Question:
Based on the premise "Bloor, M. On the Analysis of Observational A Discussion of the Worth and Use of Inductive Techniques and Respondent Validation.", can we conclude that "Bloor, M. does Analysis of Observational Discussion."? OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
****
Answer:
yes

Question: Sentence A: A little bluster, a little charm...it can get you a long way.

Sentence B: Charm never got anyone anywhere.

If sentence A is true, how about sentence B?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: no

Question: Therefore, the profit position of the postal service increases to the tune of about $650 million and the technical gain to the Nation goes up to the same $650 million.
The results are an increase in profit for the postal service, technical gain for the nation, and long term viability for the postal service.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: it is not possible to tell

Problem: Here is a premise:
lots of really big you know lots of local fans you know small stadium you know um and they'll get a crowd of less than ten thousand sometimes you know um

Here is a hypothesis:
The stadium is very small.

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

Answer: yes

Sentence 1: Could be that they knew you ride for Hunt and that made you just the game they wanted."

Sentence 2: There is no way they would know that you ride for Hunt.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer: no

Premise:
"Could be that they knew you ride for Hunt and that made you just the game they wanted.""
Hypothesis: They might have known that you ride for Hunt.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
yes