Given a paragraph and a claim, classify it this way: If the claim contradicts the evidence present in the paragraph, classify the claim as '0'. If the claim has multiple supporting *AND* contradicting evidences, classify the claim as '1'. If the claim has supporting evidence and the paragraph is in overall favor of the claim, then classify the claim as '2'.
--------
Question: Paragraph: On April Fool's Day in 2013, a pair of Florida disc jockeys got themselves into a bit of hot water with station management for prankishly warning their listeners that "dihydrogen monoxide" another name for that life-giving substance we identify as H2O, or more commonly, "water" was coming out of local residents' taps: The radio station's joke involved that "dihydrogen monoxide" was coming out of county residents' taps.The joke immediately got the attention of Patty DiPiero from Lee County Utilities. She said Lee County residents began calling the utility saying they heard on the station that county water was unsafe and should not be used for drinking, showering or for any use. DiPiero stressed in an email to media outlets that the utility was not having any issues with the water supply and the water is safe to use. However, some people believed the hoax, at least for a short time. One woman wrote in saying she worked in the food service industry and was trying to figure out how to serve customers and prepare food without requiring water.https://www.snopes.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=30094&action=edit# Lee County residents were far from the first people to fall for this venerable jape. Back in September 2007, for example, news media reported that a New Zealand MP was tricked by a letter from a constituent asking her to raise the issue of "dihydrogen monoxide" (DHMO): National MP Jacqui Dean has been caught out by a long-running hoax that seeks to trick gullible MPs into calling for a ban on "dihydrogen monoxide" or water. A letter, signed by Ms Dean and sent to Associate Health Minister Jim Anderton, the minister in charge of drug policy, asked if the Expert Advisory Committee on Drugs had a view on banning the "drug". Mr Anderton yesterday took the opportunity to rub Ms Dean's nose in the embarrassing blunder. He said dihydrogen monoxide "may have been described to her as colourless, odourless, tasteless and causing the death of uncounted thousands of people every year, and withdrawal from which, for those who become dependent on it, means certain death. "I had to respond that the experts had no intention of doing so." In 1997, Nathan Zohner, a 14-year-old student at Eagle Rock Junior High School in Idaho Falls, made the news when he based his science fair project on a warning similar to the one reproduced in the "Example" box above. Zohner's project, titled "How Gullible Are We?", involved presenting that warning about "the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide" to fifty ninth-grade students and asking them what (if anything) should be done about the chemical: Dihydrogen monoxide is colorless, odorless, tasteless, and kills uncounted thousands of people every year. Most of these deaths are caused by accidental inhalation of DHMO, but the dangers of dihydrogen monoxide do not end there. Prolonged exposure to its solid form causes severe tissue damage. Symptoms of DHMO ingestion can include excessive sweating and urination, and possibly a bloated feeling, nausea, vomiting and body electrolyte imbalance. For those who have become dependent, DHMO withdrawal means certain death.Dihydrogen monoxide: Contamination is reaching epidemic proportions! Quantities of dihydrogen monoxide have been found in almost every stream, lake, and reservoir in America today. But the pollution is global, and the contaminant has even been found in Antarctic ice. DHMO has caused millions of dollars of property damage in the midwest, and recently California. Despite the danger, dihydrogen monoxide is often used: Companies dump waste DHMO into rivers and the ocean, and nothing can be done to stop them because this practice is still legal. The impact on wildlife is extreme, and we cannot afford to ignore it any longer! The American government has refused to ban the production, distribution, or use of this damaging chemical due to its "importance to the economic health of this nation." In fact, the navy and other military organizations are conducting experiments with DHMO, and designing multi-billion dollar devices to control and utilize it during warfare situations. Hundreds of military research facilities receive tons of it through a highly sophisticated underground distribution network. Many store large quantities for later use. Forty-three students favored banning DHMO, six were undecided, and only one correctly recognized that 'dihydrogen monoxide' was actually plain old water. Zohner's analysis of the results he obtained won him first prize in the Greater Idaho Falls Science Fair; garnered him scads of attention from newspapers, magazines, radio and TV stations, universities, and congresspeople; and prompted the usual round of outcries about how our ignorant citizenry doesn't read critically and can be easily misled. Even back then Nathan Zohner's project wasn't original, as spoof petitions about dihydrogen monoxide and other innocuous "dangers" had been circulating for years, and Nathan based his project on a bogus report that was already making the rounds of the Internet. Moreover, his target audience was ninth-graders, a group highly susceptible to allowing peer pressure to overwhelm critical thinking. Thrust any piece of paper at the average high school student with a suggestion about what the "correct" response to it should be, and peer pressure pretty much assures you'll get the answer you're looking for. Someone that age isn't very likely to read a friend's petition calling for the banning of whale hunting and critically evaluate the socio-economic and environmental impact of such a regulation; instead, he's probably going to say to himself, "This issue is obviously important to my friend, and he must have some good reasons for circulating the petition, so I'll sign it." That said, this example does aptly demonstrate the kind of fallacious reasoning that's thrust at us every day under the guise of "important information": how with a little effort, even the most innocuous of substances can be made to sound like a dangerous threat to human life. In March 2004 the California municipality of Aliso Viejo (a suburb in Orange County) came within a cat's whisker of falling for this hoax after a paralegal there convinced city officials of the danger posed by this chemical. The leg-pull got so far as a vote's having been scheduled for the City Council on a proposed law that would have banned the use of foam containers at city-sponsored events because (among other things) they were made with DHMO, a substance that could "threaten human health and safety." Claim: Dihydrogen monoxide is a dangerous chemical that should be banned.

