gaussalgo/Canard_Wiki-augmented huggingface dataset:
Matt Groening

Context: After spending a few years researching science fiction, Groening got together with Simpsons writer/producer David X. Cohen (known as David S. Cohen at the time) in 1997 and developed Futurama, an animated series about life in the year 3000. By the time they pitched the series to Fox in April 1998, Groening and Cohen had composed many characters and storylines; Groening claimed they had gone "overboard" in their discussions. Groening described trying to get the show on the air as "by far the worst experience of [his] grown-up life." The show premiered on March 28, 1999. Groening's writing credits for the show are for the premiere episode, "Space Pilot 3000" (co-written with Cohen), "Rebirth" (story) and "In-A-Gadda-Da-Leela" (story).  After four years on the air, the show was canceled by Fox. In a situation similar to Family Guy, however, strong DVD sales and very stable ratings on Adult Swim brought Futurama back to life. When Comedy Central began negotiating for the rights to air Futurama reruns, Fox suggested that there was a possibility of also creating new episodes. When Comedy Central committed to sixteen new episodes, it was decided that four straight-to-DVD films - Bender's Big Score (2007), The Beast with a Billion Backs (2008), Bender's Game (2008) and Into the Wild Green Yonder (2009) - would be produced.  Since no new Futurama projects were in production, the movie Into the Wild Green Yonder was designed to stand as the Futurama series finale. However, Groening had expressed a desire to continue the Futurama franchise in some form, including as a theatrical film. In an interview with CNN, Groening said that "we have a great relationship with Comedy Central and we would love to do more episodes for them, but I don't know... We're having discussions and there is some enthusiasm but I can't tell if it's just me". Comedy Central commissioned an additional 26 new episodes, and began airing them in 2010. The show continued in to 2013, before Comedy Central announced in April 2013 that they would not be renewing it beyond its seventh season. The final episode aired on September 4, 2013. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What else interesting happened with Futurama other than being brought back to life?
Answer: Groening described trying to get the show on the air as "by far the worst experience of [his] grown-up life.
Martina Hingis

Context: In 2001, Switzerland, with Hingis and Roger Federer on its team, won the Hopman Cup. Hingis didn't drop a set in any of her singles matches during the event, defeating Tamarine Tanasugarn, Nicole Pratt, Amanda Coetzer, and Monica Seles. Federer was later quoted as saying: "I learned a lot from her, especially the two years I was here - once as a hitting partner and once as a partner with Martina. Definitely she helped me to become the player I am today."  Hingis reached her fifth consecutive Australian Open final in 2001, defeating both of the Williams sisters en route, before losing to Jennifer Capriati. She briefly ended her coaching relationship with her mother Melanie early in the year but had a change of heart two months later just before the French Open. 2001 was her least successful year in several seasons, with only three tournament victories in total. She lost her No. 1 ranking for the last time (to Jennifer Capriati) on 14 October 2001. In that same month, Hingis underwent surgery on her right ankle.  Coming back from injury, Hingis won the Australian Open doubles final at the start of 2002 (again teaming with Anna Kournikova) and reached a sixth straight Australian Open final in singles, again facing Capriati. Hingis led by a set and 4-0 and had four match points but lost in three sets. In May 2002, she needed another ankle ligament operation, this time on her left ankle. After that, she continued to struggle with injuries and was not able to recapture her best form.  In February 2003, at the age of 22, Hingis announced her retirement from tennis, due to her injuries and being in pain. "I want to play tennis only for fun and concentrate more on horse riding and finish my studies." In several interviews, she has indicated she wishes to return to her home country and coach full-time.  During this segment of her tennis career, Hingis won 40 singles titles and 36 doubles events. She held the World No. 1 singles ranking for a total of 209 weeks (fifth most following Steffi Graf, Martina Navratilova (after whom she was named), Chris Evert, and Serena Williams). In 2005, Tennis magazine put her in 22nd place in its list of 40 Greatest Players of the TENNIS era. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Who was Martina Hingis?
Answer: Hingis reached her fifth consecutive Australian Open final in 2001, defeating both of the Williams sisters en route, before losing to Jennifer Capriati.
Martina Hingis

