Problem:OPTIONS:
- the Korean's like the ceremony
- not enough information
- the relationship between the two countries is good
- tree planting is a good idea

SEOUL The annual U.S.South Korea joint military exercises currently underway have historically been a very public demonstration of force intended, in part, to counter North Korea's aggressive nuclear and missile tests. But with looming diplomatic summits aimed at reaching a deal to end the North's nuclear program, media coverage of the drills has so far been limited. This week, the U.S. Second Infantry Division held a public tree planting ceremony at Camp Casey in South Korea, near the inter-Korean border. "It is my belief that this tree, like those that have come before it, shall symbolize the roots that bind us together, and to our past in an enduring way," said General Jon Howerton, the deputy commander of the U.S. 2nd Infantry Division, at the event. The journalists attending the tree ceremony were also permitted to watch a shooting competition to determine the best marksmen in the participating U.S. and South Korean divisions. The Camp Casey event was one of the few joint military training activities that news organizations have, so far, been allowed to cover, and it illustrates how the United States and South Korea are downplaying the offensive component of this year's combined exercises. "This is clearly in order to send a signal to North Korea that South Korea and the United States are not willing to escalate the situation any further," said Go Myong-Hyun, a North Korea analyst with the Asan Institute for Policy Studies in Seoul. This year's Foal Eagle and Key Resolve combined military exercises are similar in scale to past drills, with more than 23,000 U.S. troops and 300,000 South Korean forces engaging in joint battlefield maneuvers, and responding to computer-simulated attacks from North Korea. But the start of the drills was delayed this year at South Korea's request to set a peaceful tone for the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics in the South and to facilitate the North's participation in the games. Question: The general probably believes that === The answer to the above question is
****
A: tree planting is a good idea

It has become increasingly common for academics to use social media to communicate with wider audiences. Twitter, like many other social platforms, typically measures success in terms of numbers of followers, likes and retweets, but this only tells us something about the spreading of messages but not necessarily whether the content of the messages is understood or embraced. One way to ascertain this is through network and language analysis, which, used together, can tell us how effective the communication is. Economists tweet less, mention fewer people and have fewer conversations with strangers than a comparable group of experts in the sciences, and use less accessible language with words that are more complex, with more abbreviations and with a more distant tone. Their tweets are less personal and less inclusive than those used by scientists. This is what appeared in April 2017 when we gathered data on tens of thousands of tweets from the Twitter accounts of both the top 25 economists and 25 scientists as identified by IDEAS and Science, including the top three economists at the time, Paul Krugman, Joseph Stiglitz, and Erik Brynjolfsson and, on the other side, the top three scientists, Neil deGrasse Tyson, Brian Cox, and Richard Dawkins. At that time those accounts covered roughly two thirds of all the following. The timing is significant because 2016 has been declared the year of post-truth politics, the year in which appeals to emotions (pathos) superseded the significance of factual evidence-based information (logos), affecting people's constructions and interpretations of events. This has been accompanied by the growing prominence of political "alt" movements (e.g. UKIP, the Alt-right) and their aggressive, provocative, and populist narratives, and "fake news" leading to political shock events such as Brexit and the Trump election. The relatively low traction of economists in these public debates has been and continues to be an important issue. Does the public not trust economists? Don't they understand... Question: How does the writer feel about economists? === The answer to the above question is
OPTIONS:
- That they don't communicate effectively.
- That they communicate perfectly.
- That the communicate better than scientists.
- not enough information
That they don't communicate effectively.

Problem: OPTIONS:
- not enough information
- 13
- 10
- 12
Q: "Have you ever been in a situation that was getting out of control and you were able to calm it down before it escalated further? What was the situation and what did you do or say?" As senior members of a Boy Scout Troop, other adults and I had to instruct two younger member on how to recognize and control emotions in the context of conflict. These two guys had a history of conflicts and I knew people won't always be present to control them. They had to grow up and be self-sufficient. On one camping trip they yet again had another heated argument over something trivial that kept escalating. Rather than jump in, I wanted to see how they deescalate the situation on their own. Suddenly, one of them pulls out a pocket knife and says "[insert demand here] or I'm gonna [insert some action with a knife to a person]." The situation has clearly escalated too far. Immediately I rushed in and yelled, "STOP! DROP IT, NOW!" He immediately dropped the knife, sat down, and began crying. What happens after that is irrelevant. Perhaps it's due to my quiet nature and sudden outburst that produced the shock effect. But more importantly the use of straight-forward, succinct commands can control the situation because all parties involved are automatically in natural fight-flight mode where elaborate, long explanations aren't going to be interpreted correctly by listeners for the purposes of deescalating the situation's climax. The long talk comes when the immediate conflict is temporarily resolved. * IMPORTANT NOTE: This incident is not a reflection on the Boy Scout of America, its spirit, or the use of such tools. The pocket knife is commonly used throughout camping trips. We have a set of rules and responsibilities set to the users so that they are used for the camping purposes. As an Eagle Scout myself, I am proud of the values promoted. Question: how old is the boy who took out the knife? === The answer to the above question is
Answer:
not enough information