input question: I read this background article the other day: Unfortunately, the layer of good ozone is being destroyed by air pollution. The chief culprits are chlorine and bromine gases. They are released in aerosol sprays, coolants, and other products. Loss of ozone has created an ozone hole over Antarctica. Ozone depletion results in higher levels of UV radiation reaching Earth. In humans, this increases skin cancers and eye cataracts. It also disturbs the nitrogen cycle, kills plankton, and disrupts ocean food webs. The total loss of the ozone layer would be devastating to most life. It's rate of loss has slowed with restrictions on pollutants, but it is still at risk. I am facing a new situation today: The researches studied the atmosphere in Antarctica, and close to Greenland. They found out there's an ozone hole over Antarctica. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which landmass had its atmosphere destroyed by aerosol sprays????
output answer: Antarctica

input question: I read this background article the other day: One of the most adverse impacts of poor waste management, especially municipal waste, is the incidence and prevalence of diseases such as malaria and respiratory problems, as well as other illnesses through the contamination of ground water. Biomedical wastes pose great danger in Bangladesh too as a report estimated that 20% of the biomedical waste is "highly infectious" and is a hazard since it is often disposed of into the sewage system or drains.[6] Such poor sanitation has serious consequences for the health of the residents and a report suggests that "most of the child mortality could be related with this problem".[7] With regards to the living standards, solid waste leads to blockage in the drainage system which leads to flooding in the streets. Consequently, mosquitoes and bad odour are among the negative impacts resulted.[7] I am facing a new situation today: The hospital in Y city had a good disposal site in which they disposed of Biomedical wastes, but the hospital in the neighboring city X had big problems, because the biomedical waste contaminated the ground water and affected the population. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Which city had a lower incidence of malaria????
output answer: Y city

input question: I read this background article the other day: Astronomy is very sensitive to light pollution. The night sky viewed from a city bears no resemblance to what can be seen from dark skies.[78] Skyglow (the scattering of light in the atmosphere at night) reduces the contrast between stars and galaxies and the sky itself, making it much harder to see fainter objects. This is one factor that has caused newer telescopes to be built in increasingly remote areas. I am facing a new situation today: Whenever Bill visited Tim's house, they couldn't see that many stars when stargazing . Tim lived in the city. The sky was much clearer at night at Bill's place, because he lived in a rural area. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: Where do they have the capability to see fewer faint objects, at Tim's or at Bill's????
output answer: at Tim's

input question: I read this background article the other day: Fish mortality is a parameter used in fisheries population dynamics to account for the loss of fish in a fish stock through death. The mortality can be divided into two types: Natural mortality: the removal of fish from the stock due to causes not associated with fishing. Such causes can include disease, competition, cannibalism, old age, predation, pollution or any other natural factor that causes the death of fish. In fisheries models natural mortality is denoted by (M).[1] Fishing mortality: the removal of fish from the stock due to fishing activities using any fishing gear.[1] It is denoted by (F) in fisheries models. I am facing a new situation today: Bob works as a scientist for a large fishing company in Norway. Norway's government has strict regulations on fishing to protect its fish stock. Part of Bob's job is to provide the government with fish mortality data. Today, he has two samples of fish to investigate, sample A and sample B. Bob concluded sample A had natural mortality, but sample B had fishing mortality. Using the knowledge I acquired from the background article, how should I answer correctly the following question regarding my new situation: On which fish fishing gear was not used, sample A or sample B????
output answer:
sample A