Context: In 2001, Switzerland, with Hingis and Roger Federer on its team, won the Hopman Cup. Hingis didn't drop a set in any of her singles matches during the event, defeating Tamarine Tanasugarn, Nicole Pratt, Amanda Coetzer, and Monica Seles. Federer was later quoted as saying: "I learned a lot from her, especially the two years I was here - once as a hitting partner and once as a partner with Martina. Definitely she helped me to become the player I am today."  Hingis reached her fifth consecutive Australian Open final in 2001, defeating both of the Williams sisters en route, before losing to Jennifer Capriati. She briefly ended her coaching relationship with her mother Melanie early in the year but had a change of heart two months later just before the French Open. 2001 was her least successful year in several seasons, with only three tournament victories in total. She lost her No. 1 ranking for the last time (to Jennifer Capriati) on 14 October 2001. In that same month, Hingis underwent surgery on her right ankle.  Coming back from injury, Hingis won the Australian Open doubles final at the start of 2002 (again teaming with Anna Kournikova) and reached a sixth straight Australian Open final in singles, again facing Capriati. Hingis led by a set and 4-0 and had four match points but lost in three sets. In May 2002, she needed another ankle ligament operation, this time on her left ankle. After that, she continued to struggle with injuries and was not able to recapture her best form.  In February 2003, at the age of 22, Hingis announced her retirement from tennis, due to her injuries and being in pain. "I want to play tennis only for fun and concentrate more on horse riding and finish my studies." In several interviews, she has indicated she wishes to return to her home country and coach full-time.  During this segment of her tennis career, Hingis won 40 singles titles and 36 doubles events. She held the World No. 1 singles ranking for a total of 209 weeks (fifth most following Steffi Graf, Martina Navratilova (after whom she was named), Chris Evert, and Serena Williams). In 2005, Tennis magazine put her in 22nd place in its list of 40 Greatest Players of the TENNIS era. CANNOTANSWER

Question: How many tennis games did Hingis play?
Answer: During this segment of her tennis career, Hingis won 40 singles titles and 36 doubles events. She held the World No. 1 singles ranking for a total of 209 weeks
Martina Hingis

Context: In 2001, Switzerland, with Hingis and Roger Federer on its team, won the Hopman Cup. Hingis didn't drop a set in any of her singles matches during the event, defeating Tamarine Tanasugarn, Nicole Pratt, Amanda Coetzer, and Monica Seles. Federer was later quoted as saying: "I learned a lot from her, especially the two years I was here - once as a hitting partner and once as a partner with Martina. Definitely she helped me to become the player I am today."  Hingis reached her fifth consecutive Australian Open final in 2001, defeating both of the Williams sisters en route, before losing to Jennifer Capriati. She briefly ended her coaching relationship with her mother Melanie early in the year but had a change of heart two months later just before the French Open. 2001 was her least successful year in several seasons, with only three tournament victories in total. She lost her No. 1 ranking for the last time (to Jennifer Capriati) on 14 October 2001. In that same month, Hingis underwent surgery on her right ankle.  Coming back from injury, Hingis won the Australian Open doubles final at the start of 2002 (again teaming with Anna Kournikova) and reached a sixth straight Australian Open final in singles, again facing Capriati. Hingis led by a set and 4-0 and had four match points but lost in three sets. In May 2002, she needed another ankle ligament operation, this time on her left ankle. After that, she continued to struggle with injuries and was not able to recapture her best form.  In February 2003, at the age of 22, Hingis announced her retirement from tennis, due to her injuries and being in pain. "I want to play tennis only for fun and concentrate more on horse riding and finish my studies." In several interviews, she has indicated she wishes to return to her home country and coach full-time.  During this segment of her tennis career, Hingis won 40 singles titles and 36 doubles events. She held the World No. 1 singles ranking for a total of 209 weeks (fifth most following Steffi Graf, Martina Navratilova (after whom she was named), Chris Evert, and Serena Williams). In 2005, Tennis magazine put her in 22nd place in its list of 40 Greatest Players of the TENNIS era. CANNOTANSWER

Question: When did Martina Hingis retire from playing tennis?
Answer: on 14 October 2001. In that same month, Hingis underwent surgery on her right ankle.
Martina Hingis

Context: In 2001, Switzerland, with Hingis and Roger Federer on its team, won the Hopman Cup. Hingis didn't drop a set in any of her singles matches during the event, defeating Tamarine Tanasugarn, Nicole Pratt, Amanda Coetzer, and Monica Seles. Federer was later quoted as saying: "I learned a lot from her, especially the two years I was here - once as a hitting partner and once as a partner with Martina. Definitely she helped me to become the player I am today."  Hingis reached her fifth consecutive Australian Open final in 2001, defeating both of the Williams sisters en route, before losing to Jennifer Capriati. She briefly ended her coaching relationship with her mother Melanie early in the year but had a change of heart two months later just before the French Open. 2001 was her least successful year in several seasons, with only three tournament victories in total. She lost her No. 1 ranking for the last time (to Jennifer Capriati) on 14 October 2001. In that same month, Hingis underwent surgery on her right ankle.  Coming back from injury, Hingis won the Australian Open doubles final at the start of 2002 (again teaming with Anna Kournikova) and reached a sixth straight Australian Open final in singles, again facing Capriati. Hingis led by a set and 4-0 and had four match points but lost in three sets. In May 2002, she needed another ankle ligament operation, this time on her left ankle. After that, she continued to struggle with injuries and was not able to recapture her best form.  In February 2003, at the age of 22, Hingis announced her retirement from tennis, due to her injuries and being in pain. "I want to play tennis only for fun and concentrate more on horse riding and finish my studies." In several interviews, she has indicated she wishes to return to her home country and coach full-time.  During this segment of her tennis career, Hingis won 40 singles titles and 36 doubles events. She held the World No. 1 singles ranking for a total of 209 weeks (fifth most following Steffi Graf, Martina Navratilova (after whom she was named), Chris Evert, and Serena Williams). In 2005, Tennis magazine put her in 22nd place in its list of 40 Greatest Players of the TENNIS era. CANNOTANSWER

