Problem: Given the background: Mantle melting can come about three ways: (1) when the temperature rises, (2) if the pressure lowers (which lowers the melting point), and (3) if water is added, which lowers the melting point. Two of these (1 and 3) might explain why there are volcanoes at convergent plate boundaries the temperature of the subducting plate increases as it sinks into the hot mantle (1). Sediments lying on top of the subducting plate contain water. As the sediments subduct, the water rises into the overlying mantle material. This lowers the melting temperature of the mantle (3). When the mantle above the subducting plate melts, volcanoes form above it. This leads to volcanoes in an island arc or continental arc. and the situation: Two scientist, Pete and Gill, studied the Earth's crust and geology. Pete studied earthquakes, while Gill studied mantles and volcanos. Answer the following question: Which person studied more about convergent plate boundaries?

A: Gill

Problem: Given the background: As for the public health or food safety concern, organic foods are intended to be healthy, free of contaminations and free from agents that could cause human diseases. Organic milk is meant to have no chemical residues to consumers, and the restrictions on the use of antibiotics and chemicals in organic food production has the purpose to accomplish this goal. Although dairy cows in both organic and conventional farming practices can be exposed to pathogens, it has been shown that, because antibiotics are not permitted as a preventative measure in organic practices, there are far fewer antibiotic resistant pathogens on organic farms. This dramatically increases the efficacy of antibiotics when/if they are necessary. and the situation: Two farmers sold their produce and milk on a large nearby market. John practiced organic farming and also produced organic milk, while Danny sold non-organic produce and milk. Answer the following question: Which farmer sold more foods free of contaminations?

A: John

Problem: Given the background: The dangers of global warming are being increasingly studied by a wide global consortium of scientists. These scientists are increasingly concerned about the potential long-term effects of global warming on our natural environment and on the planet. Of particular concern is how climate change and global warming caused by anthropogenic, or human-made releases of greenhouse gases, most notably carbon dioxide, can act interactively, and have adverse effects upon the planet, its natural environment and humans' existence. It is clear the planet is warming, and warming rapidly. This is due to the greenhouse effect, which is caused by greenhouse gases, which trap heat inside the Earth's atmosphere because of their more complex molecular structure which allows them to vibrate and in turn trap heat and release it back towards the Earth. This warming is also responsible for the extinction of natural habitats, which in turn leads to a reduction in wildlife population.The most recent report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (the group of the leading climate scientists in the world) concluded that the earth will warm anywhere from 2.7 to almost 11 degrees Fahrenheit (1.5 to 6 degrees Celsius) between 1990 and 2100. and the situation: Rob was evaluating two research studies on climate change, study A and study B. Study A explained how increased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. On the other hand, study B showed how decreased greenhouse gases would affect the climate. Rob found the studies very interesting. Answer the following question: Which study would see more wildlife population, study A or study B?

A: study B

Problem: Given the background: Einstein showed in his thought experiments that people travelling at different speeds, while agreeing on cause and effect, measure different time separations between events, and can even observe different chronological orderings between non-causally related events. Though these effects are typically minute in the human experience, the effect becomes much more pronounced for objects moving at speeds approaching the speed of light. Subatomic particles exist for a well known average fraction of a second in a lab relatively at rest, but when travelling close to the speed of light they are measured to travel farther and exist for much longer than when at rest. According to the special theory of relativity, in the high-speed particle's frame of reference, it exists, on the average, for a standard amount of time known as its mean lifetime, and the distance it travels in that time is zero, because its velocity is zero. Relative to a frame of reference at rest, time seems to "slow down" for the particle. Relative to the high-speed particle, distances seem to shorten. Einstein showed how both temporal and spatial dimensions can be altered (or "warped") by high-speed motion. and the situation: David wanted to test the theory of Einstein. To that end, he measured the time perceived by an airline pilot, who naturally traveled very fast. He labeled it as case A. To compare the pilot with a slower traveler he measured the time perceived by a semi truck driver covering the same distance. He labeled it as case B. He was amazed by the counter intuitive results he got from the experiment. Answer the following question: According to Einstein, would case A perceive the distance shorter or longer than case B?

A:
shorter