gaussalgo/Canard_Wiki-augmented huggingface dataset:
James Randi

Context: Randi is the author of ten books, among them Conjuring (1992), a biographical history of noted magicians. The book is subtitled Being a Definitive History of the Venerable Arts of Sorcery, Prestidigitation, Wizardry, Deception, & Chicanery and of the Mountebanks & Scoundrels Who have Perpetrated these Subterfuges on a Bewildered Public, in short, MAGIC! The book's cover says that it is by "James Randi, Esq., A Contrite Rascal Once Dedicated to these Wicked Practices but Now Almost Totally Reformed". The book selects the most influential magicians and tells some of their history, often in the context of strange deaths and careers on the road. This work expanded on Randi's second book titled Houdini, His Life and Art. This illustrated work was published in 1976 and was co-authored with Bert Sugar. It focuses on the professional and private life of Houdini.  Randi also wrote a children's book in 1989 titled The Magic World of the Amazing Randi, which introduced children to magic tricks. In addition to his magic books, he has written several educational works about paranormal and pseudoscientific claims. These include biographies of Uri Geller and Nostradamus as well as reference material on other major paranormal figures. He is currently working on A Magician in the Laboratory, which recounts his application of skepticism to science. He was a member of the all-male literary banqueting club the Trap Door Spiders, which served as the basis of his good friend Isaac Asimov's fictional group of mystery solvers, the Black Widowers.  Other books are Flim-Flam! (1982), The Faith Healers (1987), James Randi, Psychic Investigator (1991), Test Your ESP Potential (1982) and An Encyclopedia of Claims, Frauds, and Hoaxes of the Occult and Supernatural (1995).  Randi was a regular contributor to Skeptic magazine, penning the "'Twas Brillig..." column, and also served on its editorial board. He is also a frequent contributor to Skeptical Inquirer magazine, which is published by CSI, of which he is also a Fellow. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Can you tell me of any responses to books written by author James Randi?
Answer: contributor to Skeptical Inquirer magazine, which is published by CSI, of which he is also a Fellow.
James Randi

Context: Randi is the author of ten books, among them Conjuring (1992), a biographical history of noted magicians. The book is subtitled Being a Definitive History of the Venerable Arts of Sorcery, Prestidigitation, Wizardry, Deception, & Chicanery and of the Mountebanks & Scoundrels Who have Perpetrated these Subterfuges on a Bewildered Public, in short, MAGIC! The book's cover says that it is by "James Randi, Esq., A Contrite Rascal Once Dedicated to these Wicked Practices but Now Almost Totally Reformed". The book selects the most influential magicians and tells some of their history, often in the context of strange deaths and careers on the road. This work expanded on Randi's second book titled Houdini, His Life and Art. This illustrated work was published in 1976 and was co-authored with Bert Sugar. It focuses on the professional and private life of Houdini.  Randi also wrote a children's book in 1989 titled The Magic World of the Amazing Randi, which introduced children to magic tricks. In addition to his magic books, he has written several educational works about paranormal and pseudoscientific claims. These include biographies of Uri Geller and Nostradamus as well as reference material on other major paranormal figures. He is currently working on A Magician in the Laboratory, which recounts his application of skepticism to science. He was a member of the all-male literary banqueting club the Trap Door Spiders, which served as the basis of his good friend Isaac Asimov's fictional group of mystery solvers, the Black Widowers.  Other books are Flim-Flam! (1982), The Faith Healers (1987), James Randi, Psychic Investigator (1991), Test Your ESP Potential (1982) and An Encyclopedia of Claims, Frauds, and Hoaxes of the Occult and Supernatural (1995).  Randi was a regular contributor to Skeptic magazine, penning the "'Twas Brillig..." column, and also served on its editorial board. He is also a frequent contributor to Skeptical Inquirer magazine, which is published by CSI, of which he is also a Fellow. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Other than his books Conjuring, Houdini and books debunking paranormal and pseudoscientific claims, are there any other interesting aspects in this article about author James Randi?
Answer: "James Randi, Esq., A Contrite Rascal Once Dedicated to these Wicked Practices but Now Almost Totally Reformed".
Queen's Park F.C.

Context: The 1975-76 season saw the reconstruction of the Scottish Leagues and Queen's entered the Second Division. Coinciding with this, Queen's appointed a head coach for the first time. Davie McParland led Queen's to 4th place but left at the end of the season to join Partick Thistle. Joe Gilroy was his successor and Queen's finished 5th, 7th and 13th under his guidance before his departure at the end of 1978-79 season.  Former player Eddie Hunter took charge and within two seasons, Queen's had been promoted as 1980-81 champions. The talent in the side was obvious. Derek Atkins was an ever-present in goal, John McGregor a high scoring defender and Jimmy Nicholson and Gerry McCoy netted a combined tally of 28 goals. Much of the side was inexperienced, with full-back Bobby Dickson one of the few who had been a mainstay in previous years. After a highly respectable finish of 8th the following season, Queen's finished bottom and were relegated in 1983. The main reason for this was the loss of some of the players who had won Queen's promotion. In particular, John McGregor and Alan Irvine departed, leaving for Liverpool and Everton respectively. During the same season, Queen's lost 2-1 to Rangers at Hampden in the Scottish Cup quarter-finals.  Recovery took a while but eventually a good side featuring Stevie Ross, Kenny Brannigan, Ian McCall and Ross Caven finished 4th in 1985-86 - winning three more games than the Championship side of 1981. Queen's lost narrowly by 2-1 at Celtic Park in the 4th round of the Scottish Cup in the February 1986.  1987-88 was a further improvement but 21 victories was only enough for 3rd place. 1990-91 was another season of frustration as Queen's squandered a chance for promotion after having been in contention for so long and finished 5th, only four points behind 2nd place Montrose. CANNOTANSWER