Question: was Hingis injured often while playing tennis professionally?
Answer: May 2002, she needed another ankle ligament operation, this time on her left ankle.
Martina Hingis

Context: In 2001, Switzerland, with Hingis and Roger Federer on its team, won the Hopman Cup. Hingis didn't drop a set in any of her singles matches during the event, defeating Tamarine Tanasugarn, Nicole Pratt, Amanda Coetzer, and Monica Seles. Federer was later quoted as saying: "I learned a lot from her, especially the two years I was here - once as a hitting partner and once as a partner with Martina. Definitely she helped me to become the player I am today."  Hingis reached her fifth consecutive Australian Open final in 2001, defeating both of the Williams sisters en route, before losing to Jennifer Capriati. She briefly ended her coaching relationship with her mother Melanie early in the year but had a change of heart two months later just before the French Open. 2001 was her least successful year in several seasons, with only three tournament victories in total. She lost her No. 1 ranking for the last time (to Jennifer Capriati) on 14 October 2001. In that same month, Hingis underwent surgery on her right ankle.  Coming back from injury, Hingis won the Australian Open doubles final at the start of 2002 (again teaming with Anna Kournikova) and reached a sixth straight Australian Open final in singles, again facing Capriati. Hingis led by a set and 4-0 and had four match points but lost in three sets. In May 2002, she needed another ankle ligament operation, this time on her left ankle. After that, she continued to struggle with injuries and was not able to recapture her best form.  In February 2003, at the age of 22, Hingis announced her retirement from tennis, due to her injuries and being in pain. "I want to play tennis only for fun and concentrate more on horse riding and finish my studies." In several interviews, she has indicated she wishes to return to her home country and coach full-time.  During this segment of her tennis career, Hingis won 40 singles titles and 36 doubles events. She held the World No. 1 singles ranking for a total of 209 weeks (fifth most following Steffi Graf, Martina Navratilova (after whom she was named), Chris Evert, and Serena Williams). In 2005, Tennis magazine put her in 22nd place in its list of 40 Greatest Players of the TENNIS era. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did Hingis come back to play tennis again after retirement?
Answer: In several interviews, she has indicated she wishes to return to her home country and coach full-time.
Martina Hingis

Context: In 2001, Switzerland, with Hingis and Roger Federer on its team, won the Hopman Cup. Hingis didn't drop a set in any of her singles matches during the event, defeating Tamarine Tanasugarn, Nicole Pratt, Amanda Coetzer, and Monica Seles. Federer was later quoted as saying: "I learned a lot from her, especially the two years I was here - once as a hitting partner and once as a partner with Martina. Definitely she helped me to become the player I am today."  Hingis reached her fifth consecutive Australian Open final in 2001, defeating both of the Williams sisters en route, before losing to Jennifer Capriati. She briefly ended her coaching relationship with her mother Melanie early in the year but had a change of heart two months later just before the French Open. 2001 was her least successful year in several seasons, with only three tournament victories in total. She lost her No. 1 ranking for the last time (to Jennifer Capriati) on 14 October 2001. In that same month, Hingis underwent surgery on her right ankle.  Coming back from injury, Hingis won the Australian Open doubles final at the start of 2002 (again teaming with Anna Kournikova) and reached a sixth straight Australian Open final in singles, again facing Capriati. Hingis led by a set and 4-0 and had four match points but lost in three sets. In May 2002, she needed another ankle ligament operation, this time on her left ankle. After that, she continued to struggle with injuries and was not able to recapture her best form.  In February 2003, at the age of 22, Hingis announced her retirement from tennis, due to her injuries and being in pain. "I want to play tennis only for fun and concentrate more on horse riding and finish my studies." In several interviews, she has indicated she wishes to return to her home country and coach full-time.  During this segment of her tennis career, Hingis won 40 singles titles and 36 doubles events. She held the World No. 1 singles ranking for a total of 209 weeks (fifth most following Steffi Graf, Martina Navratilova (after whom she was named), Chris Evert, and Serena Williams). In 2005, Tennis magazine put her in 22nd place in its list of 40 Greatest Players of the TENNIS era. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What people did Martina Hingis play tennis against?
Answer: Steffi Graf, Martina Navratilova (after whom she was named), Chris Evert, and Serena Williams).
Martina Hingis

