Context and question: Medical detection dogs are capable of detecting diseases by sniffing a person directly or samples of urine or other specimens. Dogs can detect odour in one part per trillion, as their brain's olfactory cortex is (relative to total brain size) 40 times larger than humans. Dogs may have as many as 300 million odour receptors in their nose, while humans may have only 5 million. Each dog is trained specifically for the detection of single disease from the blood glucose level indicative to diabetes to cancer. To train a cancer dog requires 6 months. A Labrador Retriever called Daisy has detected 551 cancer patients with an accuracy of 93 percent and received the Blue Cross (for pets) Medal for her life-saving skills.
How much larger is a dog's olfactory cortex than a person's?
Answer: 40 times larger
Context and question: This period is generally taken to coincide with a major shift in population from southern Mesopotamia toward the north. Ecologically, the agricultural productivity of the Sumerian lands was being compromised as a result of rising salinity. Soil salinity in this region had been long recognized as a major problem. Poorly drained irrigated soils, in an arid climate with high levels of evaporation, led to the buildup of dissolved salts in the soil, eventually reducing agricultural yields severely. During the Akkadian and Ur III phases, there was a shift from the cultivation of wheat to the more salt-tolerant barley, but this was insufficient, and during the period from 2100 BC to 1700 BC, it is estimated that the population in this area declined by nearly three fifths. This greatly upset the balance of power within the region, weakening the areas where Sumerian was spoken, and comparatively strengthening those where Akkadian was the major language. Henceforth Sumerian would remain only a literary and liturgical language, similar to the position occupied by Latin in medieval Europe.
What crop was more salt tolerant than barley?
Answer: unanswerable
Context and question: The last centuries of philosophy have seen vigorous questions regarding the arguments for God's existence raised by such philosophers as Immanuel Kant, David Hume and Antony Flew, although Kant held that the argument from morality was valid. The theist response has been either to contend, as does Alvin Plantinga, that faith is "properly basic", or to take, as does Richard Swinburne, the evidentialist position. Some theists agree that none of the arguments for God's existence are compelling, but argue that faith is not a product of reason, but requires risk. There would be no risk, they say, if the arguments for God's existence were as solid as the laws of logic, a position summed up by Pascal as "the heart has reasons of which reason does not know." A recent theory using concepts from physics and neurophysiology proposes that God can be conceptualized within the theory of integrative level.
What two areas are used to say the arguments for God's existence are solid?
Answer:
unanswerable