Question: When did the Queen's Park F.C. reconstruction occur?
Answer: The 1975-76 season saw the reconstruction of the Scottish Leagues and Queen's entered the Second Division.
Queen's Park F.C.

Context: The 1975-76 season saw the reconstruction of the Scottish Leagues and Queen's entered the Second Division. Coinciding with this, Queen's appointed a head coach for the first time. Davie McParland led Queen's to 4th place but left at the end of the season to join Partick Thistle. Joe Gilroy was his successor and Queen's finished 5th, 7th and 13th under his guidance before his departure at the end of 1978-79 season.  Former player Eddie Hunter took charge and within two seasons, Queen's had been promoted as 1980-81 champions. The talent in the side was obvious. Derek Atkins was an ever-present in goal, John McGregor a high scoring defender and Jimmy Nicholson and Gerry McCoy netted a combined tally of 28 goals. Much of the side was inexperienced, with full-back Bobby Dickson one of the few who had been a mainstay in previous years. After a highly respectable finish of 8th the following season, Queen's finished bottom and were relegated in 1983. The main reason for this was the loss of some of the players who had won Queen's promotion. In particular, John McGregor and Alan Irvine departed, leaving for Liverpool and Everton respectively. During the same season, Queen's lost 2-1 to Rangers at Hampden in the Scottish Cup quarter-finals.  Recovery took a while but eventually a good side featuring Stevie Ross, Kenny Brannigan, Ian McCall and Ross Caven finished 4th in 1985-86 - winning three more games than the Championship side of 1981. Queen's lost narrowly by 2-1 at Celtic Park in the 4th round of the Scottish Cup in the February 1986.  1987-88 was a further improvement but 21 victories was only enough for 3rd place. 1990-91 was another season of frustration as Queen's squandered a chance for promotion after having been in contention for so long and finished 5th, only four points behind 2nd place Montrose. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What exactly changed during the Queen's Park F.C. reconstruction?
Answer: Former player Eddie Hunter took charge and within two seasons, Queen's had been promoted as 1980-81 champions.
Queen's Park F.C.

Context: The 1975-76 season saw the reconstruction of the Scottish Leagues and Queen's entered the Second Division. Coinciding with this, Queen's appointed a head coach for the first time. Davie McParland led Queen's to 4th place but left at the end of the season to join Partick Thistle. Joe Gilroy was his successor and Queen's finished 5th, 7th and 13th under his guidance before his departure at the end of 1978-79 season.  Former player Eddie Hunter took charge and within two seasons, Queen's had been promoted as 1980-81 champions. The talent in the side was obvious. Derek Atkins was an ever-present in goal, John McGregor a high scoring defender and Jimmy Nicholson and Gerry McCoy netted a combined tally of 28 goals. Much of the side was inexperienced, with full-back Bobby Dickson one of the few who had been a mainstay in previous years. After a highly respectable finish of 8th the following season, Queen's finished bottom and were relegated in 1983. The main reason for this was the loss of some of the players who had won Queen's promotion. In particular, John McGregor and Alan Irvine departed, leaving for Liverpool and Everton respectively. During the same season, Queen's lost 2-1 to Rangers at Hampden in the Scottish Cup quarter-finals.  Recovery took a while but eventually a good side featuring Stevie Ross, Kenny Brannigan, Ian McCall and Ross Caven finished 4th in 1985-86 - winning three more games than the Championship side of 1981. Queen's lost narrowly by 2-1 at Celtic Park in the 4th round of the Scottish Cup in the February 1986.  1987-88 was a further improvement but 21 victories was only enough for 3rd place. 1990-91 was another season of frustration as Queen's squandered a chance for promotion after having been in contention for so long and finished 5th, only four points behind 2nd place Montrose. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Was there a change in the player roster?
Answer: Coinciding with this, Queen's appointed a head coach for the first time.
Queen's Park F.C.

