was contacted. The foundation's curator replied that based on Jefferson's records, the foundation didn't think that the bottles had been in the possession of Thomas Jefferson. Inquiries at Chicago Wine Company and Farr Vintners came up with the result that all four of Koch's bottles originated with Rodenstock.  After initial attempts at contacts with Rodenstock gave no significant results, Koch hired a retired Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent to form a team to start private investigations into Rodenstock's sales of wine. David Molyneux-Berry, former head of Sotheby's wine department was hired as a consultant, and several forensic investigations were conducted on the wines, bottles, and engravings; Koch alleges that the engravings were made with an electric power tool, which would not have been possible in the eighteenth century and would indicate modern forgery.  On August 31, 2006, Koch filed a civil lawsuit against Rodenstock (a.k.a. Gorke) in a New York federal court, claiming that he had been the victim of fraud. The reason that Rodenstock personally was named as defendant, rather than Chicago Wine Company or Farr Vintners, was that Koch claimed that Rodenstock had orchestrated an ongoing scheme to defraud wine collectors. Koch's lawsuit included many results from his team's forensic investigations. This lawsuit was then the subject of many legal turns during 2007 and 2008, primarily focused on procedural and statutory issues. A default judgment was entered against Rodenstock in May 2010. Rodenstock refused to participate in the trial. CANNOTANSWER

Question: How does Thomas Jefferson bottles, all relate to Hardy Rodenstock?
Answer: Inquiries at Chicago Wine Company and Farr Vintners came up with the result that all four of Koch's bottles originated with Rodenstock.
Hardy Rodenstock

Context: In 2005, U.S. art and wine collector Bill Koch, who had bought some of the bottles attributed to Thomas Jefferson, prepared to exhibit items from his collection at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, including the Jefferson bottles. The museum asked for provenance of the items to be displayed. Koch had bought four bottles in 1988, Chateau Lafite and Branne-Mouton (present-day Chateau Mouton-Rothschild) of the 1784 and 1787 vintages, at a U.S. wine auction house (Chicago Wine Company) and a UK rare wine dealer (Farr Vintners), and paid a total of about 500,000 U.S. dollars for them. When Koch's staff couldn't find anything except Michael Broadbent's authentification of the bottles to confirm their provenance, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation at Monticello, Charlottesville, Virginia was contacted. The foundation's curator replied that based on Jefferson's records, the foundation didn't think that the bottles had been in the possession of Thomas Jefferson. Inquiries at Chicago Wine Company and Farr Vintners came up with the result that all four of Koch's bottles originated with Rodenstock.  After initial attempts at contacts with Rodenstock gave no significant results, Koch hired a retired Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent to form a team to start private investigations into Rodenstock's sales of wine. David Molyneux-Berry, former head of Sotheby's wine department was hired as a consultant, and several forensic investigations were conducted on the wines, bottles, and engravings; Koch alleges that the engravings were made with an electric power tool, which would not have been possible in the eighteenth century and would indicate modern forgery.  On August 31, 2006, Koch filed a civil lawsuit against Rodenstock (a.k.a. Gorke) in a New York federal court, claiming that he had been the victim of fraud. The reason that Rodenstock personally was named as defendant, rather than Chicago Wine Company or Farr Vintners, was that Koch claimed that Rodenstock had orchestrated an ongoing scheme to defraud wine collectors. Koch's lawsuit included many results from his team's forensic investigations. This lawsuit was then the subject of many legal turns during 2007 and 2008, primarily focused on procedural and statutory issues. A default judgment was entered against Rodenstock in May 2010. Rodenstock refused to participate in the trial. CANNOTANSWER

Question: So Hardy Rodenstock sold Thomas Jefferson bottles to Bill Koch For how much?
Answer: a U.S. wine auction house (Chicago Wine Company) and a UK rare wine dealer (Farr Vintners), and paid a total of about 500,000 U.S. dollars for them.
Hardy Rodenstock

