Problem: Here is a premise:
You could even argue that American society in the 1990s is an engine that maximizes consumption yet minimizes satisfaction.

Here is a hypothesis:
Consumption was maximized and satisfaction was maximized in the 1990s by American society.

Here are the options: OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: no

Sentence 1: Is it not customary for anyone purchasing poison to sign a book?

Sentence 2: Isn't it customary for people to give a signature when purchasing food?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer: no

Question:
You have wisdom.

Does it follow that "You have honor."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Answer:
it is not possible to tell

Q: If "However what, senor ?"Bartolome's eyes challenged Drew., can we say that "Bartolome was staring at Drew questioning him."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

A: yes

Premise:
"What explains the stunning logical inconsistencies and misrepresentations in this book?"
Hypothesis: Nothing can explain the stunning logical inconsitencies in this book.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

it is not possible to tell

Sentence 1: Still, if scientists had to set up some, sort of a religious mumbo-jumbo....

Sentence 2: Even so, if scientists had to create a system of religious jargon...
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer:
yes