Context: In 2001, Switzerland, with Hingis and Roger Federer on its team, won the Hopman Cup. Hingis didn't drop a set in any of her singles matches during the event, defeating Tamarine Tanasugarn, Nicole Pratt, Amanda Coetzer, and Monica Seles. Federer was later quoted as saying: "I learned a lot from her, especially the two years I was here - once as a hitting partner and once as a partner with Martina. Definitely she helped me to become the player I am today."  Hingis reached her fifth consecutive Australian Open final in 2001, defeating both of the Williams sisters en route, before losing to Jennifer Capriati. She briefly ended her coaching relationship with her mother Melanie early in the year but had a change of heart two months later just before the French Open. 2001 was her least successful year in several seasons, with only three tournament victories in total. She lost her No. 1 ranking for the last time (to Jennifer Capriati) on 14 October 2001. In that same month, Hingis underwent surgery on her right ankle.  Coming back from injury, Hingis won the Australian Open doubles final at the start of 2002 (again teaming with Anna Kournikova) and reached a sixth straight Australian Open final in singles, again facing Capriati. Hingis led by a set and 4-0 and had four match points but lost in three sets. In May 2002, she needed another ankle ligament operation, this time on her left ankle. After that, she continued to struggle with injuries and was not able to recapture her best form.  In February 2003, at the age of 22, Hingis announced her retirement from tennis, due to her injuries and being in pain. "I want to play tennis only for fun and concentrate more on horse riding and finish my studies." In several interviews, she has indicated she wishes to return to her home country and coach full-time.  During this segment of her tennis career, Hingis won 40 singles titles and 36 doubles events. She held the World No. 1 singles ranking for a total of 209 weeks (fifth most following Steffi Graf, Martina Navratilova (after whom she was named), Chris Evert, and Serena Williams). In 2005, Tennis magazine put her in 22nd place in its list of 40 Greatest Players of the TENNIS era. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Can you tell me anything else interesting the Martina Hingis may have done aside from tennis?
Answer: During this segment of her tennis career, Hingis won 40 singles titles and 36 doubles events.
Margaret Mead

Context: After her death Mead's Samoan research was criticized by anthropologist Derek Freeman, who published a book that argued against many of Mead's conclusions. Freeman argued that Mead had misunderstood Samoan culture when she argued that Samoan culture did not place many restrictions on youths' sexual explorations. Freeman argued instead that Samoan culture prized female chastity and virginity and that Mead had been misled by her female Samoan informants. Freeman's critique was met with a considerable backlash and harsh criticism from the anthropology community, whereas it was received enthusiastically by communities of scientists who believed that sexual mores were more or less universal across cultures. Some anthropologists who studied Samoan culture argued in favor of Freeman's findings and contradicted those of Mead, whereas others argued that Freeman's work did not invalidate Mead's work because Samoan culture had been changed by the integration of Christianity in the decades between Mead's and Freeman's fieldwork periods. While Mead was careful to shield the identity of all her subjects for confidentiality Freeman was able to find and interview one of her original participants, and Freeman reported that she admitted to having wilfully misled Mead. She said that she and her friends were having fun with Mead and telling her stories.  On the whole, anthropologists have rejected the notion that Mead's conclusions rested on the validity of a single interview with a single person, finding instead that Mead based her conclusions on the sum of her observations and interviews during her time in Samoa, and that the status of the single interview did not falsify her work. Some anthropologists have however maintained that even though Freeman's critique was invalid, Mead's study was not sufficiently scientifically rigorous to support the conclusions she drew.  Mead's reputation and significance as an anthropologist have not been diminished by Freeman's criticisms. In her book Galileo's Middle Finger, Alice Dreger argues that Freeman's accusations were unfounded and misleading. A detailed review of the controversy by Paul Shankman, published by the University of Wisconsin Press in 2009, supports the contention that Mead's research was essentially correct, and concludes that Freeman cherry-picked his data and misrepresented both Mead and Samoan culture. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What was the controversy surrounding Margaret Mead?
Answer: Freeman argued that Mead had misunderstood Samoan culture when she argued that Samoan culture did not place many restrictions on youths' sexual explorations.
Margaret Mead