Context: In 2005, U.S. art and wine collector Bill Koch, who had bought some of the bottles attributed to Thomas Jefferson, prepared to exhibit items from his collection at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, including the Jefferson bottles. The museum asked for provenance of the items to be displayed. Koch had bought four bottles in 1988, Chateau Lafite and Branne-Mouton (present-day Chateau Mouton-Rothschild) of the 1784 and 1787 vintages, at a U.S. wine auction house (Chicago Wine Company) and a UK rare wine dealer (Farr Vintners), and paid a total of about 500,000 U.S. dollars for them. When Koch's staff couldn't find anything except Michael Broadbent's authentification of the bottles to confirm their provenance, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation at Monticello, Charlottesville, Virginia was contacted. The foundation's curator replied that based on Jefferson's records, the foundation didn't think that the bottles had been in the possession of Thomas Jefferson. Inquiries at Chicago Wine Company and Farr Vintners came up with the result that all four of Koch's bottles originated with Rodenstock.  After initial attempts at contacts with Rodenstock gave no significant results, Koch hired a retired Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent to form a team to start private investigations into Rodenstock's sales of wine. David Molyneux-Berry, former head of Sotheby's wine department was hired as a consultant, and several forensic investigations were conducted on the wines, bottles, and engravings; Koch alleges that the engravings were made with an electric power tool, which would not have been possible in the eighteenth century and would indicate modern forgery.  On August 31, 2006, Koch filed a civil lawsuit against Rodenstock (a.k.a. Gorke) in a New York federal court, claiming that he had been the victim of fraud. The reason that Rodenstock personally was named as defendant, rather than Chicago Wine Company or Farr Vintners, was that Koch claimed that Rodenstock had orchestrated an ongoing scheme to defraud wine collectors. Koch's lawsuit included many results from his team's forensic investigations. This lawsuit was then the subject of many legal turns during 2007 and 2008, primarily focused on procedural and statutory issues. A default judgment was entered against Rodenstock in May 2010. Rodenstock refused to participate in the trial. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Were the Thomas Jefferson bottles altered ?
Answer: Koch hired a retired Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent to form a team to start private investigations into Rodenstock's sales of wine.
Hardy Rodenstock

Context: In 2005, U.S. art and wine collector Bill Koch, who had bought some of the bottles attributed to Thomas Jefferson, prepared to exhibit items from his collection at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, including the Jefferson bottles. The museum asked for provenance of the items to be displayed. Koch had bought four bottles in 1988, Chateau Lafite and Branne-Mouton (present-day Chateau Mouton-Rothschild) of the 1784 and 1787 vintages, at a U.S. wine auction house (Chicago Wine Company) and a UK rare wine dealer (Farr Vintners), and paid a total of about 500,000 U.S. dollars for them. When Koch's staff couldn't find anything except Michael Broadbent's authentification of the bottles to confirm their provenance, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation at Monticello, Charlottesville, Virginia was contacted. The foundation's curator replied that based on Jefferson's records, the foundation didn't think that the bottles had been in the possession of Thomas Jefferson. Inquiries at Chicago Wine Company and Farr Vintners came up with the result that all four of Koch's bottles originated with Rodenstock.  After initial attempts at contacts with Rodenstock gave no significant results, Koch hired a retired Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent to form a team to start private investigations into Rodenstock's sales of wine. David Molyneux-Berry, former head of Sotheby's wine department was hired as a consultant, and several forensic investigations were conducted on the wines, bottles, and engravings; Koch alleges that the engravings were made with an electric power tool, which would not have been possible in the eighteenth century and would indicate modern forgery.  On August 31, 2006, Koch filed a civil lawsuit against Rodenstock (a.k.a. Gorke) in a New York federal court, claiming that he had been the victim of fraud. The reason that Rodenstock personally was named as defendant, rather than Chicago Wine Company or Farr Vintners, was that Koch claimed that Rodenstock had orchestrated an ongoing scheme to defraud wine collectors. Koch's lawsuit included many results from his team's forensic investigations. This lawsuit was then the subject of many legal turns during 2007 and 2008, primarily focused on procedural and statutory issues. A default judgment was entered against Rodenstock in May 2010. Rodenstock refused to participate in the trial. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What did the FBI team find?
Answer: Koch alleges that the engravings were made with an electric power tool, which would not have been possible in the eighteenth century and would indicate modern forgery.
Hardy Rodenstock

