"What goes up must come down." You have probably heard that statement before. At one time this statement was true, but no longer. Since the 1960s, we have sent many spacecraft into space. Some are still traveling away from Earth. So it is possible to overcome gravity. Do you need a giant rocket to overcome gravity? No, you actually overcome gravity every day. Think about when you climb a set of stairs. When you do, you are overcoming gravity. What if you jump on a trampoline? You are overcoming gravity for a few seconds. Everyone can overcome gravity. You just need to apply a force larger than gravity. Think about that the next time you jump into the air. You are overcoming gravity for a brief second. Enjoy it while it lasts. Eventually, gravity will win the battle.
What question would one ask from this paragraph?

QUESTION: How is gravity overcome?

Magnets are able to place a force on certain materials. This force is called a magnetic force. The force a magnet exerts is a little different from the forces you may normally think about. You exert a force on a book when you lift it. You also exert a force on the pedals of your bicycle. In both those cases, those forces cause a change. The change you see in both these cases is called motion. Magnets, too, can produce change. They can produce motion just like you do. Unlike you, magnets do not have to touch something to exert a force. A magnetic force is exerted over a distance. Thats right, a magnet can push or pull certain items without ever touching them. Thats how the maglev train works. Do you know another type of force that does not require objects to touch? These forces are known as non-contact forces. Another type of non-contact force you may be familiar with is gravity. Gravity too can cause changes in motion. Gravity holds our moon in orbit without touching it.
What question would one ask from this paragraph?

QUESTION: What is the difference between magnetic force and the force a human uses to move things?

The Reconquest: The aim of the Crusades in Spain was the eviction of the Muslims. After the recovery of Jerusalem in 1099, it took four hundred years of sieges and battles, treaties, betrayals, and yet more battles, before Christian kings and warlords succeeded in subduing the Moors. On 10 September 1229, a Catalan army led by King Jaume I of Aragon and Catalunya took the Mallorcan shore near the present-day resort of Santa Ponca. The defenders retreated inside the walls of Palma, but on the last day of 1229 the city fell, and pockets of resistance throughout the island were also defeated. Jaume I proved to be an enlightened ruler who profited from the talents of the Moorsconverted by force to Christianityas well as of the island's large Jewish and Genoese trading communities. Mallorca prospered. The Moors on Menorca speedily agreed to pay an annual tribute to Aragon and were left in peace. The island's tranquility lasted until 1287, when Alfonso III of Aragon, smarting over a series of humiliations at the hands of his nobles, found a pretext for invasion. The Moors were defeated and expelled or killed. In contrast to Mallorca, Menorca's economy was devastated for decades. Jaume I died after reigning in Aragon for six decades, but he made the cardinal error of dividing between his sons the lands he had fought for so long to unite. At first this resulted in an Independent Kingdom of Mallorca, under Jaume II, followed by Sanc and Jaume III. But family rivalry triggered the overthrow of Jaume III by his cousin Pedro IV, who then seized the Balearics for Aragon. Attempting a comeback, Jaume was killed in battle near Llucmajor in 1349. A newly unified Christian Spain under the Catholic Monarchs, Ferdinand and Isabella, completed the Reconquest, defeating the only Moorish enclave left on the Iberian peninsula, Granada, in 1492. However, the centralized kingdom failed to incorporate the Balearics politically or economically.
What question would one ask from this paragraph?

QUESTION: What kind of ruler was King Jaume 1?

Animated history of the US. Of course the cartoon is highly oversimplified, and most critics consider it one of the weakest parts of the film. But it makes a valid claim which you ignore entirely: That the strategy to promote "gun rights" for white people and to outlaw gun possession by black people was a way to uphold racism without letting an openly terrorist organization like the KKK flourish. Did the 19th century NRA in the southern states promote gun rights for black people? I highly doubt it. But if they didn't, one of their functions was to continue the racism of the KKK. This is the key message of this part of the animation, which is again being ignored by its critics. Buell shooting in Flint. You write: "Fact: The little boy was the class thug, already suspended from school for stabbing another kid with a pencil, and had fought with Kayla the day before". This characterization of a six-year-old as a pencil-stabbing thug is exactly the kind of hysteria that Moore's film warns against. It is the typical right-wing reaction which looks for simple answers that do not contradict the Republican mindset. The kid was a little bastard, and the parents were involved in drugs -- case closed. But why do people deal with drugs? Because it's so much fun to do so? It is by now well documented that the CIA tolerated crack sales in US cities to fund the operation of South American "contras" It is equally well known that the so-called "war on drugs" begun under the Nixon administration is a failure which has cost hundreds of billions and made America the world leader in prison population (both in relative and absolute numbers).
What question would one ask from this paragraph?

QUESTION:
How old was the little boy who had fought Kayla?