Question:
The world can be divided into three climate zones. The first climate zone is the polar zone. As it sounds, the polar zone is near earths poles. The polar zone has very long and cold winters. Brrr!!!! Near the equator is the tropical zone. The tropical zone is known for being hot and wet. Between these two zones is the temperate zone. Temperatures there tend to be mild. Its not too hot and not too cold. You might expect places near the equator to be hot and wet. Thats not always the case. Sometimes there are other factors at work. These factors can affect the local climate type or a region. Oceans and mountain ranges can have a major impact. They can greatly influence the climate of an area. Many factors influence an areas climate. After reading the above, is "The tropical zone" the correct answer to the question "Which of the 3 zones is near the equator?"?

Answer:
yes

Question:
Critics say that is not nearly enough compared with other prescribers, such as M.D. psychiatrists or nurse practitioners who have at least six years' medical education and clinical experience. Neither Davison nor most other RxP opponents doubt the efficacy of medications. Their greatest objection is to the notion of turning psychology into a prescribing profession. In a field that has struggled long and hard to prove that mind, mood and behavior can be studied empirically, the past decade, Davison says, has seen "exciting developments" that demonstrate the validity of various psychotherapeutic interventions and the psychosocial-behavioral models on which they are based. "The timing is peculiar to abandon psychological science or to convert it to a medical science," explains Elaine M. Heiby of the University of Hawaii, who chairs a committee of the 1,000-member American Association of Applied and Preventive Psychology that is concerned about the medicalization of psychology. "Making sure that practicing psychologists are giving patients interventions based on the best available psychological science should be the APA's priority," argues Emory University's Scott Lilienfeld, president of the Society for a Science of Clinical Psychology (SSCP). More than any philosophical betrayal of psychology, RxP opponents fear that the movement will undermine the science they love. They believe that if prescriptive authority becomes the norm, biomedical requirements will inevitably seep into the psychology curriculum, at the expense of traditional psychological science and methodology. Lilienfeld feels that many clinical psychologists already receive inadequate training in fundamentals such as research design and evaluation. RxP opponents charge the APA with pushing its prescription-privileges agenda without adequately assessing support for it in the field. The 300-member SSCP is the only group within the APA to have taken a formal stance against prescription privileges. The APA has scheduled 30 minutes at its meeting in August for an RxP debate, but its leadership believes it already has an accurate sense of support for its RxP policy. "Except for this small vocal minority, we have just not gotten a lot of groundswell against this from members," says APA president Philip G. Zimbardo of Stanford University. With prescription privileges now a reality in one state, some RxP opponents concede that it may be too late. This year four states besides New Mexico -- Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois and Tennessee -- have pending legislation for psychologist prescription privileges. Over the past decade, 14 state legislatures have considered such laws. Between 1991 and 1997, a U.S. Department of Defense psychopharmacology demonstration project involving two to four years' training produced 10 military psychologists who can write prescriptions. After reading the above, is "Mike Lewis" the correct answer to the question "Who is the president of the only group within the APA to have taken a formal stance against prescription privileges?"?

Answer:
no

Question:
At the conference room table was White House Deputy Chief of Staff Joshua Bolten. Bolten watched the exchanges and, after what he called "a quiet moment,"suggested that the Vice President get in touch with the President and confirm the engage order. Bolten told us he wanted to make sure the President was told that the Vice President had executed the order. He said he had not heard any prior discussion on the subject with the President. The Vice President was logged calling the President at 10:18 for a twominute conversation that obtained the confirmation. On Air Force One, the President's press secretary was taking notes; Ari Fleischer recorded that at 10:20, the President told him that he had authorized a shootdown of aircraft if necessary. Minutes went by and word arrived of an aircraft down in Pennsylvania. Those in the shelter wondered if the aircraft had been shot down pursuant to this authorization. At approximately 10:30, the shelter started receiving reports of another hijacked plane, this time only 5 to 10 miles out. Believing they had only a minute or two, the Vice President again communicated the authorization to "engage or "take out" the aircraft. At 10:33, Hadley told the air threat conference call: "I need to get word to Dick Myers that our reports are there's an inbound aircraft flying low 5 miles out. The Vice President's guidance was we need to take them out." Once again, there was no immediate information about the fate of the inbound aircraft. In the apt description of one witness, "It drops below the radar screen and it's just continually hovering in your imagination; you don't know where it is or what happens to it." Eventually, the shelter received word that the alleged hijacker 5 miles away had been a medevac helicopter. Transmission of the Authorization from the White House to the Pilots The NMCC learned of United 93's hijacking at about 10:03. At this time the FAA had no contact with the military at the level of national command. The NMCC learned about United 93 from the White House. After reading the above, is ""White House"" the correct answer to the question "Where was the President at 10:18 when the Vice President called him?"?

Answer:
yes

Question:
William C. Walbrecher Jr., an executive at San Francisco-based 1st Nationwide Bank, was named president and chief executive officer of Citadel Holding Corp. and its principal operating unit, Fidelity Federal Bank. The appointment takes effect Nov. 13. He succeeds James A. Taylor, who stepped down as chairman, president and chief executive in March for health reasons. Edward L. Kane succeeded Mr. Taylor as chairman. Separately, Citadel posted a third-quarter net loss of $2.3 million, or 68 cents a share, versus net income of $5.3 million, or $1.61 a share, a year earlier. The latest results include some unusual write-downs, which had an after-tax impact of $4.9 million. Those included costs associated with the potential Valley Federal Savings and Loan Association acquisition, which was terminated on Sept. 27, 1989. In addition, operating results were hit by an increase in loan and real estate loss reserves. In American Stock Exchange composite trading, Citadel shares closed yesterday at $45.75, down 25 cents. After reading the above, is "$1.61 per share, $3.21" the correct answer to the question "What did the stock price close at yesterday and what was the earnings per share last year Q3?"?

Answer:
no