Input: You write: "Having created the desired impression, Moore follows with his Heston interview." No, he doesn't. You accuse Moore so often of changing the chronology, yet you have no problems changing it yourself. The Heston interview is at the very end of the movie. After the Flint rally comes a brief TV interview with Heston, where he is asked about Kayla Rolland (again, clear evidence that the local media in Flint raised questions about the NRA's presence), then an inteview with country prosecutor Arthur Busch, entirely ignored by critics of the film, who also mentions Heston's presence as notable, and refers to the immediate reactions of "people from all over America", gun owners/groups who, according to him, reacted aggressively to warnings of having guns accessible to children, much like spanking advocates react aggressively when anti-spankers point to a case of a child being killed or severely injured by a beating. These people do not feel the need to express sympathy, or to think about ways to avoid such incidents, but they feel the need to assert their "rights" and to look for quick, simple answers -- as Busch states, gun owners wanted to "hang [the child] from the highest tree". This is all not mentioned by critics of Moore's movie, who claim to be objective. Perhaps the best example of the paranoia surrounding Moore's film is your sub-essay "Is the end of the Heston interview itself faked?" Moore answers a simple question -- how could the scene have been filmed -- with a simple answer: two cameras. From this, you construct an obscure conspiracy of "re-enactment": "For all we can tell, Moore could have shouted 'Hey!' to make Heston turn around and then remained silent as Heston left." Even if your "re-enactment" theory is true (and I see no evidence that you have actually tried to ask the people involved in the filmmaking for their opinion), this itself is not unethical, and you have no evidence whatsoever that Moore has done anything unethical here, just like you have no evidence that Moore has unethically removed parts of the interview. You use standard filmmaking technique as a basis to construct bizarre conspiracies which sound plausible to the gullible reader, without ever providing any evidence for the implicit or explicit claims of fraud and distortion.
"What is not mentioned by critics of Moore's movie?" is "People do not feel the need to express sympathy, or to think about ways to avoid such incidents, but they feel the need to assert their "rights" and to look for quick, simple answers -- as Busch states, gun owners wanted to "hang [the child] from the highest tree""?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
Output: yes

Input: Fossils give clues about major geological events. Fossils can also give clues about past climates. Fossils of ocean animals on the top of a mountain? Ocean animals have been found on the Earths tallest mountain. Its hard to believe, but it is true. These fossils were found at the top of Mt. Everest. Mt. Everest is the highest mountain on Earth. These fossils showed that this entire area was once at the bottom of a sea. It can only mean that Mt. Everest was uplifted. In fact, the entire Himalaya mountain range was raised. It was forced up from the collision of two continents. Fossils of plants are found in Antarctica. Now, Antarctica is almost completely covered with ice. Plants do not grow in Antarctica. According to fossils, they once did. This means that Antarctica was once much warmer than it is now. These fossils tell us about Antarcticas past climate.

Does the response "Yes, it was once a warm place where plants grew, but is now covered in ice" correctly answer the question "Did Antarctica's climate change throughout history?"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
***
Output: yes

Paul put the despised watch away And laid out before him his array Of stones and metals, and when the morning Struck the stones to their best adorning, He chose the brightest, and this new watch Was so light and thin it seemed to catch The sunlight's nothingness, and its gleam. Topazes ran in a foamy stream Over the cover, the hands were studded With garnets, and seemed red roses, budded. The face was of crystal, and engraved Upon it the figures flashed and waved With zircons, and beryls, and amethysts. It took a week to make, and his trysts At night with the Shadow were his alone. Paul swore not to speak till his task was done. The night that the jewel was worthy to give. Paul watched the long hours of daylight live To the faintest streak; then lit his light, And sharp against the wall's pure white The outline of the Shadow started Into form. His burning-hearted Words so long imprisoned swelled To tumbling speech. Like one compelled, He told the lady all his love, And holding out the watch above His head, he knelt, imploring some Littlest sign. The Shadow was dumb.

Question: "What were the hands of the watch studded with?"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes

Answer: "Garnets"

Response: yes

Problem: Water flowing over Earths surface or underground causes erosion and deposition. Water flowing over a steeper slope moves faster and causes more erosion. How water transports particles depends on their size. When water slows down, it starts depositing sediment. This process starts with the largest particles first. Runoff erodes the land after a heavy rain. It picks up sediment. Runoff carries most of the sediment to bodies of water. Mountain streams erode narrow, V-shaped valleys and waterfalls. Erosion and deposition by slow-flowing rivers create broad floodplains and meanders. Deposition by streams and rivers may form alluvial fans and deltas. Floodwaters may deposit natural levees. Erosion and deposition by groundwater can form caves and sinkholes. Stalactites and stalagmites are mineral deposits. They build up in caves as water continues to drip.

Question: "What body of water carries the particles?"

Answer: "Oceans"

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
Answer:
no