Various theories for the decline of the Native American populations emphasize epidemic diseases, conflicts with Europeans, and conflicts among warring tribes. Scholars now believe that, among the various contributing factors, epidemic disease was the overwhelming cause of the population decline of the American natives. Some believe that after first contacts with Europeans and Africans, Old World diseases caused the death of 90 to 95% of the native population of the New World in the following 150 years. Smallpox killed up to one third of the native population of Hispaniola in 1518. By killing the Incan ruler Huayna Capac, smallpox caused the Inca Civil War. Smallpox was only the first epidemic. Typhus (probably) in 1546, influenza and smallpox together in 1558, smallpox again in 1589, diphtheria in 1614, measles in 1618all ravaged the remains of Inca culture.
If it is possible to answer this question, answer it for me (else, reply "unanswerable"): How did smallpox cause the Inca Civil War?
Ah, so.. By killing the Incan ruler Huayna Capac

According to conservation of energy, energy can neither be created (produced) nor destroyed by itself. It can only be transformed. The total inflow of energy into a system must equal the total outflow of energy from the system, plus the change in the energy contained within the system. Energy is subject to a strict global conservation law; that is, whenever one measures (or calculates) the total energy of a system of particles whose interactions do not depend explicitly on time, it is found that the total energy of the system always remains constant.
If it is possible to answer this question, answer it for me (else, reply "unanswerable"): The total inflow of energy into a system must not equal what?
Ah, so.. unanswerable

Better acquaintance with Greek and Roman technical writings also influenced the development of European science (see the history of science in the Renaissance). This was despite what A. C. Crombie (viewing the Renaissance in the 19th-century manner as a chapter in the heroic March of Progress) calls "a backwards-looking admiration for antiquity", in which Platonism stood in opposition to the Aristotelian concentration on the observable properties of the physical world. But Renaissance humanists, who considered themselves as restoring the glory and nobility of antiquity, had no interest in scientific innovation. However, by the mid-to-late 16th century, even the universities, though still dominated by Scholasticism, began to demand that Aristotle be read in accurate texts edited according to the principles of Renaissance philology, thus setting the stage for Galileo's quarrels with the outmoded habits of Scholasticism.
If it is possible to answer this question, answer it for me (else, reply "unanswerable"): What information allowed for less progress in scientific knowledge?
Ah, so..
unanswerable