You are given a background paragraph that describes one or more causal or qualitative relationships such as a relationship in economics or a scientific law and a story that makes use of the concepts or the relationship described in the provided paragraph. You need to come up with a question about the story that requires an understanding of the relationship described in the background paragraph. The generated question should not be answerable without both the background and story. Write a question about the story that requires a relationship in the background paragraph to answer. Check whether your question requires both the background paragraph and the story to answer. If your question can be answered by only one of these, try to rewrite your question so that it requires both. Note that "flipping" a word in the question can give rise to a new question where the answer will be different from the original question. Often, "flipping" a word gives rise to flipping the direction of the relationship, for example, from "increase" to "decrease."

[Q]: Background Paragraph: A large log placed in a fire will burn relatively slowly. If the same mass of wood were added to the fire in the form of small twigs, they would burn much more quickly. This is because the twigs provide a greater surface area than the log does. An increase in the surface area of a reactant increases the rate of a reaction. Surface area is larger when a given amount of a solid is present as smaller particles. A powdered reactant has a greater surface area than the same reactant as a solid chunk. In order to increase the surface area of a substance, it may be ground into smaller particles or dissolved into a liquid. In solution, the dissolved particles are separated from each other and will react more quickly with other reactants. 
Story: Two groups of teens studied fire for the physics class. Group S made a fire using large logs, while group F made a fire using small twigs and sawdust. Both groups used the same volume of wood.
[A]: Which group made a fire from fewer particles of wood?


[Q]: Background Paragraph: One of the main causes of extinction is introduction of exotic species into an environment. These exotic and new species can also be called invasive species or non-native species . These non-native species, being new to an area, may not have natural predators in the new habitat, which allows their populations to easily adapt and grow. Invasive species out-compete the native species for resources. Sometimes invasive species are so successful at living in a certain habitat that the native species go extinct ( Figure below ). 
Story: India decided to introduce several exotic species into their environment, while Singapore was very protective of its native species. India encountered big problems with extinction during the following years.
[A]: Which country didn't observe that invasive species out-compete the native species for resources?


[Q]: Background Paragraph: The dangers of global warming are being increasingly studied by a wide global consortium of scientists. These scientists are increasingly concerned about the potential long-term effects of global warming on our natural environment and on the planet. Of particular concern is how climate change and global warming caused by anthropogenic, or human-made releases of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide, can act interactively, and have adverse effects upon the planet, its natural environment and humans' existence. It is clear the planet is warming, and warming rapidly. This is due to the greenhouse effect, which is caused by greenhouse gases, which trap heat inside the Earth's atmosphere because of their more complex molecular structure which allows them to vibrate and in turn trap heat and release it back towards the Earth. This warming is also responsible for the extinction of natural habitats, which in turn leads to a reduction in wildlife population.The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the group of the leading climate scientists in the world) concluded that the earth will warm anywhere from 2.7 to almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 to 6 degrees Celsius) between 1990 and 2100. 
Story: Jessica and Milly are two politicians currently in the running for governor of their city. They are in the process of having a debate that is being broadcast on local television. Mike, an avid environmentalist who is trying to decide who to vote for, has been watching the entire debate. He feels the most important issue when voting is saving the planet and the animals on it. The question that was just asked by the moderator was "what do you think should be done with the Earth's atmosphere?" Jessica responds that she thinks we should emit more anthropogenic gases. She believes that will lead to the best outcome for the world. Milly states that we need to decrease the amount of carbon dioxide and other gases in the atmosphere.
[A]:
Is a scientist more likely to agree with Jessica's philosophy or Milly's philosphy?