Context: In 2005, U.S. art and wine collector Bill Koch, who had bought some of the bottles attributed to Thomas Jefferson, prepared to exhibit items from his collection at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, including the Jefferson bottles. The museum asked for provenance of the items to be displayed. Koch had bought four bottles in 1988, Chateau Lafite and Branne-Mouton (present-day Chateau Mouton-Rothschild) of the 1784 and 1787 vintages, at a U.S. wine auction house (Chicago Wine Company) and a UK rare wine dealer (Farr Vintners), and paid a total of about 500,000 U.S. dollars for them. When Koch's staff couldn't find anything except Michael Broadbent's authentification of the bottles to confirm their provenance, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation at Monticello, Charlottesville, Virginia was contacted. The foundation's curator replied that based on Jefferson's records, the foundation didn't think that the bottles had been in the possession of Thomas Jefferson. Inquiries at Chicago Wine Company and Farr Vintners came up with the result that all four of Koch's bottles originated with Rodenstock.  After initial attempts at contacts with Rodenstock gave no significant results, Koch hired a retired Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent to form a team to start private investigations into Rodenstock's sales of wine. David Molyneux-Berry, former head of Sotheby's wine department was hired as a consultant, and several forensic investigations were conducted on the wines, bottles, and engravings; Koch alleges that the engravings were made with an electric power tool, which would not have been possible in the eighteenth century and would indicate modern forgery.  On August 31, 2006, Koch filed a civil lawsuit against Rodenstock (a.k.a. Gorke) in a New York federal court, claiming that he had been the victim of fraud. The reason that Rodenstock personally was named as defendant, rather than Chicago Wine Company or Farr Vintners, was that Koch claimed that Rodenstock had orchestrated an ongoing scheme to defraud wine collectors. Koch's lawsuit included many results from his team's forensic investigations. This lawsuit was then the subject of many legal turns during 2007 and 2008, primarily focused on procedural and statutory issues. A default judgment was entered against Rodenstock in May 2010. Rodenstock refused to participate in the trial. CANNOTANSWER

Question: When was private investigation launched?
Answer: On August 31, 2006, Koch filed a civil lawsuit against Rodenstock (a.k.a. Gorke) in a New York federal court,
Hardy Rodenstock

Context: In 2005, U.S. art and wine collector Bill Koch, who had bought some of the bottles attributed to Thomas Jefferson, prepared to exhibit items from his collection at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, including the Jefferson bottles. The museum asked for provenance of the items to be displayed. Koch had bought four bottles in 1988, Chateau Lafite and Branne-Mouton (present-day Chateau Mouton-Rothschild) of the 1784 and 1787 vintages, at a U.S. wine auction house (Chicago Wine Company) and a UK rare wine dealer (Farr Vintners), and paid a total of about 500,000 U.S. dollars for them. When Koch's staff couldn't find anything except Michael Broadbent's authentification of the bottles to confirm their provenance, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation at Monticello, Charlottesville, Virginia was contacted. The foundation's curator replied that based on Jefferson's records, the foundation didn't think that the bottles had been in the possession of Thomas Jefferson. Inquiries at Chicago Wine Company and Farr Vintners came up with the result that all four of Koch's bottles originated with Rodenstock.  After initial attempts at contacts with Rodenstock gave no significant results, Koch hired a retired Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent to form a team to start private investigations into Rodenstock's sales of wine. David Molyneux-Berry, former head of Sotheby's wine department was hired as a consultant, and several forensic investigations were conducted on the wines, bottles, and engravings; Koch alleges that the engravings were made with an electric power tool, which would not have been possible in the eighteenth century and would indicate modern forgery.  On August 31, 2006, Koch filed a civil lawsuit against Rodenstock (a.k.a. Gorke) in a New York federal court, claiming that he had been the victim of fraud. The reason that Rodenstock personally was named as defendant, rather than Chicago Wine Company or Farr Vintners, was that Koch claimed that Rodenstock had orchestrated an ongoing scheme to defraud wine collectors. Koch's lawsuit included many results from his team's forensic investigations. This lawsuit was then the subject of many legal turns during 2007 and 2008, primarily focused on procedural and statutory issues. A default judgment was entered against Rodenstock in May 2010. Rodenstock refused to participate in the trial. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did the FBI confirm Bill Koch's allegations?
Answer: Koch's lawsuit included many results from his team's forensic investigations. This lawsuit was then the subject of many legal turns during 2007 and 2008,
Hardy Rodenstock

