Question:
Breathing is the process of moving air into and out of the lungs. The process depends on a muscle called the diaphragm. This is a large, sheet-like muscle below the lungs. Inhaling, or breathing in, occurs when the diaphragm muscle tightens. This increases the size of the chest. This too decreases air pressure inside the lungs. This action allows air and gases to enter the lungs. Exhaling, or breathing out, occurs when the diaphragm muscle relaxes. This decreases the size of the chest. This increases air pressure inside the lungs. This action allows for air to leave the lungs. When you inhale, air enters the respiratory system through your nose and ends up in your lungs, where gas exchange with the blood takes place. What happens to the air along the way? In the nose, mucus and hairs trap any dust or other particles in the air. The air is also warmed and moistened. Next, air passes through a passageway that is connected to the windpipe. The air then finds its way to the lungs. In the chest, the windpipe splits so that air enters both the right and left lung. After reading the above, is "Biceps" the correct answer to the question "Breathing process depends on which muscle"?

Answer:
no

Question:
The world can be divided into three climate zones. The first climate zone is the polar zone. As it sounds, the polar zone is near earths poles. The polar zone has very long and cold winters. Brrr!!!! Near the equator is the tropical zone. The tropical zone is known for being hot and wet. Between these two zones is the temperate zone. Temperatures there tend to be mild. Its not too hot and not too cold. You might expect places near the equator to be hot and wet. Thats not always the case. Sometimes there are other factors at work. These factors can affect the local climate type or a region. Oceans and mountain ranges can have a major impact. They can greatly influence the climate of an area. Many factors influence an areas climate. After reading the above, is "By three climate zones" the correct answer to the question "How is the world divided?"?

Answer:
yes

Question:
The rally took place on October 17, the shooting on February 29. Again, standard filmmaking techniques are interpreted as smooth distortion: "Moore works by depriving you of context and guiding your mind to fill the vacuum -- with completely false ideas. It is brilliantly, if unethically, done." As noted above, the "from my cold dead hands" part is simply Moore's way to introduce Heston. Did anyone but Moore's critics view it as anything else? He certainly does not "attribute it to a speech where it was not uttered" and, as noted above, doing so twice would make no sense whatsoever if Moore was the mastermind deceiver that his critics claim he is. Concerning the Georgetown Hoya interview where Heston was asked about Rolland, you write: "There is no indication that [Heston] recognized Kayla Rolland's case." This is naive to the extreme -- Heston would not be president of the NRA if he was not kept up to date on the most prominent cases of gun violence. Even if he did not respond to that part of the interview, he certainly knew about the case at that point. Regarding the NRA website excerpt about the case and the highlighting of the phrase "48 hours after Kayla Rolland is pronounced dead": This is one valid criticism, but far from the deliberate distortion you make it out to be; rather, it is an example for how the facts can sometimes be easy to miss with Moore's fast pace editing. The reason the sentence is highlighted is not to deceive the viewer into believing that Heston hurried to Flint to immediately hold a rally there (as will become quite obvious), but simply to highlight the first mention of the name "Kayla Rolland" in the text, which is in this paragraph. After reading the above, is "October 17" the correct answer to the question "When was Kayla Rolland shot?"?

Answer:
no

Question:
Recommendation: Congressional oversight for intelligence-and counterterrorism-is now dysfunctional. Congress should address this problem. We have considered various alternatives: A joint committee on the old model of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy is one. A single committee in each house of Congress, combining authorizing and appropriating authorities, is another. The new committee or committees should conduct continuing studies of the activities of the intelligence agencies and report problems relating to the development and use of intelligence to all members of the House and Senate. We have already recommended that the total level of funding for intelligence be made public, and that the national intelligence program be appropriated to the National Intelligence Director, not to the secretary of defense. We also recommend that the intelligence committee should have a subcommittee specifically dedicated to oversight, freed from the consuming responsibility of working on the budget. The resolution creating the new intelligence committee structure should grant subpoena authority to the committee or committees. The majority party's representation on this committee should never exceed the minority's representation by more than one. Four of the members appointed to this committee or committees should be a member who also serves on each of the following additional committees: Armed Services, Judiciary, Foreign Affairs, and the Defense Appropriations subcommittee. In this way the other major congressional interests can be brought together in the new committee's work. Members should serve indefinitely on the intelligence committees, without set terms, thereby letting them accumulate expertise. The committees should be smaller-perhaps seven or nine members in each house-so that each member feels a greater sense of responsibility, and accountability, for the quality of the committee's work. The leaders of the Department of Homeland Security now appear before 88 committees and subcommittees of Congress. One expert witness (not a member of the administration) told us that this is perhaps the single largest obstacle impeding the department's successful development. The one attempt to consolidate such committee authority, the House Select Committee on Homeland Security, may be eliminated. The Senate does not have even this. Congress needs to establish for the Department of Homeland Security the kind of clear authority and responsibility that exist to enable the Justice Department to deal with crime and the Defense Department to deal with threats to national security. After reading the above, is "That fact that the leaders of the Department of Homeland Security now appear before 88 committees and subcommittees of Congress" the correct answer to the question "What is perhaps the single largest obstacle impeding the department's successful development"?

Answer:
yes