Given a paragraph from a Wikipedia article about some topic, and a question related to the topic, determine whether the question is answerable from the paragraph. If the question is answerable, answer "True", otherwise, answer "False".
--------
Question: Though researchers generally believe that sexual orientation is not determined by any one factor but by a combination of genetic, hormonal, and environmental influences, with biological factors involving a complex interplay of genetic factors and the early uterine environment, they favor biological models for the cause. They believe that sexual orientation is not a choice, and some of them believe that it is established at conception. That is, individuals do not choose to be homosexual, heterosexual, bisexual, or asexual. While current scientific investigation usually seeks to find biological explanations for the adoption of a particular sexual orientation, there are yet no replicated scientific studies supporting any specific biological etiology for sexual orientation. However, scientific studies have found a number of statistical biological differences between gay people and heterosexuals, which may result from the same underlying cause as sexual orientation itself. Question: How the the SASO different than other scales?

Answer: False

Question: The region is well known for its Golconda and Hyderabad painting styles which are branches of Deccani painting. Developed during the 16th century, the Golconda style is a native style blending foreign techniques and bears some similarity to the Vijayanagara paintings of neighbouring Mysore. A significant use of luminous gold and white colours is generally found in the Golconda style. The Hyderabad style originated in the 17th century under the Nizams. Highly influenced by Mughal painting, this style makes use of bright colours and mostly depicts regional landscape, culture, costumes and jewellery. Question: Why might Golconda share similarity to Vijayanagara style?

Answer: True

Question: Both private individuals and large production companies have used YouTube to grow audiences. Independent content creators have built grassroots followings numbering in the thousands at very little cost or effort, while mass retail and radio promotion proved problematic. Concurrently, old media celebrities moved into the website at the invitation of a YouTube management that witnessed early content creators accruing substantial followings, and perceived audience sizes potentially larger than that attainable by television. While YouTube's revenue-sharing "Partner Program" made it possible to earn a substantial living as a video producerits top five hundred partners each earning more than $100,000 annually and its ten highest-earning channels grossing from $2.5 million to $12 millionin 2012 CMU business editor characterized YouTube as "a free-to-use... promotional platform for the music labels". In 2013 Forbes' Katheryn Thayer asserted that digital-era artists' work must not only be of high quality, but must elicit reactions on the YouTube platform and social media. In 2013, videos of the 2.5% of artists categorized as "mega", "mainstream" and "mid-sized" received 90.3% of the relevant views on YouTube and Vevo. By early 2013 Billboard had announced that it was factoring YouTube streaming data into calculation of the Billboard Hot 100 and related genre charts. Question: Billboard was doing what exactly to take into account YouTube's streaming data?

Answer:
True