I can use this background: Biodiversity's relevance to human health is becoming an international political issue, as scientific evidence builds on the global health implications of biodiversity loss. This issue is closely linked with the issue of climate change, as many of the anticipated health risks of climate change are associated with changes in biodiversity (e.g. changes in populations and distribution of disease vectors, scarcity of fresh water, impacts on agricultural biodiversity and food resources etc.). This is because the species most likely to disappear are those that buffer against infectious disease transmission, while surviving species tend to be the ones that increase disease transmission, such as that of West Nile Virus, Lyme disease and Hantavirus, according to a study done co-authored by Felicia Keesing, an ecologist at Bard College and Drew Harvell, associate director for Environment of the Atkinson Center for a Sustainable Future (ACSF) at Cornell University.The growing demand and lack of drinkable water on the planet presents an additional challenge to the future of human health. Partly, the problem lies in the success of water suppliers to increase supplies and failure of groups promoting preservation of water resources. While the distribution of clean water increases, in some parts of the world it remains unequal. According to the World Health Organisation (2018) only 71% of the global population used a safely managed drinking-water service.Some of the health issues influenced by biodiversity include dietary health and nutrition security, infectious disease, medical science and medicinal resources, social and psychological health. Biodiversity is also known to have an important role in reducing disaster risk and in post-disaster relief and recovery efforts.Biodiversity provides critical support for drug discovery and the availability of medicinal resources. A significant proportion of drugs are derived, directly or indirectly, from biological sources: at least 50% of the pharmaceutical compounds on the US market... Now, I have a new situation: Belgium and France are two countries participating at a human health meeting. Belgium has a lower biodiversity, while France's biodiversity is much higher. Answer this question please: Which country experienced less disease transmission?
Ans: France

I can use this background: Like water in the ocean, air in the atmosphere exerts pressure that increases with depth. Most gas molecules in the atmosphere are pulled close to Earth's surface by gravity. As a result, air pressure decreases quickly at lower altitudes and then more slowly at higher altitudes. This is illustrated in Figure below . Air pressure is greatest at sea level, where the depth of the atmosphere is greatest. At higher altitudes, the pressure is less because the depth of the atmosphere is less. For example, on top of Mount Everest, the tallest mountain on Earth, air pressure is only about one-third of the pressure at sea level. At such high altitudes, low air pressure makes it hard to breathe and is dangerous to human health. Now, I have a new situation: Molly has just moved to a new city for a job she was just hired for. She used to live in a city up in the mountains named Midgar. She liked living there due to the hikes she could go on and seeing the beautiful nature of the hills and mountains. The town she lives in now, Treno, is closer to sea level and is mostly flat plains and farm land. It's a change of scenery, and she hopes she starts to enjoy it more. Answer this question please: Is air pressure in Treno higher or lower than in Midgar?
Ans: higher

I can use this background: Habitat destruction has played a key role in extinctions, especially in relation to tropical forest destruction. Factors contributing to habitat loss include: overconsumption, overpopulation, land use change, deforestation, pollution (air pollution, water pollution, soil contamination) and global warming or climate change.Habitat size and numbers of species are systematically related. Physically larger species and those living at lower latitudes or in forests or oceans are more sensitive to reduction in habitat area. Conversion to "trivial" standardized ecosystems (e.g., monoculture following deforestation) effectively destroys habitat for the more diverse species that preceded the conversion. Even the simplest forms of agriculture affect diversity through clearing/draining land, discouraging weeds and "pests", and encouraging just a limited set of domesticated plant and animal species. In some countries lack of property rights or lax law/regulatory enforcement necessarily leads to biodiversity loss (degradation costs having to be supported by the community).A 2007 study conducted by the National Science Foundation found that biodiversity and genetic diversity are codependentthat diversity among species requires diversity within a species and vice versa. "If any one type is removed from the system, the cycle can break down and the community becomes dominated by a single species." Now, I have a new situation: Two continents had different histories. Asia was inhabited by many humans which destroyed most natural habitats through their activities. America was protective towards its environment and therefore thrived. Answer this question please: Which continent destroyed fewer habitats by deforestation?
Ans: America

I can use this background: A large log placed in a fire will burn relatively slowly. If the same mass of wood were added to the fire in the form of small twigs, they would burn much more quickly. This is because the twigs provide a greater surface area than the log does. An increase in the surface area of a reactant increases the rate of a reaction. Surface area is larger when a given amount of a solid is present as smaller particles. A powdered reactant has a greater surface area than the same reactant as a solid chunk. In order to increase the surface area of a substance, it may be ground into smaller particles or dissolved into a liquid. In solution, the dissolved particles are separated from each other and will react more quickly with other reactants. Now, I have a new situation: Danny went camping and made a fire in the woods. he used large logs he fell a few months back. Bob was camping 300 yards away and he made a fire using small sticks, kindlings and sawdust he had left over. Bob's fire burned fast and bright. Answer this question please: Which person made a fire that burned less bright?
Ans: Danny