Sentence 1: um-hum wouldn't catch right

Sentence 2: It caught properly.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer: no

Question:
With such far-flung territories, dissolution was inevitable, and began immediately.

Does it follow that "Dissolution was bound to happen sooner or later with territories so far apart."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Answer:
yes

Q: If well they started out really bad they went like one and six and then they won five or six in a row, can we say that "after a good opener they went and lost six in a row"?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

A: it is not possible to tell

Premise:
" The worst part of it was that Uncle David could make good on his threat of seeing that Dave got no more work anywhere."
Hypothesis: Uncle David had the power to ensure that Dave couldn't work anymore.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

yes

input question: This, it turns out, is the most important difference between democracy and dickmorrisy. If this premise is true, does that tell us:"There is no important difference between democracy and dickmorrisy."?

OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

output answer: no

Q: If because she you know they keep it warm with for all the older people and she keeps it year round, can we say that "She cares deeply about older people."?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

A:
it is not possible to tell