In this task, you're given an article, a question which often contains a blank, four options (associated with "A", "B", "C", "D") and the answer to that question. Your task is to classify whether the given answer is correct or not by providing "Yes" or "No", based on the article.

Article: LONDON ( Reuters)-- Ecotourism is causing a lot of damage to wildlife and may be endangering the survival of the very animals people are flocking to see, according to researchers. Biologists and conservationists are worried because polar bears, dolphins, penguins and other creatures are getting stressed and losing weight and some are dying. "Evidence is growing that many animals do not react well to tourists in their backyard," New Scientist magazine said. The immediate effects researchers have noticed are changes in behavior, heart rates, or stress hormone levels but they fear it could get much worse and over the long term "could endanger the survival of the very wildlife they want to see". Although money produced through ecotourism, which has been growing at about 10--30 percent a year, has major benefits for poor countries and people living in rural areas, the Swiss-based World Conservation Union (IUCN) and some governments fear not all projects are audited and based on environmentally friendly policies, according to the magazine. "The transmission of disease to wildlife, or small changes to wildlife health through disturbance of daily life or increased stress levels, while not obvious to the casual observer, may translate to lower survival and breeding," said Philip Seddon, of the University of Otago in Dunedin, New Zealand. Scientists have noticed that bottleneck dolphins along the northeastern coast of New Zealand become nervously excited when tourist boats arrive. Similar changes in behavior have been observed in polar bears and yellow-eyed penguins in areas visited by ecotourists are producing smaller babies. Conservationists are now calling for more research into the effect of ecotourism on animals and say the industry must be developed carefully. They also want studies done before new ecotourism projects are started. "The animals' welfare should be very important because without them there will be no ecotourism," said Rochelle Constantine of the University of Auckland in New Zealand.
Question: What's the text mainly about?
Options: (A) Many animals are dying because of lack of money. (B) There will be no ecotourism without animals. (C) Ecotourism could endanger the survival of the wildlife people want to see. (D) More research should be done on ecotourism.
Asnwer: D
No

Article: Though the facts that too many people on earth and a too rapid increase in the number added each year are not in argument, we always begin the discussion of "population as global issue" with what most persons mean like this. It was quite right to compare demographic growth to "a long, thin powder fuse that bums steadily and hesitatingly until it finally reaches the charge and explodes". To understand the current situation, which is characterized by rapid increases in population, it is necessary to understand the history of population trends. Rapid growth is a comparatively recent phenomenon. Looking back at the 8,000 years of demographic history, we find that populations have been virtually stable or growing very slightly for most of human history. For most of our ancestors, life was hard, often nasty, and very short. There was high fertility in most places, but this was usually balanced by high mortality. For most of human history, it was seldom the case that one in ten persons would live past forty, while infancy and childhood were especially risky periods. Often, societies were in clear danger of extinction because death rates could exceed their birthrates. Thus, the population problem throughout most of history was how to prevent extinction of the human race. This pattern is important to notice. Not only does it put the current problems of demographic growth into a historical perspective, but it suggests that the cause of rapid increase in population in recent years is not a sudden enthusiasm for more children, but an improvement in the conditions that traditionally have caused high mortality. Demographic history can be divided into two major periods: a time of long, slow growth which extended from about 8000 B.C. till approximately 1650 A.D. In the first period of some 9,600 years, the population increased from some 8 million to 500 million in 1650. Between 1650 and 1975, the population has increased from 500 million to more than 4 billion. And the population reached 6.2 billion throughout the world by the year 2000, One way to appreciate this dramatic difference in such abstract numbers is to reduce the time frame to something that is more manageable. Between 8000 B.C. and 1650, an average of only 50,000 persons was being added annually to the world's population, At present, this number is added every six hours. The increase is about 800000,000 persons annually.
Question: Which of the following demographic growth patterns is most similar to the long thin powder fuse?
Options: (A) A slow growth for a long time and then a period of rapid, dramatic increase. (B) Too many people on earth and a few rapid increases in the number added each year. (C) A virtually stable or slightly decreasing period and then a sudden explosion of population. (D) A long period when death rates exceed birthrates and then a short period with higher fertility and lower mortality.
Asnwer: A
Yes

Article: Are you addicted to computer games? Do you stay up all night playing them? Do you feel happy after you play computer games? There's no doubt that the excitement and appealing of games these days makes them hard to put down. We are attracted by the choice when it comes to gaming: You can role play--creating your own fantasy characters and stories, giving you a chance to step out of everyday life into an imaginary world. And there are shooting games where you can let out your anger and depression in violent situations where you kill people with guns. You can get excited from the games. However, can these kinds of games really be fun and can being absorbed in virtual reality be good for us? Should we worry about their effects on our health? Popular games like Grand Theft Auto have been blamed for everything from falling results at school to causing acts of extreme violence. Internet safety adviser, Alan MacKenzie, thinks "any people understandably will just think that a game is just a game and not realizing the exact content that's in there". He gives an example of the violence, which he says is "wholly inappropriate for anybody, not to mention children." Others will argue that gaming is a harmless form of entertainment. There is evidence that playing video games could actually be good for us. Some games like Game of Thrones and World of Warcraft are educational and using games certainly can help children learn good qualities. Studies have also shown that the skills used in playing games can cause growth in certain areas of the brain, the ability to think in 3D and even improve our eyesight. Video game players are also no longer just simple creatures. For some, gaming is having a positive effect on their social lives with games like Halo and World of Warcraft often being played in groups. When your group works together to win the game, your sense of achievement is higher than when winning by yourself. So every coin has two sides. It seems today, gaming isn't just for game fans and if used in a proper way, we can all take part. If video games have two sides, what side do you stand by?
Question: The writer used a lot of questions at the beginning to _ .
Options: (A) show his worries about the effect on health (B) lead into the topic of the passage (C) ask the reader for their own opinions about games (D) doubt the advantage of playing computer games
Asnwer: D
No