Context: The 1975-76 season saw the reconstruction of the Scottish Leagues and Queen's entered the Second Division. Coinciding with this, Queen's appointed a head coach for the first time. Davie McParland led Queen's to 4th place but left at the end of the season to join Partick Thistle. Joe Gilroy was his successor and Queen's finished 5th, 7th and 13th under his guidance before his departure at the end of 1978-79 season.  Former player Eddie Hunter took charge and within two seasons, Queen's had been promoted as 1980-81 champions. The talent in the side was obvious. Derek Atkins was an ever-present in goal, John McGregor a high scoring defender and Jimmy Nicholson and Gerry McCoy netted a combined tally of 28 goals. Much of the side was inexperienced, with full-back Bobby Dickson one of the few who had been a mainstay in previous years. After a highly respectable finish of 8th the following season, Queen's finished bottom and were relegated in 1983. The main reason for this was the loss of some of the players who had won Queen's promotion. In particular, John McGregor and Alan Irvine departed, leaving for Liverpool and Everton respectively. During the same season, Queen's lost 2-1 to Rangers at Hampden in the Scottish Cup quarter-finals.  Recovery took a while but eventually a good side featuring Stevie Ross, Kenny Brannigan, Ian McCall and Ross Caven finished 4th in 1985-86 - winning three more games than the Championship side of 1981. Queen's lost narrowly by 2-1 at Celtic Park in the 4th round of the Scottish Cup in the February 1986.  1987-88 was a further improvement but 21 victories was only enough for 3rd place. 1990-91 was another season of frustration as Queen's squandered a chance for promotion after having been in contention for so long and finished 5th, only four points behind 2nd place Montrose. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Who was the Queen's appointed head coach?
Answer: Davie McParland led Queen's to 4th place but left at the end of the season to join Partick Thistle.
Queen's Park F.C.

Context: The 1975-76 season saw the reconstruction of the Scottish Leagues and Queen's entered the Second Division. Coinciding with this, Queen's appointed a head coach for the first time. Davie McParland led Queen's to 4th place but left at the end of the season to join Partick Thistle. Joe Gilroy was his successor and Queen's finished 5th, 7th and 13th under his guidance before his departure at the end of 1978-79 season.  Former player Eddie Hunter took charge and within two seasons, Queen's had been promoted as 1980-81 champions. The talent in the side was obvious. Derek Atkins was an ever-present in goal, John McGregor a high scoring defender and Jimmy Nicholson and Gerry McCoy netted a combined tally of 28 goals. Much of the side was inexperienced, with full-back Bobby Dickson one of the few who had been a mainstay in previous years. After a highly respectable finish of 8th the following season, Queen's finished bottom and were relegated in 1983. The main reason for this was the loss of some of the players who had won Queen's promotion. In particular, John McGregor and Alan Irvine departed, leaving for Liverpool and Everton respectively. During the same season, Queen's lost 2-1 to Rangers at Hampden in the Scottish Cup quarter-finals.  Recovery took a while but eventually a good side featuring Stevie Ross, Kenny Brannigan, Ian McCall and Ross Caven finished 4th in 1985-86 - winning three more games than the Championship side of 1981. Queen's lost narrowly by 2-1 at Celtic Park in the 4th round of the Scottish Cup in the February 1986.  1987-88 was a further improvement but 21 victories was only enough for 3rd place. 1990-91 was another season of frustration as Queen's squandered a chance for promotion after having been in contention for so long and finished 5th, only four points behind 2nd place Montrose. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did the team have any star players during the time period when McParland was head coach?
Answer: Derek Atkins was an ever-present in goal, John McGregor a high scoring defender and Jimmy Nicholson and Gerry McCoy netted a combined tally of 28 goals.
Queen's Park F.C.

Context: The 1975-76 season saw the reconstruction of the Scottish Leagues and Queen's entered the Second Division. Coinciding with this, Queen's appointed a head coach for the first time. Davie McParland led Queen's to 4th place but left at the end of the season to join Partick Thistle. Joe Gilroy was his successor and Queen's finished 5th, 7th and 13th under his guidance before his departure at the end of 1978-79 season.  Former player Eddie Hunter took charge and within two seasons, Queen's had been promoted as 1980-81 champions. The talent in the side was obvious. Derek Atkins was an ever-present in goal, John McGregor a high scoring defender and Jimmy Nicholson and Gerry McCoy netted a combined tally of 28 goals. Much of the side was inexperienced, with full-back Bobby Dickson one of the few who had been a mainstay in previous years. After a highly respectable finish of 8th the following season, Queen's finished bottom and were relegated in 1983. The main reason for this was the loss of some of the players who had won Queen's promotion. In particular, John McGregor and Alan Irvine departed, leaving for Liverpool and Everton respectively. During the same season, Queen's lost 2-1 to Rangers at Hampden in the Scottish Cup quarter-finals.  Recovery took a while but eventually a good side featuring Stevie Ross, Kenny Brannigan, Ian McCall and Ross Caven finished 4th in 1985-86 - winning three more games than the Championship side of 1981. Queen's lost narrowly by 2-1 at Celtic Park in the 4th round of the Scottish Cup in the February 1986.  1987-88 was a further improvement but 21 victories was only enough for 3rd place. 1990-91 was another season of frustration as Queen's squandered a chance for promotion after having been in contention for so long and finished 5th, only four points behind 2nd place Montrose. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did Queen's Park F.C. ever become champion again after the 1980-81 season?
Answer: Stevie Ross, Kenny Brannigan, Ian McCall and Ross Caven finished 4th in 1985-86 - winning three more games than the Championship side of 1981.
Guy Carleton, 1st Baron Dorchester