Context: In 2005, U.S. art and wine collector Bill Koch, who had bought some of the bottles attributed to Thomas Jefferson, prepared to exhibit items from his collection at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, including the Jefferson bottles. The museum asked for provenance of the items to be displayed. Koch had bought four bottles in 1988, Chateau Lafite and Branne-Mouton (present-day Chateau Mouton-Rothschild) of the 1784 and 1787 vintages, at a U.S. wine auction house (Chicago Wine Company) and a UK rare wine dealer (Farr Vintners), and paid a total of about 500,000 U.S. dollars for them. When Koch's staff couldn't find anything except Michael Broadbent's authentification of the bottles to confirm their provenance, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation at Monticello, Charlottesville, Virginia was contacted. The foundation's curator replied that based on Jefferson's records, the foundation didn't think that the bottles had been in the possession of Thomas Jefferson. Inquiries at Chicago Wine Company and Farr Vintners came up with the result that all four of Koch's bottles originated with Rodenstock.  After initial attempts at contacts with Rodenstock gave no significant results, Koch hired a retired Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent to form a team to start private investigations into Rodenstock's sales of wine. David Molyneux-Berry, former head of Sotheby's wine department was hired as a consultant, and several forensic investigations were conducted on the wines, bottles, and engravings; Koch alleges that the engravings were made with an electric power tool, which would not have been possible in the eighteenth century and would indicate modern forgery.  On August 31, 2006, Koch filed a civil lawsuit against Rodenstock (a.k.a. Gorke) in a New York federal court, claiming that he had been the victim of fraud. The reason that Rodenstock personally was named as defendant, rather than Chicago Wine Company or Farr Vintners, was that Koch claimed that Rodenstock had orchestrated an ongoing scheme to defraud wine collectors. Koch's lawsuit included many results from his team's forensic investigations. This lawsuit was then the subject of many legal turns during 2007 and 2008, primarily focused on procedural and statutory issues. A default judgment was entered against Rodenstock in May 2010. Rodenstock refused to participate in the trial. CANNOTANSWER

Question: How did the FBI case end?
Answer: A default judgment was entered against Rodenstock in May 2010. Rodenstock refused to participate in the trial.
Hardy Rodenstock

Context: In 2005, U.S. art and wine collector Bill Koch, who had bought some of the bottles attributed to Thomas Jefferson, prepared to exhibit items from his collection at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, including the Jefferson bottles. The museum asked for provenance of the items to be displayed. Koch had bought four bottles in 1988, Chateau Lafite and Branne-Mouton (present-day Chateau Mouton-Rothschild) of the 1784 and 1787 vintages, at a U.S. wine auction house (Chicago Wine Company) and a UK rare wine dealer (Farr Vintners), and paid a total of about 500,000 U.S. dollars for them. When Koch's staff couldn't find anything except Michael Broadbent's authentification of the bottles to confirm their provenance, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation at Monticello, Charlottesville, Virginia was contacted. The foundation's curator replied that based on Jefferson's records, the foundation didn't think that the bottles had been in the possession of Thomas Jefferson. Inquiries at Chicago Wine Company and Farr Vintners came up with the result that all four of Koch's bottles originated with Rodenstock.  After initial attempts at contacts with Rodenstock gave no significant results, Koch hired a retired Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent to form a team to start private investigations into Rodenstock's sales of wine. David Molyneux-Berry, former head of Sotheby's wine department was hired as a consultant, and several forensic investigations were conducted on the wines, bottles, and engravings; Koch alleges that the engravings were made with an electric power tool, which would not have been possible in the eighteenth century and would indicate modern forgery.  On August 31, 2006, Koch filed a civil lawsuit against Rodenstock (a.k.a. Gorke) in a New York federal court, claiming that he had been the victim of fraud. The reason that Rodenstock personally was named as defendant, rather than Chicago Wine Company or Farr Vintners, was that Koch claimed that Rodenstock had orchestrated an ongoing scheme to defraud wine collectors. Koch's lawsuit included many results from his team's forensic investigations. This lawsuit was then the subject of many legal turns during 2007 and 2008, primarily focused on procedural and statutory issues. A default judgment was entered against Rodenstock in May 2010. Rodenstock refused to participate in the trial. CANNOTANSWER

Question: How much was the default judgement entered against Hardy Rodenstock for?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
Hardy Rodenstock

