input question: I have a new situation: Daniel visited two countries. Switzerland and India. There was almost no air pollution at all in Switzerland, while the air in India was almost impossible to breathe it was so polluted. But I can use this background: Air pollution is harmful to human beings and other living things. About 22 million people die from air pollution each year. Breathing polluted air increases the risk of developing lung diseases such as asthma and lung cancer. Breathing bad air also increases the chances of dying from other diseases. Children are most likely to be affected by air pollution. That's because their lungs are still developing and growing. Children also take in more air for their size than adults do. Some air pollutants damage the environment as well as the health of living things. The type of damage depends on the pollutant. Air pollution can also harm the environment. What is an answer for this question: Which country had fewer people develop asthma????
output answer: Switzerland
I have a new situation: Two friends were involved in a car crash. they both survived, but Mike had a serious brain injury. Vince was OK, he didn't experience any significant injuries. But I can use this background: A person with a serious brain injury usually suffers permanent brain damage. These brain injuries usually occur when an external mechanical force, such as a violent blow or jolt to the head or body, causes brain dysfunction. An object penetrating the skull, such as a bullet or a shattered piece of the skull, also can cause traumatic brain injury. As a result, the person may have trouble talking or controlling body movements. Symptoms depend on what part of the brain was injured. Serious brain injuries can also cause personality changes and problems with mental abilities such as memory. Medicines, counseling, and other treatments may help people with serious brain injuries recover from, or at least learn to cope with, their disabilities. What is an answer for this question: Which friend didn't suffer a brain dysfunction?
----
Answer: Vince
Q: I have a new situation: Greg and Frank were two friends that studied natural sciences. One day, Greg decided to start reading about natural selection. His friend Frank decided to read more about populations that displayed natural selection more sparingly. They both learned lots of new interesting facts. But I can use this background: New species develop naturally through the process of natural selection . Due to natural selection, organisms with traits that better enable them to adapt to their environment will tend to survive and reproduce in greater numbers. Natural selection causes beneficial heritable traits to become more common in a population and unfavorable heritable traits to become less common. For example, a giraffe's neck is beneficial because it allows the giraffe to reach leaves high in trees. Natural selection caused this beneficial trait to become more common than short necks. What is an answer for this question: Which friend learned less about animals that reproduce in greater numbers?
A: Frank
Question: I have a new situation: Bob works as a scientist for a large fishing company in Norway. Norway's government has strict regulations on fishing to protect its fish stock. Part of Bob's job is to provide the government with fish mortality data. Today, he has two samples of fish to investigate, sample A and sample B. Bob concluded sample A had natural mortality, but sample B had fishing mortality. But I can use this background: Fish mortality is a parameter used in fisheries population dynamics to account for the loss of fish in a fish stock through death. The mortality can be divided into two types: Natural mortality: the removal of fish from the stock due to causes not associated with fishing. Such causes can include disease, competition, cannibalism, old age, predation, pollution or any other natural factor that causes the death of fish. In fisheries models natural mortality is denoted by (M).[1] Fishing mortality: the removal of fish from the stock due to fishing activities using any fishing gear.[1] It is denoted by (F) in fisheries models. What is an answer for this question: Would pollution be a casue of death or not a cause of death for sample B?
Answer: not a cause of death
[Q]: I have a new situation: Tim is trying to boil two pots of water, pot A and pot B. Tim has a device which lets him see what the average kinetic energy is of the particles in each pot is. After examining each pot, Tim discovers that pot A has particles with a very high average kinetic energy, and pot B's particles have a low average kinetic energy. But I can use this background: The particles of soup have greater average kinetic energy than the particles of water in the tub, explaining why the soup has a higher temperature. However, the mass of the water in the tub is much greater than the mass of the soup in the pot. This means that there are many more particles of water than soup. All those moving particles give the water in the tub greater total kinetic energy, even though their average kinetic energy is less. Therefore, the water in the tub has greater thermal energy than the soup. To compare the thermal energy of some other materials, go to the following URL and click on the interactive animation "Temperature and Thermal Energy." What is an answer for this question: Which pot is closer to boiling?
****
[A]: pot A
Problem: Given the question: I have a new situation: The researches studied the atmosphere in Antarctica, and close to Greenland. They found out there's an ozone hole over Antarctica. But I can use this background: Unfortunately, the layer of good ozone is being destroyed by air pollution. The chief culprits are chlorine and bromine gases. They are released in aerosol sprays, coolants, and other products. Loss of ozone has created an ozone hole over Antarctica. Ozone depletion results in higher levels of UV radiation reaching Earth. In humans, this increases skin cancers and eye cataracts. It also disturbs the nitrogen cycle, kills plankton, and disrupts ocean food webs. The total loss of the ozone layer would be devastating to most life. It's rate of loss has slowed with restrictions on pollutants, but it is still at risk. What is an answer for this question: Which landmass didn't have its atmosphere destroyed by bromine gasses?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
The answer is:
Greenland