In this task, you're given an article and an answer. Your task is to generate the question for the answer based on the given article.

[Q]: Article: I don't want to talk about being a woman scientist again. There was a time in my life when people asked constantly for stories about what it's like to work in a field dominated (controlled) by men. I was never very good at telling those stories because truthfully I never found them interesting. What I do find interesting is the origin of the universe, the shape of space, time and the nature of black holes. At 19, when I began studying astrophysics , it did not bother me in the least to be the only woman in the classroom. But while earning my Ph.D. at MIT and then as a post-doctor doing space research, the issue started to bother me. My every achievement--jobs, research papers, awards--was viewed through the lens of gender politics. So were my failures. Sometimes, when I was pushed into an argument on left brain versus right brain, or nature versus nurture , I would instantly fight fiercely on my behalf and all womankind. Then one day a few years ago, out of my mouth came a sentence that would eventually become my reply to any and all provocations : I don't talk about that anymore. It took me 10 years to get back the confidence I had at 19 and to realize that I didn't want to deal with gender issues. Why should curing sexism be yet another terrible burden on every female scientist? After all, I don't study sociology or political theory. Today I research and teach at Barnard, a women's college in New York City. Recently, someone asked me how many of the 45 students in my class were women. You cannot imagine my satisfaction at being able to answer, 45. I know some of my students worry how they will manage their scientific research and a desire for children. And I don't dismiss those concerns. Still, I don't tell them "war" stories. Instead, I have given them this: the visual of their physics professor heavily pregnant doing physics experiments. And in turn they have given me the image of 45 women driven by a love of science. And that's a sight worth talking about.
Answer: She is fed up with the issue of gender discrimination .
[A]: Why doesn't the author want to talk about being a woman scientist again?

[Q]: Article: December 2 Sharon called about four times today. At least it shows she's trying to explain something to me. I feel a little better. December 3 This morning Sharon said she had only told one person and didn't know why everyone seemed to know. Yes, I am an adopted daughter. But she had promised to keep it a secret for ever! December 5 I wish I had a friend I could really trust all of the time. I thought I found that friend, but I haven't and it's making me miserable ! It's wrong to tell her all about it. She gains my trust, and then loses it. December 7 I have a nice room, beautiful house and everything I've ever wanted. My adoptive parents will give me all the things I've ever dreamed of. Yet all the money in the world can't buy what I want now. I want for Sharon to be my best friend again. December 10 Sharon just called. She said she thought it might help if we spent more time together. She worried that I would switch schools . She is the best friend I've ever had. When I'm with Sharon, I can be myself. I need Sharon's friendship. I need it more than I've ever known. December 16 I just had the most _ two days of my life! This was the best time I've had for a long, long while. Yesterday, we walked five times around the park and today we walked along the river for twenty minutes. We talked so much. Sharon, Sharon, no brick wall between us now.
Answer: Her friendship with Sharon.
[A]: What is the author mainly worried about?

[Q]: Article: Old Fossils Scientists have found what they think is probably the oldest fossil on Earth, a remnant of life from 3.7 billion years ago when Earth's skies were orange and its oceans green. In a newly melted part of Greenland, Australian scientists found the leftover structure from a community of microbes that lived on an ancient seafloor. Based on their analysis of the fossils, the researchers determined that they are 220 million years older than those discovered in Western Australia, which were 3.48 billion years old. The discovery shows life may have formed quicker and more easily than once thought, about half a billion years after Earth formed. And that may also give hope for life forming elsewhere, such as Mars, said study co-author Martin VanKranendonk of the University of New South Wales and director of the Australian Center for Astrobiology. "It gives us an idea how our planet evolved and how life gained a foothold," VanKranendonk said. Scientists had thought it would take at least half a billion years for life to form after the molten Earth started to cool a bit, but this shows it could have happened quicker, he said. That's because the newly found fossil is far too complex to have developed soon after the planet's first life forms, he said. In an outcrop of rocks that used to be covered with ice and snow which melted after an exceptionally warm spring, the Australian team found stromatolites , which are layered structures that are often produced by a community of microbes. The stromatolites were about 1 to 4 centimeters high. "It is like the house left behind made by the microbes," VanKranendonk said. "Scientists used the layers of ash from volcanoes and tiny zircon with uranium and estimated that they date back to 3.7 billion years ago." The dating seems about right, said Abigail Allwood, a NASA astrobiologist who found the previous oldest fossil, from 3.48 billion years ago, in Australia. But Allwood said she is not completely convinced that what VanKranendonk's team found once was alive. She said the evidence wasn't conclusive enough that it was life and not a geologic quirk . "It would be nice to have more evidence, but in these rocks that's a lot to ask," Allwood said in an email.
Answer: Sceptical.
[A]:
What is Abigail Allwood's attitude towards the newly found fossil?