Context: In 2005, U.S. art and wine collector Bill Koch, who had bought some of the bottles attributed to Thomas Jefferson, prepared to exhibit items from his collection at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, including the Jefferson bottles. The museum asked for provenance of the items to be displayed. Koch had bought four bottles in 1988, Chateau Lafite and Branne-Mouton (present-day Chateau Mouton-Rothschild) of the 1784 and 1787 vintages, at a U.S. wine auction house (Chicago Wine Company) and a UK rare wine dealer (Farr Vintners), and paid a total of about 500,000 U.S. dollars for them. When Koch's staff couldn't find anything except Michael Broadbent's authentification of the bottles to confirm their provenance, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation at Monticello, Charlottesville, Virginia was contacted. The foundation's curator replied that based on Jefferson's records, the foundation didn't think that the bottles had been in the possession of Thomas Jefferson. Inquiries at Chicago Wine Company and Farr Vintners came up with the result that all four of Koch's bottles originated with Rodenstock.  After initial attempts at contacts with Rodenstock gave no significant results, Koch hired a retired Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent to form a team to start private investigations into Rodenstock's sales of wine. David Molyneux-Berry, former head of Sotheby's wine department was hired as a consultant, and several forensic investigations were conducted on the wines, bottles, and engravings; Koch alleges that the engravings were made with an electric power tool, which would not have been possible in the eighteenth century and would indicate modern forgery.  On August 31, 2006, Koch filed a civil lawsuit against Rodenstock (a.k.a. Gorke) in a New York federal court, claiming that he had been the victim of fraud. The reason that Rodenstock personally was named as defendant, rather than Chicago Wine Company or Farr Vintners, was that Koch claimed that Rodenstock had orchestrated an ongoing scheme to defraud wine collectors. Koch's lawsuit included many results from his team's forensic investigations. This lawsuit was then the subject of many legal turns during 2007 and 2008, primarily focused on procedural and statutory issues. A default judgment was entered against Rodenstock in May 2010. Rodenstock refused to participate in the trial. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Besides the default judgement against Hardy Rodenstock, Are there any other interesting aspects about this article?
Answer: David Molyneux-Berry, former head of Sotheby's wine department was hired as a consultant, and several forensic investigations were conducted on the wines, bottles,
Hardy Rodenstock

Context: In 2005, U.S. art and wine collector Bill Koch, who had bought some of the bottles attributed to Thomas Jefferson, prepared to exhibit items from his collection at the Boston Museum of Fine Arts, including the Jefferson bottles. The museum asked for provenance of the items to be displayed. Koch had bought four bottles in 1988, Chateau Lafite and Branne-Mouton (present-day Chateau Mouton-Rothschild) of the 1784 and 1787 vintages, at a U.S. wine auction house (Chicago Wine Company) and a UK rare wine dealer (Farr Vintners), and paid a total of about 500,000 U.S. dollars for them. When Koch's staff couldn't find anything except Michael Broadbent's authentification of the bottles to confirm their provenance, the Thomas Jefferson Foundation at Monticello, Charlottesville, Virginia was contacted. The foundation's curator replied that based on Jefferson's records, the foundation didn't think that the bottles had been in the possession of Thomas Jefferson. Inquiries at Chicago Wine Company and Farr Vintners came up with the result that all four of Koch's bottles originated with Rodenstock.  After initial attempts at contacts with Rodenstock gave no significant results, Koch hired a retired Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agent to form a team to start private investigations into Rodenstock's sales of wine. David Molyneux-Berry, former head of Sotheby's wine department was hired as a consultant, and several forensic investigations were conducted on the wines, bottles, and engravings; Koch alleges that the engravings were made with an electric power tool, which would not have been possible in the eighteenth century and would indicate modern forgery.  On August 31, 2006, Koch filed a civil lawsuit against Rodenstock (a.k.a. Gorke) in a New York federal court, claiming that he had been the victim of fraud. The reason that Rodenstock personally was named as defendant, rather than Chicago Wine Company or Farr Vintners, was that Koch claimed that Rodenstock had orchestrated an ongoing scheme to defraud wine collectors. Koch's lawsuit included many results from his team's forensic investigations. This lawsuit was then the subject of many legal turns during 2007 and 2008, primarily focused on procedural and statutory issues. A default judgment was entered against Rodenstock in May 2010. Rodenstock refused to participate in the trial. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Besides Hardy Rodenstock's sale of wine, what other things were investigated?
Answer: Koch alleges that the engravings were made with an electric power tool, which would not have been possible in the eighteenth century and would indicate modern forgery.
Chauncey Billups

