Input: Fossils may form in other ways. Fossils can be preserved almost completely. In this process, the organism doesnt change much. As seen below, tree sap may cover an organism. With time, the sap hardens. It turns to into amber. The original organism is preserved. This is very exciting for scientists. They are able to study the DNA of the organism that no longer lives on Earth. Some animals have been found frozen in ice. Others have been found in tar pits after falling in. Molds and casts are another way organisms can be fossilized. Have you ever walked in soft mud and left footprints? Once in a while, these traces of organisms can be preserved. In this case, nothing is left of the organism. A mold is an imprint of an organism that is preserved in rock. The organisms remains break down completely. There is nothing left of the original plant and animal.

Does the response "Tar pits" correctly answer the question "What are three materials an organism can be preserved in?"?
***
Output: yes

Input: Expansion quickly peaked however, and the European powers who had carved up the New World set about testing each other in dynastic conflicts and colonial rivalry. The English were the main rivals of the Dutch on the high seas, and there were several wars between the two in the 17th and 18th centuries. In 16651667 the Dutch sailed up the River Medway and sank the British fleet moored there. The 18th century saw Amsterdam grow into the foremost financial center in the world, but the seeds of decline had already been planted. When the English colonies in New England rose up in revolt against the British, they found ready Ailies in the Dutch. From their colonies in the Caribbean they sent caches of arms and ammunition. The British were furious and went to war in 1780, destroying the Dutch navy and signaling a sudden decline in power and influence from which the Netherlands never recovered. Trade suffered to such an extent that in 1791 the VOC went into liquidation. In the latter part of the century there were anti-Orange demonstrations by pro-French factions in the country, and in 1795 Napoleon Bonaparte took the Netherlands in his epic march across Europe. Under the yoke of another foreign power, and with trade at an all time low, the Golden Age was truly dead. The Return of the House of Orange Napoleon installed his brother Louis as King of Holland and he chose to take the fine Town Hall on Dam Square as his palacenow the Koninklijk Palace. But only four years later he fled the city after civil disturbances broke out when he raised taxes. When Napoleon's bubble burst and French power began to wane, William of Orange emerged from exile and was proclaimed king in 1813. Amsterdam had to work its way out of economic decline, but throughout the 19th century the city grew steadily. Industrialization changed the city. With the building of the Central Station at the end of the century, Amsterdam turned its back on its seafaring past and looked towards the mechanical age for its future. The station was built over the old harbor wall and some of the oldest canals in the city center were filled in to allow better access to motorized vehicles. Dam Square was landlocked for the first time in its history.

Does the response "French" correctly answer the question "In the 17th and 18th century the English and the Dutch were main rivals on the high seas, who did they fight that made them become Ailies?"?
***
Output: no

Input: He repeatedly calls on his followers to embrace martyrdom since "The walls of oppression and humiliation cannot be demolished except in a rain of bullets." For those yearning for a lost sense of order in an older, more tranquil world, he offers his "Caliphate" as an imagined alternative to today's uncertainty. For others, he offers simplistic conspiracies to explain their world. Bin Laden also relies heavily on the Egyptian writer Sayyid Qutb. A member of the Muslim Brotherhood executed in 1966 on charges of attempting to overthrow the government, Qutb mixed Islamic scholarship with a very superficial acquaintance with Western history and thought. Sent by the Egyptian government to study in the United States in the late 1940s, Qutb returned with an enormous loathing of Western society and history. He dismissed Western achievements as entirely material, arguing that Western society possesses "nothing that will satisfy its own conscience and justify its existence." Three basic themes emerge from Qutb's writings. First, he claimed that the world was beset with barbarism, licentiousness, and unbelief (a condition he called jahiliyya, the religious term for the period of ignorance prior to the revelations given to the Prophet Mohammed). Qutb argued that humans can choose only between Islam and jahiliyya. Second, he warned that more people, including Muslims, were attracted to jahiliyya and its material comforts than to his view of Islam; jahiliyya could therefore triumph over Islam. Third, no middle ground exists in what Qutb conceived as a struggle between God and Satan. All Muslims-as he defined them-therefore must take up arms in this fight. Any Muslim who rejects his ideas is just one more nonbeliever worthy of destruction. Bin Laden shares Qutb's stark view, permitting him and his followers to rationalize even unprovoked mass murder as righteous defense of an embattled faith. Many Americans have wondered, "Why do 'they' hate us?" Some also ask, "What can we do to stop these attacks?" Bin Laden and al Qaeda have given answers to both these questions.

Does the response "Sayyid Qutb" correctly answer the question "Who said all Muslims must take up arms in this fight"?
***
Output: yes

Input: Tuesday, September 11, 2001, dawned temperate and nearly cloudless in the eastern United States. Millions of men and women readied themselves for work. Some made their way to the Twin Towers, the signature structures of the World Trade Center complex in New York City. Others went to Arlington, Virginia, to the Pentagon. Across the Potomac River, the United States Congress was back in session. At the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, people began to line up for a White House tour. In Sarasota, Florida, President George W. Bush went for an early morning run. For those heading to an airport, weather conditions could not have been better for a safe and pleasant journey. Among the travelers were Mohamed Atta and Abdul Aziz al Omari, who arrived at the airport in Portland, Maine. Boston: American 11 and United 175. Atta and Omari boarded a 6:00 A.M. flight from Portland to Boston's Logan International Airport. When he checked in for his flight to Boston, Atta was selected by a computerized prescreening system known as CAPPS (Computer Assisted Passenger Prescreening System), created to identify passengers who should be subject to special security measures. Under security rules in place at the time, the only consequence of Atta's selection by CAPPS was that his checked bags were held off the plane until it was confirmed that he had boarded the aircraft. This did not hinder Atta's plans. Atta and Omari arrived in Boston at 6:45. Seven minutes later, Atta apparently took a call from Marwan al Shehhi, a longtime colleague who was at another terminal at Logan Airport. They spoke for three minutes. It would be their final conversation.

Does the response "Aziz and Logan" correctly answer the question "Who had their final conversation"?
***
Output:
no