Context: Upon his return to England Carleton recommended the creation of a position of Governor General of all the provinces in British North America. Instead he was appointed "Governor-in-chief", with simultaneous appointments as governor of Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and St. John's Island (present-day Prince Edward Island). He arrived in Quebec on 23 October 1786. His position as Governor-in-chief was mostly ignored. He found quickly that his authority in any of the provinces other than Quebec was effective only while he was present in person.  He was raised to the Peerage in August 1786 as Lord Dorchester, Baron of Dorchester in the County of Oxford.  The Constitutional Act of 1791 split the large territory of Quebec into Upper and Lower Canada, corresponding roughly to areas settled by ethnic British and ethnic French, respectively. Sir Alured Clarke was named as the lieutenant governor of Lower Canada and John Graves Simcoe the lieutenant governor of Upper Canada. In August 1791 Carleton left for Britain and on 7 February 1792 took his seat in the House of Lords. He left for Canada again on 18 August 1793 to resume his duties there. His replacement, Robert Prescott, arrived in May 1796. On 9 July 1796 Carleton sailed from Canada to Britain, never to return.  In retirement Carleton lived mostly at Greywell Hill, adjoining Nately Scures, in Hampshire. After about 1805 he moved to Stubbings House at Burchett's Green, near Maidenhead, in Berkshire. On 10 November 1808, he died suddenly at Stubbings. He was buried in the parish church of St Swithun's, Nately Scures. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Where did Guy Carleton, reside post-war?
Answer: He arrived in Quebec on 23 October 1786.
Guy Carleton, 1st Baron Dorchester

Context: Upon his return to England Carleton recommended the creation of a position of Governor General of all the provinces in British North America. Instead he was appointed "Governor-in-chief", with simultaneous appointments as governor of Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and St. John's Island (present-day Prince Edward Island). He arrived in Quebec on 23 October 1786. His position as Governor-in-chief was mostly ignored. He found quickly that his authority in any of the provinces other than Quebec was effective only while he was present in person.  He was raised to the Peerage in August 1786 as Lord Dorchester, Baron of Dorchester in the County of Oxford.  The Constitutional Act of 1791 split the large territory of Quebec into Upper and Lower Canada, corresponding roughly to areas settled by ethnic British and ethnic French, respectively. Sir Alured Clarke was named as the lieutenant governor of Lower Canada and John Graves Simcoe the lieutenant governor of Upper Canada. In August 1791 Carleton left for Britain and on 7 February 1792 took his seat in the House of Lords. He left for Canada again on 18 August 1793 to resume his duties there. His replacement, Robert Prescott, arrived in May 1796. On 9 July 1796 Carleton sailed from Canada to Britain, never to return.  In retirement Carleton lived mostly at Greywell Hill, adjoining Nately Scures, in Hampshire. After about 1805 he moved to Stubbings House at Burchett's Green, near Maidenhead, in Berkshire. On 10 November 1808, he died suddenly at Stubbings. He was buried in the parish church of St Swithun's, Nately Scures. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What did Guy Carleton do in Quebec?
Answer: he was appointed "Governor-in-chief", with simultaneous appointments as governor of Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and St. John's Island (
Guy Carleton, 1st Baron Dorchester

Context: Upon his return to England Carleton recommended the creation of a position of Governor General of all the provinces in British North America. Instead he was appointed "Governor-in-chief", with simultaneous appointments as governor of Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and St. John's Island (present-day Prince Edward Island). He arrived in Quebec on 23 October 1786. His position as Governor-in-chief was mostly ignored. He found quickly that his authority in any of the provinces other than Quebec was effective only while he was present in person.  He was raised to the Peerage in August 1786 as Lord Dorchester, Baron of Dorchester in the County of Oxford.  The Constitutional Act of 1791 split the large territory of Quebec into Upper and Lower Canada, corresponding roughly to areas settled by ethnic British and ethnic French, respectively. Sir Alured Clarke was named as the lieutenant governor of Lower Canada and John Graves Simcoe the lieutenant governor of Upper Canada. In August 1791 Carleton left for Britain and on 7 February 1792 took his seat in the House of Lords. He left for Canada again on 18 August 1793 to resume his duties there. His replacement, Robert Prescott, arrived in May 1796. On 9 July 1796 Carleton sailed from Canada to Britain, never to return.  In retirement Carleton lived mostly at Greywell Hill, adjoining Nately Scures, in Hampshire. After about 1805 he moved to Stubbings House at Burchett's Green, near Maidenhead, in Berkshire. On 10 November 1808, he died suddenly at Stubbings. He was buried in the parish church of St Swithun's, Nately Scures. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did Guy Carleton do anything notable while Governor-in-chief?
Answer: His position as Governor-in-chief was mostly ignored.
Guy Carleton, 1st Baron Dorchester