Context: In 2006, Billups was selected to play in the 2006 NBA All-Star Game as a reserve for the Eastern Conference, along with former teammates Richard Hamilton, Rasheed Wallace and Ben Wallace. Pistons head coach Flip Saunders coached the Eastern Conference squad and put all four Pistons in the game when the east was falling behind; they were able to get the Eastern All-Star team back in the game. During the 2006 NBA All-Star Weekend, Billups participated in the Three-point Shootout contest. He was eliminated in the first round of the contest after scoring 12 points. Billups called this moment when all four Pistons entered the game at the same time, one of the highlight moments of his career.  In the 2007 NBA All-Star Game, Billups was chosen as a reserve, along with teammate Richard Hamilton, for the Eastern Conference, despite an injury that kept Billups out of five games early on in the season. Billups also took part in the Shooting Stars Competition alongside former Piston and Detroit Shock head coach Bill Laimbeer and Shock star Swin Cash. Team Detroit won the competition with Billups hitting the final half-court shot.  Billups was selected to play as a reserve in the 2008 NBA All-Star Game, along with teammates Richard Hamilton and Rasheed Wallace, an injury replacement. Billups was the only Nugget to be selected to the 2009 NBA All-Star Game.  Billups was chosen as the replacement by David Stern for injured New Orleans Hornets point guard Chris Paul at the 2010 NBA All-Star Game. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What appearances did Chauncey Billups make?
Answer: In 2006, Billups was selected to play in the 2006 NBA All-Star Game as a reserve for the Eastern Conference, along with
Chauncey Billups

Context: In 2006, Billups was selected to play in the 2006 NBA All-Star Game as a reserve for the Eastern Conference, along with former teammates Richard Hamilton, Rasheed Wallace and Ben Wallace. Pistons head coach Flip Saunders coached the Eastern Conference squad and put all four Pistons in the game when the east was falling behind; they were able to get the Eastern All-Star team back in the game. During the 2006 NBA All-Star Weekend, Billups participated in the Three-point Shootout contest. He was eliminated in the first round of the contest after scoring 12 points. Billups called this moment when all four Pistons entered the game at the same time, one of the highlight moments of his career.  In the 2007 NBA All-Star Game, Billups was chosen as a reserve, along with teammate Richard Hamilton, for the Eastern Conference, despite an injury that kept Billups out of five games early on in the season. Billups also took part in the Shooting Stars Competition alongside former Piston and Detroit Shock head coach Bill Laimbeer and Shock star Swin Cash. Team Detroit won the competition with Billups hitting the final half-court shot.  Billups was selected to play as a reserve in the 2008 NBA All-Star Game, along with teammates Richard Hamilton and Rasheed Wallace, an injury replacement. Billups was the only Nugget to be selected to the 2009 NBA All-Star Game.  Billups was chosen as the replacement by David Stern for injured New Orleans Hornets point guard Chris Paul at the 2010 NBA All-Star Game. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Who else was selected to play with Chauncey Billups other than Billups?
Answer: along with former teammates Richard Hamilton, Rasheed Wallace and Ben Wallace.
Chauncey Billups

Context: In 2006, Billups was selected to play in the 2006 NBA All-Star Game as a reserve for the Eastern Conference, along with former teammates Richard Hamilton, Rasheed Wallace and Ben Wallace. Pistons head coach Flip Saunders coached the Eastern Conference squad and put all four Pistons in the game when the east was falling behind; they were able to get the Eastern All-Star team back in the game. During the 2006 NBA All-Star Weekend, Billups participated in the Three-point Shootout contest. He was eliminated in the first round of the contest after scoring 12 points. Billups called this moment when all four Pistons entered the game at the same time, one of the highlight moments of his career.  In the 2007 NBA All-Star Game, Billups was chosen as a reserve, along with teammate Richard Hamilton, for the Eastern Conference, despite an injury that kept Billups out of five games early on in the season. Billups also took part in the Shooting Stars Competition alongside former Piston and Detroit Shock head coach Bill Laimbeer and Shock star Swin Cash. Team Detroit won the competition with Billups hitting the final half-court shot.  Billups was selected to play as a reserve in the 2008 NBA All-Star Game, along with teammates Richard Hamilton and Rasheed Wallace, an injury replacement. Billups was the only Nugget to be selected to the 2009 NBA All-Star Game.  Billups was chosen as the replacement by David Stern for injured New Orleans Hornets point guard Chris Paul at the 2010 NBA All-Star Game. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did Chauncey Billups end up playing in the 2006 NBA All-Star Game?
Answer: Flip Saunders coached the Eastern Conference squad and put all four Pistons in the game when the east was falling behind;
Chauncey Billups