Context: After her death Mead's Samoan research was criticized by anthropologist Derek Freeman, who published a book that argued against many of Mead's conclusions. Freeman argued that Mead had misunderstood Samoan culture when she argued that Samoan culture did not place many restrictions on youths' sexual explorations. Freeman argued instead that Samoan culture prized female chastity and virginity and that Mead had been misled by her female Samoan informants. Freeman's critique was met with a considerable backlash and harsh criticism from the anthropology community, whereas it was received enthusiastically by communities of scientists who believed that sexual mores were more or less universal across cultures. Some anthropologists who studied Samoan culture argued in favor of Freeman's findings and contradicted those of Mead, whereas others argued that Freeman's work did not invalidate Mead's work because Samoan culture had been changed by the integration of Christianity in the decades between Mead's and Freeman's fieldwork periods. While Mead was careful to shield the identity of all her subjects for confidentiality Freeman was able to find and interview one of her original participants, and Freeman reported that she admitted to having wilfully misled Mead. She said that she and her friends were having fun with Mead and telling her stories.  On the whole, anthropologists have rejected the notion that Mead's conclusions rested on the validity of a single interview with a single person, finding instead that Mead based her conclusions on the sum of her observations and interviews during her time in Samoa, and that the status of the single interview did not falsify her work. Some anthropologists have however maintained that even though Freeman's critique was invalid, Mead's study was not sufficiently scientifically rigorous to support the conclusions she drew.  Mead's reputation and significance as an anthropologist have not been diminished by Freeman's criticisms. In her book Galileo's Middle Finger, Alice Dreger argues that Freeman's accusations were unfounded and misleading. A detailed review of the controversy by Paul Shankman, published by the University of Wisconsin Press in 2009, supports the contention that Mead's research was essentially correct, and concludes that Freeman cherry-picked his data and misrepresented both Mead and Samoan culture. CANNOTANSWER

Question: How was Freeman's argument taken?
Answer: Freeman's critique was met with a considerable backlash and harsh criticism from the anthropology community,
Margaret Mead

Context: After her death Mead's Samoan research was criticized by anthropologist Derek Freeman, who published a book that argued against many of Mead's conclusions. Freeman argued that Mead had misunderstood Samoan culture when she argued that Samoan culture did not place many restrictions on youths' sexual explorations. Freeman argued instead that Samoan culture prized female chastity and virginity and that Mead had been misled by her female Samoan informants. Freeman's critique was met with a considerable backlash and harsh criticism from the anthropology community, whereas it was received enthusiastically by communities of scientists who believed that sexual mores were more or less universal across cultures. Some anthropologists who studied Samoan culture argued in favor of Freeman's findings and contradicted those of Mead, whereas others argued that Freeman's work did not invalidate Mead's work because Samoan culture had been changed by the integration of Christianity in the decades between Mead's and Freeman's fieldwork periods. While Mead was careful to shield the identity of all her subjects for confidentiality Freeman was able to find and interview one of her original participants, and Freeman reported that she admitted to having wilfully misled Mead. She said that she and her friends were having fun with Mead and telling her stories.  On the whole, anthropologists have rejected the notion that Mead's conclusions rested on the validity of a single interview with a single person, finding instead that Mead based her conclusions on the sum of her observations and interviews during her time in Samoa, and that the status of the single interview did not falsify her work. Some anthropologists have however maintained that even though Freeman's critique was invalid, Mead's study was not sufficiently scientifically rigorous to support the conclusions she drew.  Mead's reputation and significance as an anthropologist have not been diminished by Freeman's criticisms. In her book Galileo's Middle Finger, Alice Dreger argues that Freeman's accusations were unfounded and misleading. A detailed review of the controversy by Paul Shankman, published by the University of Wisconsin Press in 2009, supports the contention that Mead's research was essentially correct, and concludes that Freeman cherry-picked his data and misrepresented both Mead and Samoan culture. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Besides the backlash against Freeman, are there any other interesting aspects about Margaret Mead?
Answer: Mead's reputation and significance as an anthropologist have not been diminished by Freeman's criticisms.
Margaret Mead

Context: After her death Mead's Samoan research was criticized by anthropologist Derek Freeman, who published a book that argued against many of Mead's conclusions. Freeman argued that Mead had misunderstood Samoan culture when she argued that Samoan culture did not place many restrictions on youths' sexual explorations. Freeman argued instead that Samoan culture prized female chastity and virginity and that Mead had been misled by her female Samoan informants. Freeman's critique was met with a considerable backlash and harsh criticism from the anthropology community, whereas it was received enthusiastically by communities of scientists who believed that sexual mores were more or less universal across cultures. Some anthropologists who studied Samoan culture argued in favor of Freeman's findings and contradicted those of Mead, whereas others argued that Freeman's work did not invalidate Mead's work because Samoan culture had been changed by the integration of Christianity in the decades between Mead's and Freeman's fieldwork periods. While Mead was careful to shield the identity of all her subjects for confidentiality Freeman was able to find and interview one of her original participants, and Freeman reported that she admitted to having wilfully misled Mead. She said that she and her friends were having fun with Mead and telling her stories.  On the whole, anthropologists have rejected the notion that Mead's conclusions rested on the validity of a single interview with a single person, finding instead that Mead based her conclusions on the sum of her observations and interviews during her time in Samoa, and that the status of the single interview did not falsify her work. Some anthropologists have however maintained that even though Freeman's critique was invalid, Mead's study was not sufficiently scientifically rigorous to support the conclusions she drew.  Mead's reputation and significance as an anthropologist have not been diminished by Freeman's criticisms. In her book Galileo's Middle Finger, Alice Dreger argues that Freeman's accusations were unfounded and misleading. A detailed review of the controversy by Paul Shankman, published by the University of Wisconsin Press in 2009, supports the contention that Mead's research was essentially correct, and concludes that Freeman cherry-picked his data and misrepresented both Mead and Samoan culture. CANNOTANSWER

