Input: Imagine a glass of your favorite drink that never became empty. Now think about what really happens. You take a drink and there is less in the glass. You keep drinking and soon it is all gone. Good thing you have more to refill your glass. What if there would never be any more of your favorite drink. What would you do? Now you know the difference between renewable and non-renewable. Its too bad that many things here on Earth will run out. This includes some of our natural resources we depend on. Things like oil will not last forever. There is a limited supply. Someday, we will run out, so then what? At current rates of use, coal will last about 300 years. Petroleum will be used up in just a few decades.
"Is oil a renewable or non renewable resource and when is it expected to be used up?" is "Nonrewable"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
Output: yes

Input: Have you are burned something on the stove or in the oven? Do you know why things burn? It all has to do with temperature. Changes in matter are affected by temperature. For example, what if you place a cake in the oven and you leave it in too long? What do you think will happen? Thats right, it will probably burn. The same thing will happen if the oven setting is too high and you apply too much heat. In either case, heat has affected the rate of change in matter. Its probably obvious that when the temperature is increased a chemical change, like cooking, will occur faster. What about a physical change? Are physical changes affected by temperature? Most of us have seen steam rising off a wet road after a summer rainstorm. This happens because the road surface is very warm. The warm road and warm air temperature causes the water to evaporate quickly. The liquid water is turning into water vapor, but it is still water. The evaporation of water is a physical change. So yes, temperature affects the rate that physical change occurs.

Does the response "Evaporation of water" correctly answer the question "What is are some physical changes caused by temperature?"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
***
Output: yes

Porky is looking all over the big city for a hotel room , but due to a convention there are no vacancies . Porky takes the only available vacancy at one hotel , but will have to share with Daffy Duck , who is a very loud , obnoxious and annoying sort . Daffy introduces his invisible kangaroo friend '' Hymie '' , but Porky wo n't believe that . Daffy spends the rest of the night annoying Porky : pestering him with questions , shaking the bed , spilling water from a glass , hogging the blanket and finally literally sending the both of them flying off the bed when Daffy kicks , and startles , Porky with his literally frozen feet . Fed up with his antics , Porky stuffs Daffy in a pillow case and drops him out of the window . As Porky goes back to bed , Daffy returns bandaged , but shakes them off and prepares to get revenge . Daffy tricks the half-asleep pig into stepping out of a window thinking he 's boarding a train . Daffy hides the window saying it 's '' too gruesome '' to watch . Suddenly he hears train noises , and behind the shade , sees the still-drowsy Porky pulling away on an actual train and waving at Daffy . Daffy finds this silly . Then he bounces all around the room , '' Hoo-Hoo ! '' - ing wildly .

Question: "Who hears the train noises"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "Bugs Bunny"

Response: no

As noted above, the 9/11 plotters spent somewhere between $400,000 and $500,000 to plan and conduct their attack. The available evidence indicates that the 19 operatives were funded by al Qaeda, either through wire transfers or cash provided by KSM, which they carried into the United States or deposited in foreign accounts and accessed from this country. Our investigation has uncovered no credible evidence that any person in the United States gave the hijackers substantial financial assistance. Similarly, we have seen no evidence that any foreign government-or foreign government official-supplied any funding. We have found no evidence that the Hamburg cell members (Atta, Shehhi, Jarrah, and Binalshibh) received funds from al Qaeda before late 1999. It appears they supported themselves. KSM, Binalshibh, and another plot facilitator, Mustafa al Hawsawi, each received money, in some cases perhaps as much as $10,000, to perform their roles in the plot. After the Hamburg recruits joined the 9/11 conspiracy, al Qaeda began giving them money. Our knowledge of the funding during this period, before the operatives entered the United States, remains murky. According to KSM, the Hamburg cell members each received $5,000 to pay for their return to Germany from Afghanistan after they had been selected to join the plot, and they received additional funds for travel from Germany to the United States. Financial transactions of the plotters are discussed in more detail in chapter 7. Requirements for a Successful Attack As some of the core operatives prepared to leave for the United States, al Qaeda's leaders could have reflected on what they needed to be able to do in order to organize and conduct a complex international terrorist operation to inflict catastrophic harm. We believe such a list of requirements would have included leaders able to evaluate, approve, and supervise the planning and direction of the operation; communications sufficient to enable planning and direction of the operatives and those who would be helping them; a personnel system that could recruit candidates, vet them, indoctrinate them, and give them necessary training; an intelligence effort to gather required information and form assessments of enemy strengths and weaknesses; the ability to move people; and the ability to raise and move the necessary money. The information we have presented about the development of the planes operation shows how, by the spring and summer of 2000, al Qaeda was able to meet these requirements. By late May 2000, two operatives assigned to the planes operation were already in the United States. Three of the four Hamburg cell members would soon arrive.

Question: "Where did money to fund the 9/11 plotters come from and where didn't it come from?"

Response: "U.S"
OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

A: no

Problem: Relying on an animal to come by is risky. A flower may have to wait a long time for the right animals to come by. What if one never passes close enough to the flower? Hoping the wind will blow is also risky for a plant. What if the wind does not blow? What if the blowing pollen does not land on another flower? The wind could even blow the pollen over the ocean where it is wasted. Giving free nectar is costly. It is not a good use of the plants energy. A plant uses a lot of energy to produce nectar. Some animals may just drink the nectar. They may not carry off any pollen in return. To improve their chances, plants evolved special traits. For example, they developed ways to hide their nectar. Only certain animals were able to get at the plants hidden nectar. These specific animals might be more likely to visit only flowers of the same species. This was also a benefit for some animals. Animals also evolved special traits to get to the nectar.

Question: "Why is giving free nectar costly?"

Answer: "Some animals just drink it"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
Answer:
no