Context: In 2006, Billups was selected to play in the 2006 NBA All-Star Game as a reserve for the Eastern Conference, along with former teammates Richard Hamilton, Rasheed Wallace and Ben Wallace. Pistons head coach Flip Saunders coached the Eastern Conference squad and put all four Pistons in the game when the east was falling behind; they were able to get the Eastern All-Star team back in the game. During the 2006 NBA All-Star Weekend, Billups participated in the Three-point Shootout contest. He was eliminated in the first round of the contest after scoring 12 points. Billups called this moment when all four Pistons entered the game at the same time, one of the highlight moments of his career.  In the 2007 NBA All-Star Game, Billups was chosen as a reserve, along with teammate Richard Hamilton, for the Eastern Conference, despite an injury that kept Billups out of five games early on in the season. Billups also took part in the Shooting Stars Competition alongside former Piston and Detroit Shock head coach Bill Laimbeer and Shock star Swin Cash. Team Detroit won the competition with Billups hitting the final half-court shot.  Billups was selected to play as a reserve in the 2008 NBA All-Star Game, along with teammates Richard Hamilton and Rasheed Wallace, an injury replacement. Billups was the only Nugget to be selected to the 2009 NBA All-Star Game.  Billups was chosen as the replacement by David Stern for injured New Orleans Hornets point guard Chris Paul at the 2010 NBA All-Star Game. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Was there anything notable in that 2006 NBA All-Star Game?
Answer: they were able to get the Eastern All-Star team back in the game.
Chauncey Billups

Context: In 2006, Billups was selected to play in the 2006 NBA All-Star Game as a reserve for the Eastern Conference, along with former teammates Richard Hamilton, Rasheed Wallace and Ben Wallace. Pistons head coach Flip Saunders coached the Eastern Conference squad and put all four Pistons in the game when the east was falling behind; they were able to get the Eastern All-Star team back in the game. During the 2006 NBA All-Star Weekend, Billups participated in the Three-point Shootout contest. He was eliminated in the first round of the contest after scoring 12 points. Billups called this moment when all four Pistons entered the game at the same time, one of the highlight moments of his career.  In the 2007 NBA All-Star Game, Billups was chosen as a reserve, along with teammate Richard Hamilton, for the Eastern Conference, despite an injury that kept Billups out of five games early on in the season. Billups also took part in the Shooting Stars Competition alongside former Piston and Detroit Shock head coach Bill Laimbeer and Shock star Swin Cash. Team Detroit won the competition with Billups hitting the final half-court shot.  Billups was selected to play as a reserve in the 2008 NBA All-Star Game, along with teammates Richard Hamilton and Rasheed Wallace, an injury replacement. Billups was the only Nugget to be selected to the 2009 NBA All-Star Game.  Billups was chosen as the replacement by David Stern for injured New Orleans Hornets point guard Chris Paul at the 2010 NBA All-Star Game. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Are there any other interesting aspects about this article about Chauncey Billups other than then All-Star Game in 2006?
Answer: In the 2007 NBA All-Star Game, Billups was chosen as a reserve, along with teammate Richard Hamilton, for the Eastern Conference,
Chauncey Billups

Context: In 2006, Billups was selected to play in the 2006 NBA All-Star Game as a reserve for the Eastern Conference, along with former teammates Richard Hamilton, Rasheed Wallace and Ben Wallace. Pistons head coach Flip Saunders coached the Eastern Conference squad and put all four Pistons in the game when the east was falling behind; they were able to get the Eastern All-Star team back in the game. During the 2006 NBA All-Star Weekend, Billups participated in the Three-point Shootout contest. He was eliminated in the first round of the contest after scoring 12 points. Billups called this moment when all four Pistons entered the game at the same time, one of the highlight moments of his career.  In the 2007 NBA All-Star Game, Billups was chosen as a reserve, along with teammate Richard Hamilton, for the Eastern Conference, despite an injury that kept Billups out of five games early on in the season. Billups also took part in the Shooting Stars Competition alongside former Piston and Detroit Shock head coach Bill Laimbeer and Shock star Swin Cash. Team Detroit won the competition with Billups hitting the final half-court shot.  Billups was selected to play as a reserve in the 2008 NBA All-Star Game, along with teammates Richard Hamilton and Rasheed Wallace, an injury replacement. Billups was the only Nugget to be selected to the 2009 NBA All-Star Game.  Billups was chosen as the replacement by David Stern for injured New Orleans Hornets point guard Chris Paul at the 2010 NBA All-Star Game. CANNOTANSWER

