Article: As dangerous as sharks may have seed to people after watching Jaws, which was released on June 20,1975, the recent disastrous decrease in their numbers show that people have proven far more dangerous to sharks. This disastrous decline is due in large part to commercial fishing of sharks. "The market for shark fins in East Asia opened up thanks to changes in their economy, increasing their ability to spend money on things such as shark fin soup," Burgess said. However, the biggest worry for sharks and their relatives, the skates and rays, which are suffering a similar fate, "is how they are killed incidentally when fishermen try and take other fish--the problem of bycatch ," Burgess explained. "They may be thrown back afterward, but they're still dead." The key of the problems behind bringing sharks back is that "they're not the same as other fish," Burgess said, "Sharks are slow growing and slow to reach maturity. Sharks are live bearers, which means females keep their young in their body just like us, but instead of nine months, it takes 12 to 18 months or more in sharks. Also, sharks generally can't give birth again until a year after they've given birth--sometimes they're on a three-year cycle. So once you get a shark population knocked down, this 'life in the slow lane' means that recovery is measured in decades rather than years."\ Burgess said, "I'm on the recovery team for it, but the recovery plan for that is over the course of 100 years. So I won't see them recover, nor will you, nor will your children. That's what it means when these animals go down--they're down a long time." Any measures aimed at saving sharks must not only consider byeatch, "which is the real killer right now," but also encourage interactional cooperation, Burgess said. "Sharks are very migratory, and many species cross borders," he said. "We can protect them only by getting many govemment to come aboard. That's the hardest part about this." Question: Bringing sharks back is difficult because _ . Yes or no, is the answer "their reproductive rate is slow"?
Yes

Article: I am especially interested in eco-friendly cars. Would you please give me some help? -John Lily John Lily, More and more automobile companies are taking measures to create cars that do less harm to the planet. Here are some of the top green cars this year. Tesla Roadster This is an electric sports car. You can travel 220 miles before recharging the battery. The only problem? It will cost you $ 100 000. So, until you win the lottery or happen to find a box of gold at the end of a rainbow, let's move on to the more reasonable choices. Aptera 2e This electric car is much more affordable than the Tesla Roadster, with a starting price of around $25 000. Its electric motor runs 100 miles per charge. Unfortunately, it is currently only available in California through a complex booking process. Toyota Prius At 51 miles per gallon in the city and 48 0n the highway, the Toyota Prius is one of the most fuel-efficient cars in the world With an annual C02 rating of 1 968 kilograms, this car holds the first place on MSN's list of the Least Polluting Vehicles of 2009. It also has other eco-friendly features like a solar-powered ventilation system. Honda Civic Hybrid The Honda Civic Hybrid is competitive with the Toyota Prius when it comes to fuel efficiency. It gets 40 miles per gallon in the city and 45 0n the highway. It also has the second-lowest annual CO2figure, releasing 2 160 kilograms in a year. Honda Insight Hybrid With a base price of just $20 000, the Honda Insight Hybrid is the least expensive Hybrid on the market today. Coming just after the Honda Civic and Toyota Prius in terms of pollution, this fuel-efficient vehicle gets 40 miles per gallon in the city and 43 0n the highway: Besides all these, Toyota Camry Hybrid is also a good choice. William Question: What might William be according to the passage? Yes or no, is the answer "A car expert giving advice to people online."?
Yes

Article: Mattel Inc.is recalling 4.4 million Polly Pocket toys with magnets after some of them caused serious injuries to children who swallowed magnets that fell off.Tiny magnets inside the toys may fall off without being noticed by parents and babysitters.The magnets can be swallowed or placed in children' s noses or ears.When more than one magnet is swallowed, the magnets can attract each other and cause intestine perforations which can be deadly. The Consumer Product Safety Commission received 170 reports of the magnets coming out of these recalled toys.There were three reports of serious injuries to children who swallowed more than one magnet.All three suffered intestine perforations that required operations.A 2-year-old child stayed in hospital for 7 days and a 7-year-old child was hospitalized for 12 days. The recalled Polly Pocket toys contain plastic dolls and accessories that have small magnets.The magnets measure one-eighth inch in diameter and are fixed in the hands and feet of the dolls, and even in the plastic clothing, hairpieces and other accessories to help the pieces stay on the dolls or the dolls' houses. The model number is printed on the bottom of the largest pieces on the toys.Contact Mattel if you cannot find a model number on your product to determine if it is part of the recall.Polly Pocket magnetic toys currently sold in stores are not included in this recall.The model numbers included in the recall are: B2632, B3158, B7118, G8605, H1537 and H3211.The toys were on sales in department stores and toy stores from May 2006 through September 2009. Consumers should immediately take these recalled toys away from children and contact Mattel for the return of the toys.For more information contact Mattel at 888 597-6597 anytime or visit the company' s website. Question: How does the writer show the danger of the problem toys? Yes or no, is the answer "By presenting some serious cases."?
No

Article: I travel a lot in my work, and what I dislike about my job is eating alone. It always makes me feel lonely to see others laughing and talking. So, room service for several nights was a better choice for me. After having room service three nights at a hotel in Houston, however, I needed to get out of my room. Although the restaurant opened at 6:30, I arrived at 6:25. The waiter at the front desk made a comment about my "being there really early". I explained my dislike of eating alone in restaurants. He then seated me at a lovely table and asked me whether I would mind if he sat down with me for a while. I was glad! He sat and talked with me about his career goals and the difficulty of being at work on nights, weekends and holidays. He said he hadn't enough time to be with his family. After 15 minutes, he saw some customers at the front desk and excused himself. I noticed that before he went to the front desk, he stopped in the kitchen for a moment. Then another waiter came out of the kitchen and had a wonderful chat with me. Before I left that night, some other waiters, even the cook, had come out of the kitchen and sat with me! When I asked for my bill about one hour later, all the people who had sat down with me came over in a big group to my table, and presented me with a red rose. And I cried! What had begun as a lonely night ended as a beautiful experience. Question: How did the waiter feel when he saw the author come in at 6:25? Yes or no, is the answer "Surprised."?
No