Question: Sentence A: To amend the Clean Air Act to reduce air pollution through expansion of cap and trade programs, to provide an alternative regulatory classification for units subject to the cap and trade programs, and for other purposes.

Sentence B: Amending the Clean Air Act could reduce air pollution through expansion of cap and trade programs.

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

Answer: yes

Question: so at least that's uh some way that they're you know i i guess the best part about it you can't just drop off all scholarship scholarships because it does i would imagine at least in it's intentions help a lot of people who couldn't afford to go to school
Scholarships do not help anyone and they should be gotten rid of.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: no

Problem: Here is a premise:
Staff recommendations went first to Vice President Randi Youells and then to President Erlenborn for final funding decisions.

Here is a hypothesis:
Final funding decisions went first to Vice President Randi Youelis and then to President Erienborn.

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

Answer: yes

Sentence 1: The history of the myriad painful fads women have subjected themselves to over the years--iron maidens, rubber girdles, breast binding--may help remind viewers what all that '60s bra-burning was about.

Sentence 2: You will never understand the bra-burning that happened in the 60's.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer: no

Question:
well uh that's kind of obvious i mean they're even carrying it to to where now uh that they advertise on TV you know if your if you uh you know have done this or if you need this uh uh we'll sue for you and you don't have to pay us unless you but then what they don't tell you is that if you if they win you give them at least a third of the of the thing that they win so i don't know it is uh it's getting to be more business now rather than uh actually uh dealing with the crime than with uh um the uh punishment they the the lawyers are just in it for the money i'm i'm convinced i know i i agree with you i think you're real you're very right that the politicians should i think they should have an equal amount of you know maybe they can have a few but i think most of them should be not uh lawyers in the fact and that's way way they've gotten into politics it's because of the the law things you know the loops and everything but uh but no i know we it um we're in Maryland and uh we have the same thing overcrowding and and uh they are letting them out i mean just the regular jail sentence thing they let them out because of they don't have any place to keep to put them so somebody that could you know uh unless uh been a major offense but uh uh even the piddly little stuff i mean the the guys that loses today in America is the victim and whoever that may be whether it's a robbery or drugs or whatever else um they are the ones that are going to pay and they are the one that are going to suffer and the other person you know if they pay if they if they uh arrest them uh and uh then the you know time the law takes over uh half the time uh they either let them go or they get off with a a sentence because they've had a lawyer that you know feels that that they weren't all together when they did it

Does it follow that "All of our politicians are lawyers."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Answer:
no

Question:
Based on the premise "If Madrid played any role in these pivotal events, no record of it remains.", can we conclude that "If Madrid was involved in the event, there is no record of it because the records were destroyed in a fire."? OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
****
Answer:
it is not possible to tell