Question:
Based on the premise "As a result, Flowers and the troopers (and Zercher and McGrath) have a much greater incentive to spice up the truth or to invent a story out of whole cloth.", can we conclude that "This caused Zercher and McGrath to stick rigidly to the truth."? OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
****
Answer:
no

Question: Sentence A: Carl Soderstrom agreed with Gentilello that alcohol-related research must be published not in substance abuse journals, but in publications read by emergency and trauma surgery staff.

Sentence B: Carl Soderstrom and Gentilello both believe that alcohol-related research should be published in publications read by emergency and trauma surgery staff.

If sentence A is true, how about sentence B?
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: yes

Question: uh on my job we had a lot of Workmen's Comp cases and
There was never a Workmen's Comp case at my job.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: no

Problem: Here is a premise:
In the ensuing confusion she would have had ample opportunity to shoot the bolt across.

Here is a hypothesis:
She took the chance to shoot the bolt across, when everyone was distracted.

Here are the options: OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no

Answer: it is not possible to tell

Sentence 1: The jagged mountain ranges and dense forests leave less than two-fifths of the country suitable for habitation and farming.

Sentence 2: Less than 40% of the country is suitable for habitation and farming.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
Is this second sentence entailed by the first?

Answer: yes

Premise:
"the deal the Iraqi's have with the Russians was for oil"
Hypothesis: The Russians drink oil.
OPTIONS:
- yes
- it is not possible to tell
- no
no