Question: Article: Have you seen Jurassic Park? In this film, scientists use DNA kept for tens of millions of years to clone dinosaurs. They find trouble, however, when they realize that the cloned creatures are smarter and more dangerous than expected. That's nothing more than a fiction. But could we really clone endangered animals? To date, the most successful attempt to do so was the cloning of a gaur, a rare ox-like animal from southeast Asia. Scientists used a cow to bring the cloned baby gaur, named Noah. Two days after birth, however, Noah died from a common bacterial infection. Other endangered species that may be cloned include the African bongo antelope , the Sumatran tiger, the cheetah , and the giant panda. Next, could we really clone extinct animals? In theory? Yes. To do this, you need a well-kept source of DNA from the extinct animals such as wool mammoth , Tasmanian tiger, or even dinosaur, and a closely related species, still living, which could serve as a surrogate mother. In reality? Probably not. On the one hand, it's not likely that extinct animals' DNA could survive undamaged for such a long time. Cloning extinct animals as wool mammoth, Tasmanian tiger, or dinosaur is much more difficult due to the lack of properly well-preserved DNA. On the other hand, for example, a gaur can have a cow as _ , definitely not a monkey. But what about an extinct animal as unique as the panda? What species could possibly serve as a surrogate mother? Cloning presents many exciting possibilities. However, even if extinct animals are brought back, they could not survive in today's world. Not only do most extinct animals have no habitat to live in, but the other plants and animals they depended on for food may also be gone as well. Question: In the author's opinion, it is possible that _ . Yes or no, is the answer "some extinct species may be cloned, but not survive"?
Answer: No

Question: Article: There are many commonly held beliefs about eye glasses and eyesight that are not proven facts. For instance, some people believe that wearing glasses too soon weakens the eyes. But there is no evidence to show that the structure of eyes is changed by wearing glasses at a young age. Wearing the wrong glasses, however, can prove harmful. Studies show that for adults there is no danger, but children can develop loss of vision if they have glasses inappropriate for their eyes. We have all heard some of the common myths about how eyesight gets bad. Most people believe that reading in dim light causes poor eyesight, but that is untrue. Too little light makes the eyes work harder, so they do get tired and strained. Eyestrain also results from reading a lot, reading in bed, and watching too much television. However, although eyestrain may cause some pain or headaches, it does not permanently damage eyesight. Another myth about eyes is that they can be replaced, or transferred from one person to another. They are close to one million nerve fibers that connect the eyeball to the brain, so it is impossible to attach them all in a new person. Only certain parts of the eye can be replaced. But if we keep clearing up the myths and learning more about the eyes, some day a full transplant may be possible. Question: If a child wears appropriate glasses, _ . Yes or no, is the answer "the structure of his eyes will keep the same as before"?
Answer: No

Question: Article: Greenwich is on the River, five miles from the middle of London, and its history is two thousand years old. The first English people were fishermen there, and they named the place Greenwich, meaning "green village". Later the English kings and queens lived at Greenwich in their beautiful places. The name of the earliest palace was Placentia. Its windows were made of glass--the first in England. But trouble was coming to Greenwich. In 1649, a war started in England and for eleven years there was no king. The men who had worked for him at Placentia decided to live in the place themselves. They sold all its beautiful things, and bought small pieces of the palace garden with money. Finally, the war ended and King Charles II came back. But Placentia was falling down. So King Charles built a new and bigger palace, which is now open to the public. At this time, Charles was worried about losing so many of its ships at sea because their sailors did not know how to tell exactly where they were. So in 1675, Charles made John Flamsteed, the first astronomer in England, try to find the answer. Flamsteed worked in a new building on the high ground in Greenwich Park. From it with a telescope which he made himself, Flamsteed could look all round the sky. And he did, night after night, for twenty years. Carrying on Flamsteed's work a hundred years later, an astronomer called Harrison finally made a clock which told the time at sea, and helped sailors to know where they were.You can see Harrison's clock, still working, in Greenwich's museum of the sea. Because of Flamsteed's work, every country in the world now tells its time by Greenwich time. Question: Charles made John Flamsteed try to find _ . Yes or no, is the answer "a way for sailors to tell their positions at sea"?
Answer:
No