Question: How did the public react to the scandal surrounding Margaret Mead?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
Margaret Mead

Context: After her death Mead's Samoan research was criticized by anthropologist Derek Freeman, who published a book that argued against many of Mead's conclusions. Freeman argued that Mead had misunderstood Samoan culture when she argued that Samoan culture did not place many restrictions on youths' sexual explorations. Freeman argued instead that Samoan culture prized female chastity and virginity and that Mead had been misled by her female Samoan informants. Freeman's critique was met with a considerable backlash and harsh criticism from the anthropology community, whereas it was received enthusiastically by communities of scientists who believed that sexual mores were more or less universal across cultures. Some anthropologists who studied Samoan culture argued in favor of Freeman's findings and contradicted those of Mead, whereas others argued that Freeman's work did not invalidate Mead's work because Samoan culture had been changed by the integration of Christianity in the decades between Mead's and Freeman's fieldwork periods. While Mead was careful to shield the identity of all her subjects for confidentiality Freeman was able to find and interview one of her original participants, and Freeman reported that she admitted to having wilfully misled Mead. She said that she and her friends were having fun with Mead and telling her stories.  On the whole, anthropologists have rejected the notion that Mead's conclusions rested on the validity of a single interview with a single person, finding instead that Mead based her conclusions on the sum of her observations and interviews during her time in Samoa, and that the status of the single interview did not falsify her work. Some anthropologists have however maintained that even though Freeman's critique was invalid, Mead's study was not sufficiently scientifically rigorous to support the conclusions she drew.  Mead's reputation and significance as an anthropologist have not been diminished by Freeman's criticisms. In her book Galileo's Middle Finger, Alice Dreger argues that Freeman's accusations were unfounded and misleading. A detailed review of the controversy by Paul Shankman, published by the University of Wisconsin Press in 2009, supports the contention that Mead's research was essentially correct, and concludes that Freeman cherry-picked his data and misrepresented both Mead and Samoan culture. CANNOTANSWER

Question: How did the Margaret Mead controversy affect Freeman?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
Margaret Mead

Context: After her death Mead's Samoan research was criticized by anthropologist Derek Freeman, who published a book that argued against many of Mead's conclusions. Freeman argued that Mead had misunderstood Samoan culture when she argued that Samoan culture did not place many restrictions on youths' sexual explorations. Freeman argued instead that Samoan culture prized female chastity and virginity and that Mead had been misled by her female Samoan informants. Freeman's critique was met with a considerable backlash and harsh criticism from the anthropology community, whereas it was received enthusiastically by communities of scientists who believed that sexual mores were more or less universal across cultures. Some anthropologists who studied Samoan culture argued in favor of Freeman's findings and contradicted those of Mead, whereas others argued that Freeman's work did not invalidate Mead's work because Samoan culture had been changed by the integration of Christianity in the decades between Mead's and Freeman's fieldwork periods. While Mead was careful to shield the identity of all her subjects for confidentiality Freeman was able to find and interview one of her original participants, and Freeman reported that she admitted to having wilfully misled Mead. She said that she and her friends were having fun with Mead and telling her stories.  On the whole, anthropologists have rejected the notion that Mead's conclusions rested on the validity of a single interview with a single person, finding instead that Mead based her conclusions on the sum of her observations and interviews during her time in Samoa, and that the status of the single interview did not falsify her work. Some anthropologists have however maintained that even though Freeman's critique was invalid, Mead's study was not sufficiently scientifically rigorous to support the conclusions she drew.  Mead's reputation and significance as an anthropologist have not been diminished by Freeman's criticisms. In her book Galileo's Middle Finger, Alice Dreger argues that Freeman's accusations were unfounded and misleading. A detailed review of the controversy by Paul Shankman, published by the University of Wisconsin Press in 2009, supports the contention that Mead's research was essentially correct, and concludes that Freeman cherry-picked his data and misrepresented both Mead and Samoan culture. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Besides the public backlash against Freeman, is there anything else note worthy about Margaret Mead controversy?
Answer: Some anthropologists have however maintained that even though Freeman's critique was invalid, Mead's study was not sufficiently scientifically rigorous to support the conclusions she drew.
Margaret Mead