Question: How did Chauncey Billups perform in the Eastern Conference?
Answer: Team Detroit won the competition with Billups hitting the final half-court shot.
Slavoj Žižek

Context: Zizek argues that:  (Against Marx's concept of ideology as described in The German Ideology), False consciousness prevents people from seeing how things really are. (Building upon Althusser), Ideology is thoroughly unconscious and functions as a series of justifications and spontaneous socio-symbolic rituals which support virtual authorities.  The Real is not experienced as something which is ordered in a way that gives satisfactory meaning to all its parts in relation to one another. Instead the Real is experienced as through the lens of hegemonic systems of representation and reproduction, while resisting full inscription into ordering system ascribed to it. This in turn may lead subjects to experience the Real as generating political resistance.  (Drawing on Lacan's notion of the barred subject), The subject is a purely negative entity, a void of negativity (in the Hegelian sense), which allows for the flexibility and reflexivity of the cartesian Cogito (Transcendental Subject). Though consciousness is opaque (following Hegel), the epistemological gap between the In-itself and For-itself is immanent to reality itself;. The antinomies of Kant, quantum physics, and Badiou's 'materialist' principle that 'The One is Not', point towards an inconsistent ("Barred") Real itself (that Lacan conceptualized prior).[opaque language]  Although there are multiple Symbolic interpretations of the Real, they are not all relatively "true". Two instances of the Real can be identified: the abject Real (or "real Real"), which cannot be wholly integrated into the symbolic order, and the symbolic Real, a set of signifiers that can never be properly integrated into the horizon of sense of a subject. The truth is revealed in the process of transiting the contradictions; or the real is a "minimal difference", the gap between the infinite judgement of a reductionist materialism and experience as lived, the "Parallax" of dialectical antagonisms are inherent to reality itself, and Dialectical Materialism (contra Engels) is a new materialist Hegelianism, incorporating the insights of Lacanian psychoanalysis, set theory, quantum physics, and contemporary continental philosophy. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What is Ontology?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
Slavoj Žižek

Context: Zizek argues that:  (Against Marx's concept of ideology as described in The German Ideology), False consciousness prevents people from seeing how things really are. (Building upon Althusser), Ideology is thoroughly unconscious and functions as a series of justifications and spontaneous socio-symbolic rituals which support virtual authorities.  The Real is not experienced as something which is ordered in a way that gives satisfactory meaning to all its parts in relation to one another. Instead the Real is experienced as through the lens of hegemonic systems of representation and reproduction, while resisting full inscription into ordering system ascribed to it. This in turn may lead subjects to experience the Real as generating political resistance.  (Drawing on Lacan's notion of the barred subject), The subject is a purely negative entity, a void of negativity (in the Hegelian sense), which allows for the flexibility and reflexivity of the cartesian Cogito (Transcendental Subject). Though consciousness is opaque (following Hegel), the epistemological gap between the In-itself and For-itself is immanent to reality itself;. The antinomies of Kant, quantum physics, and Badiou's 'materialist' principle that 'The One is Not', point towards an inconsistent ("Barred") Real itself (that Lacan conceptualized prior).[opaque language]  Although there are multiple Symbolic interpretations of the Real, they are not all relatively "true". Two instances of the Real can be identified: the abject Real (or "real Real"), which cannot be wholly integrated into the symbolic order, and the symbolic Real, a set of signifiers that can never be properly integrated into the horizon of sense of a subject. The truth is revealed in the process of transiting the contradictions; or the real is a "minimal difference", the gap between the infinite judgement of a reductionist materialism and experience as lived, the "Parallax" of dialectical antagonisms are inherent to reality itself, and Dialectical Materialism (contra Engels) is a new materialist Hegelianism, incorporating the insights of Lacanian psychoanalysis, set theory, quantum physics, and contemporary continental philosophy. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What was Slavoj Žižek's ideology?
Answer: Ideology is thoroughly unconscious and functions as a series of justifications and spontaneous socio-symbolic rituals