Answer: 0

Question: Paragraph: On June 9 2020, Facebook user Xavier Dillingham sharedthe following Twitter screenshots, which purportedly showed Google search results for the terms "professional hairstyles men," "unprofessional hairstyles men,""professional hairstyles women," and "unprofessional hairstyles women":Dillingham included screenshots of tweets by @Denzel_Success and @dave_fieri with a visible date on one of June 6 2020:It's deeper than police brutality https://t.co/6bJKhJa1w3 DENZEL SMITH (@Denzel_Success) June 6, 2020Hold up pic.twitter.com/xBBR8OZ7Cr DAVE FIERI (@dave_fieri) June 6, 2020One of the screenshots visible in the Facebook post appeared to show at least one result specifically about the matter of Google's purported racial bias in organizing images of men's and women's "professional hairstyles" and "unprofessional hairstyles."When we searched "professional hairstyles men" on June 19 2020, the results were primarily of white men:As was a search for "professional hairstyles women":When we searched "unprofessional hairstyles men" and "unprofessional hairstyles women," the results appeared to have been altered by discourse on social media. For the second search, a number of collages appeared, along with links to content about bias in Google results:We also found discussions about the matter going back for years. On April 6 2016, Mic.com covered the same issue in an article titled "If You Google 'Unprofessional Hairstyles for Work,' These Are the Problematic Results," reporting that April 2016 results included versions of the same hairstyle for both searches:The people in a search for professional hairstyles are predominantly white. Conversely, people in searches for unprofessional are mostly black though for some reason, Elizabeth Banks as The Hunger Games' Effie Trinket makes a surprise appearance.Twitter user MalumDube pointed out the irony of a similar style worn by Rachel McAdams was somehow deemed "unprofessional" when worn by a black woman.British outletThe Guardian published an editorial about the April 2016 controversy, in which the author described clicking through some of the images and explained their occasional context:In the case of the great hair debate, Google Images seems to have taken many of the pictures of black women wearing the "unprofessional" hairstyles were from blogs, articles and Pinterest boards. Many of these are by people of colour explicitly discussing and protesting against racist attitudes to hair. One image led me to a post criticising Hampton University's ban on dreadlocks and cornrows; another was linked with a post celebrating natural hair and the "ridiculous" pressure to straighten it for the office; here's a rejection of the idea that big, natural curls are "distracting" in a newsroom.One thing was clear between the 2016 popularity of a Google image search for "unprofessional hair men/women" and "professional hair men/women" viral discourse in both instances appeared to influence the images returned by Google in both cases. Collages we found in the results on June 19 2020 often accompanied reporting on the Google results, pushing down what may have been earlier, accurately described results before tens of thousands of Google users tested the hypothesis.On June 10 2020, The Shade Room published a statement from Cathy Edwards, Vice President of Google Images, about the discussion. Edwards reiterated the claim that articles decrying descriptions of black women's natural hair as "unprofessional" made up some but not all of the images:Google spoke exclusively to us to explain these image results, which are usually linked to articles that are actually denouncing the biases that black men and women face when it comes to their hair and society's idea of what professional hair is supposed to look like."Our Google Images search systems rely on a number of factors, including word matching, to surface results," Cathy Edwards, VP of Google Images, tells us. "For many of the results, the words 'unprofessional hairstyles' appear in the articles, and many of these stories are rightly denouncing the discrimination people of color face when it comes to their hair."While the images may be alarming, for the purposes of clarity, Google has taken the liberty of adding captions to help people under the relevancy of the images."While we include captions to help people understand why these images are relevant to the query, we acknowledge that the association can be concerning and painful to see without the fuller context," Edwards said. "Ensuring that all people and communities are able to find helpful results in Google Images is something we care about deeply and are actively working to improve."Rating the veracity of the claim thatGoogle search results for the terms "professional hairstyles men," "unprofessional hairstyles men,""professional hairstyles women," and "unprofessional hairstyles women" demonstrated racial bias was difficult due in part to how viral the claim became. Facebook posts and tweets with tens of thousands of shares reshuffled the results, and Google could have changed their algorithms in the two-week period between the June 6 2020 tweets and our June 19 2020 fact check. It is true that some of the results remained (and were the subject of scrutiny in 2016), but the results we evaluated were influenced by the interest generated by the claims and other forces that remained invisible.Comments Claim: "If you Google ""unprofessional hairstyles for men"" and """"unprofessional hairstyles for women"" or ""professional hairstyles for men"" and ""professional hairstyles for women,"" results appeared to be racially biased."