Context: Upon his return to England Carleton recommended the creation of a position of Governor General of all the provinces in British North America. Instead he was appointed "Governor-in-chief", with simultaneous appointments as governor of Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and St. John's Island (present-day Prince Edward Island). He arrived in Quebec on 23 October 1786. His position as Governor-in-chief was mostly ignored. He found quickly that his authority in any of the provinces other than Quebec was effective only while he was present in person.  He was raised to the Peerage in August 1786 as Lord Dorchester, Baron of Dorchester in the County of Oxford.  The Constitutional Act of 1791 split the large territory of Quebec into Upper and Lower Canada, corresponding roughly to areas settled by ethnic British and ethnic French, respectively. Sir Alured Clarke was named as the lieutenant governor of Lower Canada and John Graves Simcoe the lieutenant governor of Upper Canada. In August 1791 Carleton left for Britain and on 7 February 1792 took his seat in the House of Lords. He left for Canada again on 18 August 1793 to resume his duties there. His replacement, Robert Prescott, arrived in May 1796. On 9 July 1796 Carleton sailed from Canada to Britain, never to return.  In retirement Carleton lived mostly at Greywell Hill, adjoining Nately Scures, in Hampshire. After about 1805 he moved to Stubbings House at Burchett's Green, near Maidenhead, in Berkshire. On 10 November 1808, he died suddenly at Stubbings. He was buried in the parish church of St Swithun's, Nately Scures. CANNOTANSWER

Question: What did Guy Carleton do after holding the position of Governor-in-chief?
Answer: He was raised to the Peerage in August 1786 as Lord Dorchester, Baron of Dorchester in the County of Oxford.
Guy Carleton, 1st Baron Dorchester

Context: Upon his return to England Carleton recommended the creation of a position of Governor General of all the provinces in British North America. Instead he was appointed "Governor-in-chief", with simultaneous appointments as governor of Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and St. John's Island (present-day Prince Edward Island). He arrived in Quebec on 23 October 1786. His position as Governor-in-chief was mostly ignored. He found quickly that his authority in any of the provinces other than Quebec was effective only while he was present in person.  He was raised to the Peerage in August 1786 as Lord Dorchester, Baron of Dorchester in the County of Oxford.  The Constitutional Act of 1791 split the large territory of Quebec into Upper and Lower Canada, corresponding roughly to areas settled by ethnic British and ethnic French, respectively. Sir Alured Clarke was named as the lieutenant governor of Lower Canada and John Graves Simcoe the lieutenant governor of Upper Canada. In August 1791 Carleton left for Britain and on 7 February 1792 took his seat in the House of Lords. He left for Canada again on 18 August 1793 to resume his duties there. His replacement, Robert Prescott, arrived in May 1796. On 9 July 1796 Carleton sailed from Canada to Britain, never to return.  In retirement Carleton lived mostly at Greywell Hill, adjoining Nately Scures, in Hampshire. After about 1805 he moved to Stubbings House at Burchett's Green, near Maidenhead, in Berkshire. On 10 November 1808, he died suddenly at Stubbings. He was buried in the parish church of St Swithun's, Nately Scures. CANNOTANSWER

Question: How long was Guy Carleton in the County of Oxford?
Answer: In August 1791 Carleton left for Britain and on 7 February 1792 took his seat in the House of Lords.
Guy Carleton, 1st Baron Dorchester

Context: Upon his return to England Carleton recommended the creation of a position of Governor General of all the provinces in British North America. Instead he was appointed "Governor-in-chief", with simultaneous appointments as governor of Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and St. John's Island (present-day Prince Edward Island). He arrived in Quebec on 23 October 1786. His position as Governor-in-chief was mostly ignored. He found quickly that his authority in any of the provinces other than Quebec was effective only while he was present in person.  He was raised to the Peerage in August 1786 as Lord Dorchester, Baron of Dorchester in the County of Oxford.  The Constitutional Act of 1791 split the large territory of Quebec into Upper and Lower Canada, corresponding roughly to areas settled by ethnic British and ethnic French, respectively. Sir Alured Clarke was named as the lieutenant governor of Lower Canada and John Graves Simcoe the lieutenant governor of Upper Canada. In August 1791 Carleton left for Britain and on 7 February 1792 took his seat in the House of Lords. He left for Canada again on 18 August 1793 to resume his duties there. His replacement, Robert Prescott, arrived in May 1796. On 9 July 1796 Carleton sailed from Canada to Britain, never to return.  In retirement Carleton lived mostly at Greywell Hill, adjoining Nately Scures, in Hampshire. After about 1805 he moved to Stubbings House at Burchett's Green, near Maidenhead, in Berkshire. On 10 November 1808, he died suddenly at Stubbings. He was buried in the parish church of St Swithun's, Nately Scures. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did Guy Carlton hold any positions after his time in the House of Lords?
Answer: He left for Canada again on 18 August 1793 to resume his duties there.
Guy Carleton, 1st Baron Dorchester