Context: After her death Mead's Samoan research was criticized by anthropologist Derek Freeman, who published a book that argued against many of Mead's conclusions. Freeman argued that Mead had misunderstood Samoan culture when she argued that Samoan culture did not place many restrictions on youths' sexual explorations. Freeman argued instead that Samoan culture prized female chastity and virginity and that Mead had been misled by her female Samoan informants. Freeman's critique was met with a considerable backlash and harsh criticism from the anthropology community, whereas it was received enthusiastically by communities of scientists who believed that sexual mores were more or less universal across cultures. Some anthropologists who studied Samoan culture argued in favor of Freeman's findings and contradicted those of Mead, whereas others argued that Freeman's work did not invalidate Mead's work because Samoan culture had been changed by the integration of Christianity in the decades between Mead's and Freeman's fieldwork periods. While Mead was careful to shield the identity of all her subjects for confidentiality Freeman was able to find and interview one of her original participants, and Freeman reported that she admitted to having wilfully misled Mead. She said that she and her friends were having fun with Mead and telling her stories.  On the whole, anthropologists have rejected the notion that Mead's conclusions rested on the validity of a single interview with a single person, finding instead that Mead based her conclusions on the sum of her observations and interviews during her time in Samoa, and that the status of the single interview did not falsify her work. Some anthropologists have however maintained that even though Freeman's critique was invalid, Mead's study was not sufficiently scientifically rigorous to support the conclusions she drew.  Mead's reputation and significance as an anthropologist have not been diminished by Freeman's criticisms. In her book Galileo's Middle Finger, Alice Dreger argues that Freeman's accusations were unfounded and misleading. A detailed review of the controversy by Paul Shankman, published by the University of Wisconsin Press in 2009, supports the contention that Mead's research was essentially correct, and concludes that Freeman cherry-picked his data and misrepresented both Mead and Samoan culture. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Who criticized Margaret Mead besides Freeman?
Answer: Mead's Samoan research was criticized by anthropologist Derek Freeman,
Margaret Mead

Context: After her death Mead's Samoan research was criticized by anthropologist Derek Freeman, who published a book that argued against many of Mead's conclusions. Freeman argued that Mead had misunderstood Samoan culture when she argued that Samoan culture did not place many restrictions on youths' sexual explorations. Freeman argued instead that Samoan culture prized female chastity and virginity and that Mead had been misled by her female Samoan informants. Freeman's critique was met with a considerable backlash and harsh criticism from the anthropology community, whereas it was received enthusiastically by communities of scientists who believed that sexual mores were more or less universal across cultures. Some anthropologists who studied Samoan culture argued in favor of Freeman's findings and contradicted those of Mead, whereas others argued that Freeman's work did not invalidate Mead's work because Samoan culture had been changed by the integration of Christianity in the decades between Mead's and Freeman's fieldwork periods. While Mead was careful to shield the identity of all her subjects for confidentiality Freeman was able to find and interview one of her original participants, and Freeman reported that she admitted to having wilfully misled Mead. She said that she and her friends were having fun with Mead and telling her stories.  On the whole, anthropologists have rejected the notion that Mead's conclusions rested on the validity of a single interview with a single person, finding instead that Mead based her conclusions on the sum of her observations and interviews during her time in Samoa, and that the status of the single interview did not falsify her work. Some anthropologists have however maintained that even though Freeman's critique was invalid, Mead's study was not sufficiently scientifically rigorous to support the conclusions she drew.  Mead's reputation and significance as an anthropologist have not been diminished by Freeman's criticisms. In her book Galileo's Middle Finger, Alice Dreger argues that Freeman's accusations were unfounded and misleading. A detailed review of the controversy by Paul Shankman, published by the University of Wisconsin Press in 2009, supports the contention that Mead's research was essentially correct, and concludes that Freeman cherry-picked his data and misrepresented both Mead and Samoan culture. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Who was Derek Freeman?
Answer: anthropologist Derek Freeman,
Margaret Mead

