[Q]: I have a new situation: Michael lives near a cliff overlooking the sea. Because of this he has an amazing view of the sunset. One day Michael decides to head out to the cliff and notices the sky looks much more red than normal. He also remembers that on the previous day he couldn't see his shadow at all. But I can use this background: When light passes through Earth's atmosphere, photons interact with it through scattering. If the light does not interact with the atmosphere, it is called direct radiation and is what you see if you were to look directly at the Sun. Indirect radiation is light that has been scattered in the atmosphere. For example, on an overcast day when you cannot see your shadow there is no direct radiation reaching you, it has all been scattered. As another example, due to a phenomenon called Rayleigh scattering, shorter (blue) wavelengths scatter more easily than longer (red) wavelengths. This is why the sky looks blue; you are seeing scattered blue light. This is also why sunsets are red. Because the Sun is close to the horizon, the Sun's rays pass through more atmosphere than normal to reach your eye. Much of the blue light has been scattered out, leaving the red light in a sunset. What is an answer for this question: Given the sky looks more red, is more or less of the suns radiation passing through atmosphere?
****
[A]: more

[Q]: I have a new situation: Two continents had different histories. Asia was inhabited by many humans which destroyed most natural habitats through their activities. America was protective towards its environment and therefore thrived. But I can use this background: Habitat destruction has played a key role in extinctions, especially in relation to tropical forest destruction. Factors contributing to habitat loss include: overconsumption, overpopulation, land use change, deforestation, pollution (air pollution, water pollution, soil contamination) and global warming or climate change.Habitat size and numbers of species are systematically related. Physically larger species and those living at lower latitudes or in forests or oceans are more sensitive to reduction in habitat area. Conversion to "trivial" standardized ecosystems (e.g., monoculture following deforestation) effectively destroys habitat for the more diverse species that preceded the conversion. Even the simplest forms of agriculture affect diversity through clearing/draining land, discouraging weeds and "pests", and encouraging just a limited set of domesticated plant and animal species. In some countries lack of property rights or lax law/regulatory enforcement necessarily leads to biodiversity loss (degradation costs having to be supported by the community).A 2007 study conducted by the National Science Foundation found that biodiversity and genetic diversity are codependentthat diversity among species requires diversity within a species and vice versa. "If any one type is removed from the system, the cycle can break down and the community becomes dominated by a single species." What is an answer for this question: Which continent destroyed habitats by overconsumption?
****
[A]: Asia

[Q]: I have a new situation: Rob is an amateur astronomer. He was looking at the sky with his telescope. First he took a longer length observation. He noted his observation as case A. Then he took a shorter length observation. He noted that observation as case B. He found that it's beneficial to take both observations to get a fuller view of the observable universe. But I can use this background: Matter, dark matter, and dark energy are distributed homogeneously throughout the Universe over length scales longer than 300 million light-years or so. However, over shorter length-scales, matter tends to clump hierarchically; many atoms are condensed into stars, most stars into galaxies, most galaxies into clusters, superclusters and, finally, large-scale galactic filaments. The observable Universe contains approximately 300 sextillion (31023) stars and more than 100 billion (1011) galaxies. Typical galaxies range from dwarfs with as few as ten million (107) stars up to giants with one trillion (1012) stars. Between the larger structures are voids, which are typically 10150 Mpc (33 million490 million ly) in diameter. The Milky Way is in the Local Group of galaxies, which in turn is in the Laniakea Supercluster. This supercluster spans over 500 million light-years, while the Local Group spans over 10 million light-years. The Universe also has vast regions of relative emptiness; the largest known void measures 1.8 billion ly (550 Mpc) across. What is an answer for this question: In case B would matter be distributed less or more homogeneously than in case A?
****
[A]: less

[Q]: I have a new situation: Redland and Brownland were two countries situated at different latitudes. Redland was located at 70 degrees N, while Brownland was much further south, at 30 degrees N. Brownland had no mountains, only a few hills under 1000 ft. But I can use this background: Alpine tundra occurs at high enough altitude at any latitude. Portions of montane grasslands and shrublands ecoregions worldwide include alpine tundra. Large regions of alpine tundra occur in the North American Cordillera, the Alps and Pyrenees of Europe, the Himalaya and Karakoram of Asia, the Andes of South America, and the Eastern Rift mountains of Africa.Alpine tundra occupies high-mountain summits, slopes, and ridges above timberline. Aspect plays a role as well; the treeline often occurs at higher elevations on warmer equator-facing slopes. Because the alpine zone is present only on mountains, much of the landscape is rugged and broken, with rocky, snowcapped peaks, cliffs, and talus slopes, but also contains areas of gently rolling to almost flat topography.Averaging over many locations and local microclimates, the treeline rises 75 metres (245 ft) when moving 1 degree south from 70 to 50N, and 130 metres (430 ft) per degree from 50 to 30N. Between 30N and 20S, the treeline is roughly constant, between 3,500 and 4,000 metres (11,500 and 13,100 ft). What is an answer for this question: Which country had less alpine tundra?
****
[A]:
Brownland