Context: Upon his return to England Carleton recommended the creation of a position of Governor General of all the provinces in British North America. Instead he was appointed "Governor-in-chief", with simultaneous appointments as governor of Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and St. John's Island (present-day Prince Edward Island). He arrived in Quebec on 23 October 1786. His position as Governor-in-chief was mostly ignored. He found quickly that his authority in any of the provinces other than Quebec was effective only while he was present in person.  He was raised to the Peerage in August 1786 as Lord Dorchester, Baron of Dorchester in the County of Oxford.  The Constitutional Act of 1791 split the large territory of Quebec into Upper and Lower Canada, corresponding roughly to areas settled by ethnic British and ethnic French, respectively. Sir Alured Clarke was named as the lieutenant governor of Lower Canada and John Graves Simcoe the lieutenant governor of Upper Canada. In August 1791 Carleton left for Britain and on 7 February 1792 took his seat in the House of Lords. He left for Canada again on 18 August 1793 to resume his duties there. His replacement, Robert Prescott, arrived in May 1796. On 9 July 1796 Carleton sailed from Canada to Britain, never to return.  In retirement Carleton lived mostly at Greywell Hill, adjoining Nately Scures, in Hampshire. After about 1805 he moved to Stubbings House at Burchett's Green, near Maidenhead, in Berkshire. On 10 November 1808, he died suddenly at Stubbings. He was buried in the parish church of St Swithun's, Nately Scures. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did Guy Carlton stay in Canada for long?
Answer: On 9 July 1796 Carleton sailed from Canada to Britain, never to return.
Guy Carleton, 1st Baron Dorchester

Context: Upon his return to England Carleton recommended the creation of a position of Governor General of all the provinces in British North America. Instead he was appointed "Governor-in-chief", with simultaneous appointments as governor of Quebec, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and St. John's Island (present-day Prince Edward Island). He arrived in Quebec on 23 October 1786. His position as Governor-in-chief was mostly ignored. He found quickly that his authority in any of the provinces other than Quebec was effective only while he was present in person.  He was raised to the Peerage in August 1786 as Lord Dorchester, Baron of Dorchester in the County of Oxford.  The Constitutional Act of 1791 split the large territory of Quebec into Upper and Lower Canada, corresponding roughly to areas settled by ethnic British and ethnic French, respectively. Sir Alured Clarke was named as the lieutenant governor of Lower Canada and John Graves Simcoe the lieutenant governor of Upper Canada. In August 1791 Carleton left for Britain and on 7 February 1792 took his seat in the House of Lords. He left for Canada again on 18 August 1793 to resume his duties there. His replacement, Robert Prescott, arrived in May 1796. On 9 July 1796 Carleton sailed from Canada to Britain, never to return.  In retirement Carleton lived mostly at Greywell Hill, adjoining Nately Scures, in Hampshire. After about 1805 he moved to Stubbings House at Burchett's Green, near Maidenhead, in Berkshire. On 10 November 1808, he died suddenly at Stubbings. He was buried in the parish church of St Swithun's, Nately Scures. CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did Guy Carlton die in Britain?
Answer: Berkshire. On 10 November 1808, he died suddenly at Stubbings.
Norman Borlaug

Context: Borlaug's name is nearly synonymous with the Green Revolution, against which many criticisms have been mounted over the decades by environmentalists and some nutritionalists. Throughout his years of research, Borlaug's programs often faced opposition by people who consider genetic crossbreeding to be unnatural or to have negative effects. Borlaug's work has been criticized for bringing large-scale monoculture, input-intensive farming techniques to countries that had previously relied on subsistence farming. These farming techniques often reap large profits for U.S. agribusiness and agrochemical corporations and have been criticized for widening social inequality in the countries owing to uneven food distribution while forcing a capitalist agenda of U.S. corporations onto countries that had undergone land reform.  Other concerns of his critics and critics of biotechnology in general include: that the construction of roads in populated third-world areas could lead to the destruction of wilderness; the crossing of genetic barriers; the inability of crops to fulfill all nutritional requirements; the decreased biodiversity from planting a small number of varieties; the environmental and economic effects of inorganic fertilizer and pesticides; the amount of herbicide sprayed on fields of herbicide-resistant crops.  Borlaug dismissed most claims of critics, but did take certain concerns seriously. He stated that his work has been "a change in the right direction, but it has not transformed the world into a Utopia". Of environmental lobbyists he stated, "some of the environmental lobbyists of the Western nations are the salt of the earth, but many of them are elitists. They've never experienced the physical sensation of hunger. They do their lobbying from comfortable office suites in Washington or Brussels. If they lived just one month amid the misery of the developing world, as I have for fifty years, they'd be crying out for tractors and fertilizer and irrigation canals and be outraged that fashionable elitists back home were trying to deny them these things". CANNOTANSWER

Question: Who was Norman Borlaug's most vocal critic?
Answer: mounted over the decades by environmentalists and some nutritionalists.
Norman Borlaug