Context: After her death Mead's Samoan research was criticized by anthropologist Derek Freeman, who published a book that argued against many of Mead's conclusions. Freeman argued that Mead had misunderstood Samoan culture when she argued that Samoan culture did not place many restrictions on youths' sexual explorations. Freeman argued instead that Samoan culture prized female chastity and virginity and that Mead had been misled by her female Samoan informants. Freeman's critique was met with a considerable backlash and harsh criticism from the anthropology community, whereas it was received enthusiastically by communities of scientists who believed that sexual mores were more or less universal across cultures. Some anthropologists who studied Samoan culture argued in favor of Freeman's findings and contradicted those of Mead, whereas others argued that Freeman's work did not invalidate Mead's work because Samoan culture had been changed by the integration of Christianity in the decades between Mead's and Freeman's fieldwork periods. While Mead was careful to shield the identity of all her subjects for confidentiality Freeman was able to find and interview one of her original participants, and Freeman reported that she admitted to having wilfully misled Mead. She said that she and her friends were having fun with Mead and telling her stories.  On the whole, anthropologists have rejected the notion that Mead's conclusions rested on the validity of a single interview with a single person, finding instead that Mead based her conclusions on the sum of her observations and interviews during her time in Samoa, and that the status of the single interview did not falsify her work. Some anthropologists have however maintained that even though Freeman's critique was invalid, Mead's study was not sufficiently scientifically rigorous to support the conclusions she drew.  Mead's reputation and significance as an anthropologist have not been diminished by Freeman's criticisms. In her book Galileo's Middle Finger, Alice Dreger argues that Freeman's accusations were unfounded and misleading. A detailed review of the controversy by Paul Shankman, published by the University of Wisconsin Press in 2009, supports the contention that Mead's research was essentially correct, and concludes that Freeman cherry-picked his data and misrepresented both Mead and Samoan culture. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did any one agree with Margaret Mead's research?
Answer: In her book Galileo's Middle Finger, Alice Dreger argues that Freeman's accusations were unfounded and misleading.
Margaret Mead

Context: After her death Mead's Samoan research was criticized by anthropologist Derek Freeman, who published a book that argued against many of Mead's conclusions. Freeman argued that Mead had misunderstood Samoan culture when she argued that Samoan culture did not place many restrictions on youths' sexual explorations. Freeman argued instead that Samoan culture prized female chastity and virginity and that Mead had been misled by her female Samoan informants. Freeman's critique was met with a considerable backlash and harsh criticism from the anthropology community, whereas it was received enthusiastically by communities of scientists who believed that sexual mores were more or less universal across cultures. Some anthropologists who studied Samoan culture argued in favor of Freeman's findings and contradicted those of Mead, whereas others argued that Freeman's work did not invalidate Mead's work because Samoan culture had been changed by the integration of Christianity in the decades between Mead's and Freeman's fieldwork periods. While Mead was careful to shield the identity of all her subjects for confidentiality Freeman was able to find and interview one of her original participants, and Freeman reported that she admitted to having wilfully misled Mead. She said that she and her friends were having fun with Mead and telling her stories.  On the whole, anthropologists have rejected the notion that Mead's conclusions rested on the validity of a single interview with a single person, finding instead that Mead based her conclusions on the sum of her observations and interviews during her time in Samoa, and that the status of the single interview did not falsify her work. Some anthropologists have however maintained that even though Freeman's critique was invalid, Mead's study was not sufficiently scientifically rigorous to support the conclusions she drew.  Mead's reputation and significance as an anthropologist have not been diminished by Freeman's criticisms. In her book Galileo's Middle Finger, Alice Dreger argues that Freeman's accusations were unfounded and misleading. A detailed review of the controversy by Paul Shankman, published by the University of Wisconsin Press in 2009, supports the contention that Mead's research was essentially correct, and concludes that Freeman cherry-picked his data and misrepresented both Mead and Samoan culture. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Why were Freeman's accusations against Margaret Mead misleading according to Alice Dreger?
Answer: Freeman cherry-picked his data and misrepresented both Mead and Samoan culture.
Hereditary peer

Context: Until 1963 peers could not disclaim their peerage in order to sit in the House of Commons, and thus a peerage was sometimes seen as an impediment to a future political career.  In 1999, the House of Lords Act abolished the automatic right of hereditary peers to sit in the House of Lords. Out of about 750 hereditary peers, only 92 may sit in the House of Lords. The Act provides that 90 of those 92 seats are to be elected by other members of the House: 15 by vote of the whole house (including life peers), 42 by the Conservative hereditary peers, two by the Labour hereditary peers, three by the Liberal Democrat hereditary peers, and 28 by the crossbench hereditary peers. Elections were held in October and November 1999 to choose those initial 90 peers, with all hereditary peers eligible to vote. Hereditary peers elected hold their seats until their death, resignation or exclusion for non-attendance (the latter two means introduced by the House of Lords Reform Act 2014), at which point by-elections are held to maintain the number at 92.  The remaining two hold their seats by right of the hereditary offices of Earl Marshal and Lord Great Chamberlain. These offices are hereditary in themselves, and in recent times have been held by the Dukes of Norfolk and the Marquesses of Cholmondeley respectively. These are the only two hereditary peers whose right to sit is automatic.  The Government reserves a number of political and ceremonial positions for hereditary peers. To encourage hereditary peers in the House of Lords to follow the party line, a number of Lords-in-Waiting (government whips) are usually hereditary peers. This practice was not adhered to by the Labour government of 1997-2010 due to the small number of Labour hereditary peers in the House of Lords. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What types of hereditary peers existed?
Answer: Conservative hereditary peers,