Given a question and a context passage, generate the answer having the word or phrase from the context passage. Here, the answer should be a shortest continous span from the passage.

Context: How quickly is the human population growing? If we look at worldwide human population growth from 10,000 BCE through today, our growth looks like exponential growth. It increased very slowly at first, but later grew faster and faster as the population increased in size ( Figure 1.1). And recently, the human population has increased at a faster pace than ever before. It has taken only 12 years for the worlds population to increase from six billion to seven billion. Considering that in the year 1804, there were just one billion people, and in 1927, there were just two billion people (thats 123 years to increase from 1 to 2 billion), the recent increase in the human population growth rate is characteristic of exponential growth. Does this mean there are unlimited resources? Worldwide human population growth from 10,000 BCE through today. On the other hand, if you look at human population growth in specific countries, you may see a different pattern. On the level of a country, the history of human population growth can be divided into five stages, as described in Table 1.1. Some countries have very high birth rates, in some countries the growth rate has stabilized, and in some countries the growth rate is in decline. Stage 1 2 3 4 5 Description Birth and death rates are high and population growth is stable. This occurred in early human history. Significant drop in death rate, resulting in exponential growth. This occurred in 18th- and 19th-century Eu- rope. Population size continues to grow. Birth rates equal death rates and populations become stable. Total population size may level off. The United Nations and the U.S. Census Bureau predict that by 2050, the Earth will be populated by 9.4 billion people. Other estimates predict 10 to 11 billion. There are two different beliefs about what type of growth the human population will undergo in the future: 1. Neo-Malthusians believe that human population growth cannot continue without destroying the environment, and maybe humans themselves. 2. Cornucopians believe that the Earth can give humans a limitless amount of resources. They also believe that technology can solve problems caused by limited resources, such as lack of food. The Cornucopians believe that a larger population is good for technology and innovation. The 5-stage model above predicts that when all countries are industrialized, the human population will eventually level out. But many scientists and other Neo-Malthusians believe that humans have already gone over the Earths carrying capacity. That means, we may have already reached the maximum population size that can be supported, without destroying our resources and habitat. If this is true, then human overpopulation will lead to a lack of food and other resources. Overpopulation may also lead to increased disease, and/or war. These problems may cause the population of humans to crash. If these issues are not controlled, could the human population go extinct? Which of the above theories makes sense to you? Why? 
 Question: which is the last stage of human population growth?
total population size may level off.

Context: Hoping to break their current losing streak the Cardinals flew to Arrowhead Stadium for an interconference duel with the Chiefs. The Cardinals scored with kicker Jay Feely hitting a 36-yard field goal, but they fell behind with QB Matt Cassel completing a 1-yard TD pass to WR Dwayne Bowe. This was followed by RB Thomas Jones getting a 1 and a 3-yard TD run. The Cardinals responded with Feely making a 29-yard field goal, but they struggled further with kicker Ryan Succop getting a 23-yard field goal, followed by Cassel throwing a 38-yard TD pass to Bowe. The Cardinals cut the lead with QB Derek Anderson completing a 3-yard TD pass to WR Larry Fitzgerald. 
 Question: How many yards was the longest field goal?
36-yard

Context: Jean Hagen (August 3, 1923 -- August 29, 1977) was an American actress best known for her role as Lina Lamont in Singin' in the Rain (1952), for which she was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress. 
 Question: What was Jean Hagen nominated for?

academy award for best supporting actress