Context: Borlaug's name is nearly synonymous with the Green Revolution, against which many criticisms have been mounted over the decades by environmentalists and some nutritionalists. Throughout his years of research, Borlaug's programs often faced opposition by people who consider genetic crossbreeding to be unnatural or to have negative effects. Borlaug's work has been criticized for bringing large-scale monoculture, input-intensive farming techniques to countries that had previously relied on subsistence farming. These farming techniques often reap large profits for U.S. agribusiness and agrochemical corporations and have been criticized for widening social inequality in the countries owing to uneven food distribution while forcing a capitalist agenda of U.S. corporations onto countries that had undergone land reform.  Other concerns of his critics and critics of biotechnology in general include: that the construction of roads in populated third-world areas could lead to the destruction of wilderness; the crossing of genetic barriers; the inability of crops to fulfill all nutritional requirements; the decreased biodiversity from planting a small number of varieties; the environmental and economic effects of inorganic fertilizer and pesticides; the amount of herbicide sprayed on fields of herbicide-resistant crops.  Borlaug dismissed most claims of critics, but did take certain concerns seriously. He stated that his work has been "a change in the right direction, but it has not transformed the world into a Utopia". Of environmental lobbyists he stated, "some of the environmental lobbyists of the Western nations are the salt of the earth, but many of them are elitists. They've never experienced the physical sensation of hunger. They do their lobbying from comfortable office suites in Washington or Brussels. If they lived just one month amid the misery of the developing world, as I have for fifty years, they'd be crying out for tractors and fertilizer and irrigation canals and be outraged that fashionable elitists back home were trying to deny them these things". CANNOTANSWER

Question: What was the critics' biggest issue with Norman Borlaug?
Answer: faced opposition by people who consider genetic crossbreeding to be unnatural or to have negative effects.
Norman Borlaug

Context: Borlaug's name is nearly synonymous with the Green Revolution, against which many criticisms have been mounted over the decades by environmentalists and some nutritionalists. Throughout his years of research, Borlaug's programs often faced opposition by people who consider genetic crossbreeding to be unnatural or to have negative effects. Borlaug's work has been criticized for bringing large-scale monoculture, input-intensive farming techniques to countries that had previously relied on subsistence farming. These farming techniques often reap large profits for U.S. agribusiness and agrochemical corporations and have been criticized for widening social inequality in the countries owing to uneven food distribution while forcing a capitalist agenda of U.S. corporations onto countries that had undergone land reform.  Other concerns of his critics and critics of biotechnology in general include: that the construction of roads in populated third-world areas could lead to the destruction of wilderness; the crossing of genetic barriers; the inability of crops to fulfill all nutritional requirements; the decreased biodiversity from planting a small number of varieties; the environmental and economic effects of inorganic fertilizer and pesticides; the amount of herbicide sprayed on fields of herbicide-resistant crops.  Borlaug dismissed most claims of critics, but did take certain concerns seriously. He stated that his work has been "a change in the right direction, but it has not transformed the world into a Utopia". Of environmental lobbyists he stated, "some of the environmental lobbyists of the Western nations are the salt of the earth, but many of them are elitists. They've never experienced the physical sensation of hunger. They do their lobbying from comfortable office suites in Washington or Brussels. If they lived just one month amid the misery of the developing world, as I have for fifty years, they'd be crying out for tractors and fertilizer and irrigation canals and be outraged that fashionable elitists back home were trying to deny them these things". CANNOTANSWER

Question: Did Norman Borlaug prove the critics wrong?
Answer: CANNOTANSWER
Norman Borlaug

Context: Borlaug's name is nearly synonymous with the Green Revolution, against which many criticisms have been mounted over the decades by environmentalists and some nutritionalists. Throughout his years of research, Borlaug's programs often faced opposition by people who consider genetic crossbreeding to be unnatural or to have negative effects. Borlaug's work has been criticized for bringing large-scale monoculture, input-intensive farming techniques to countries that had previously relied on subsistence farming. These farming techniques often reap large profits for U.S. agribusiness and agrochemical corporations and have been criticized for widening social inequality in the countries owing to uneven food distribution while forcing a capitalist agenda of U.S. corporations onto countries that had undergone land reform.  Other concerns of his critics and critics of biotechnology in general include: that the construction of roads in populated third-world areas could lead to the destruction of wilderness; the crossing of genetic barriers; the inability of crops to fulfill all nutritional requirements; the decreased biodiversity from planting a small number of varieties; the environmental and economic effects of inorganic fertilizer and pesticides; the amount of herbicide sprayed on fields of herbicide-resistant crops.  Borlaug dismissed most claims of critics, but did take certain concerns seriously. He stated that his work has been "a change in the right direction, but it has not transformed the world into a Utopia". Of environmental lobbyists he stated, "some of the environmental lobbyists of the Western nations are the salt of the earth, but many of them are elitists. They've never experienced the physical sensation of hunger. They do their lobbying from comfortable office suites in Washington or Brussels. If they lived just one month amid the misery of the developing world, as I have for fifty years, they'd be crying out for tractors and fertilizer and irrigation canals and be outraged that fashionable elitists back home were trying to deny them these things". CANNOTANSWER

Question: What did Norman Borlaug think about his critics?
Answer: Borlaug dismissed most claims of critics, but did take certain concerns seriously.
Norman Borlaug