Answer: 1

Question: Paragraph: A Lehigh County judge tossed out evidence cited in support of drug and firearms counts stemming from the Nov. 7 search in Allentown, The (Allentown) Morning Call reported . "The smell of marijuana is no longer per se indicative of a crime," Judge Maria Dantos wrote in her opinion filed earlier this month. Authorities said Timothy Barr, 27, was a passenger in the car driven by his wife that was stopped by state troopers on a traffic violation. Troopers said they smelled a strong odor of marijuana and told Barr that gave them the legal right to search the vehicle even after he showed them his card authorizing the use of medical marijuana. Officers found small amounts of marijuana and residue and also found a loaded handgun under the driver's seat. Court records indicate that Barr cannot legally possess a firearm due to a prior conviction. In her ruling, Dantos said it was "illogical, impractical and unreasonable" for the troopers to suspect illegal activity once Barr showed them his medical marijuana card. She said Pennsylvania lawmakers never contemplated people with such cards being arrested and prosecuted for possession of marijuana in a package not clearly marked with a dispensary name. "Such actions are merely means of hampering the legalization of marijuana for medical purposes," Dantos wrote. Prosecutors must now decide whether to appeal to state Superior Court or try to move forward without the evidence. District Attorney Jim Martin said his office is reviewing the opinion and transcripts from a July 17 hearing and had made no decision on an appeal. Defense attorney Joshua Karoly said the ruling could be the first step in changing a procedural rule that allows police to search a vehicle based on the smell of drugs alone. "This case will put a spotlight on the plain smell doctrine in Pennsylvania which police use far too often to invade citizens' privacy," he said. Dantos wrote in the opinion that officers' confusion over medical marijuana exemplified a "clear disconnect between the medical community and the law enforcement community." One trooper testified that he believed medical marijuana had no smell and the other said she mistakenly thought dried marijuana was illegal and not used for medical purposes. Marijuana in flower and dry leaf form has been offered at dispensaries since August 2018. ___ This story has been corrected to show that the medical marijuana card belonged to the passenger, not the driver, and decision came earlier this month rather than Friday. ___ Information from: The Morning Call, http://www.mcall.com Claim: Vehicle search prompted by marijuana smell ruled illegal.

Answer:
2