Context: Borlaug's name is nearly synonymous with the Green Revolution, against which many criticisms have been mounted over the decades by environmentalists and some nutritionalists. Throughout his years of research, Borlaug's programs often faced opposition by people who consider genetic crossbreeding to be unnatural or to have negative effects. Borlaug's work has been criticized for bringing large-scale monoculture, input-intensive farming techniques to countries that had previously relied on subsistence farming. These farming techniques often reap large profits for U.S. agribusiness and agrochemical corporations and have been criticized for widening social inequality in the countries owing to uneven food distribution while forcing a capitalist agenda of U.S. corporations onto countries that had undergone land reform.  Other concerns of his critics and critics of biotechnology in general include: that the construction of roads in populated third-world areas could lead to the destruction of wilderness; the crossing of genetic barriers; the inability of crops to fulfill all nutritional requirements; the decreased biodiversity from planting a small number of varieties; the environmental and economic effects of inorganic fertilizer and pesticides; the amount of herbicide sprayed on fields of herbicide-resistant crops.  Borlaug dismissed most claims of critics, but did take certain concerns seriously. He stated that his work has been "a change in the right direction, but it has not transformed the world into a Utopia". Of environmental lobbyists he stated, "some of the environmental lobbyists of the Western nations are the salt of the earth, but many of them are elitists. They've never experienced the physical sensation of hunger. They do their lobbying from comfortable office suites in Washington or Brussels. If they lived just one month amid the misery of the developing world, as I have for fifty years, they'd be crying out for tractors and fertilizer and irrigation canals and be outraged that fashionable elitists back home were trying to deny them these things". CANNOTANSWER

Question: Which concerns of his critics did Norman Borlaug take seriously?
Answer: He stated that his work has been "a change in the right direction, but it has not transformed the world into a Utopia
Norman Borlaug

Context: Borlaug's name is nearly synonymous with the Green Revolution, against which many criticisms have been mounted over the decades by environmentalists and some nutritionalists. Throughout his years of research, Borlaug's programs often faced opposition by people who consider genetic crossbreeding to be unnatural or to have negative effects. Borlaug's work has been criticized for bringing large-scale monoculture, input-intensive farming techniques to countries that had previously relied on subsistence farming. These farming techniques often reap large profits for U.S. agribusiness and agrochemical corporations and have been criticized for widening social inequality in the countries owing to uneven food distribution while forcing a capitalist agenda of U.S. corporations onto countries that had undergone land reform.  Other concerns of his critics and critics of biotechnology in general include: that the construction of roads in populated third-world areas could lead to the destruction of wilderness; the crossing of genetic barriers; the inability of crops to fulfill all nutritional requirements; the decreased biodiversity from planting a small number of varieties; the environmental and economic effects of inorganic fertilizer and pesticides; the amount of herbicide sprayed on fields of herbicide-resistant crops.  Borlaug dismissed most claims of critics, but did take certain concerns seriously. He stated that his work has been "a change in the right direction, but it has not transformed the world into a Utopia". Of environmental lobbyists he stated, "some of the environmental lobbyists of the Western nations are the salt of the earth, but many of them are elitists. They've never experienced the physical sensation of hunger. They do their lobbying from comfortable office suites in Washington or Brussels. If they lived just one month amid the misery of the developing world, as I have for fifty years, they'd be crying out for tractors and fertilizer and irrigation canals and be outraged that fashionable elitists back home were trying to deny them these things". CANNOTANSWER

Question: In addition to Norman Borlaug's response to his critics, is there any other interesting information?
Answer: If they lived just one month amid the misery of the developing world, as I have for fifty years, they'd be crying out for tractors and fertilizer and irrigation
Jack White

Context: White has been called "eccentric." He is known for creating mythology around his endeavors; examples include his claim that the Stripes began on Bastille Day, that he and Meg are the two youngest of ten siblings, and that Third Man Records used to be a candy factory. These assertions came into question or were disproven, such as when, in 2002, the Detroit Free Press produced copies of both a marriage license and divorce certificate for him and Meg, confirming their history as a married couple. Neither addresses the truth officially, and Jack continues to refer to Meg as his sister in interviews, including in the documentary Under Great White Northern Lights, filmed in 2007. In a 2005 interview with Rolling Stone magazine, Jack alluded to this open secret, implying that it was intended to keep the focus on the music rather than the couple's relationship:  "When you see a band that is two pieces, husband and wife, boyfriend and girlfriend, you think, 'Oh, I see...' When they're brother and sister, you go, 'Oh, that's interesting.' You care more about the music, not the relationship--whether they're trying to save their relationship by being in a band."  He has an attachment to the number three, stemming from seeing three staples in the back of a Vladimir Kagan couch he helped to upholster as an apprentice. His business ventures frequently feature "three" in the title and he typically appends "III" to the end of his name. During the White Stripes 2005 tour in the UK, White began referring to himself as "Three Quid"--"quid" being British slang for pound sterling.  He maintains an aesthetic that he says challenges whether people will believe he is "real." He frequently color-codes his endeavors, such as the aforementioned Third Man Upholstery and The White Stripes, as well as Third Man Records, which is completely outfitted in yellow, black, red, and blue (including staff uniforms). As a taxidermy enthusiast--that correlates to his work as an upholsterer--he decorates his studio in preserved animals, including a peacock, giraffe, and Himalayan goat. CANNOTANSWER

Question: what was eccentricity?
Answer: White has been called "eccentric."