Question: I have a new situation: Michael wants to play a trick on his friend. He takes a bottle of soda, shakes it really well then puts it in the fridge. He then tells his friend if he wants something to drink there's some soda in the fridge. Michael's friend goes to the fridge and pulls out the bottle Michael just shook and opens it. But I can use this background: A: You could shake a bottle of cola and then open it. Shaking causes carbon dioxide to come out of the cola solution and change to a gas. The gas fizzes out of the bottle and spreads into the surrounding air, showing that its particles have enough kinetic energy to spread apart. Then you could tilt the open bottle and pour out a small amount of the cola on a table, where it will form a puddle. This shows that particles of the liquid have enough kinetic energy to slide over each other but not enough to pull apart completely. If you do nothing to the solid glass of the cola bottle, it will remain the same size and shape. Its particles do not have enough energy to move apart or even to slide over each other. What is an answer for this question: Which will happen when Michael's friend opens the bottle. nothing or will it release carbon dioxide?
Answer: release carbon dioxide
[Q]: I have a new situation: Joe studied the lives of humans. He studied 2 groups of people. Group G had people over 65 in it, and group Y had people under 65 years old in it. But I can use this background: Old age begins in the mid-60s and lasts until the end of life. Most people over 65 have retired from work, freeing up their time for hobbies, grandchildren, and other interests. Stamina, strength, reflex time, and the senses all decline during old age, and the number of brain cells decreases as well. The immune system becomes less efficient, increasing the risk of serious illnesses such as cancer and pneumonia. Diseases such as Alzheimer's disease that cause loss of mental function also become more common. What is an answer for this question: Which group had fewer people that had decreased reflex time?
****
[A]: group Y
input: Please answer the following: I have a new situation: Daniel visited two countries. Switzerland and India. There was almost no air pollution at all in Switzerland, while the air in India was almost impossible to breathe it was so polluted. But I can use this background: Air pollution is harmful to human beings and other living things. About 22 million people die from air pollution each year. Breathing polluted air increases the risk of developing lung diseases such as asthma and lung cancer. Breathing bad air also increases the chances of dying from other diseases. Children are most likely to be affected by air pollution. That's because their lungs are still developing and growing. Children also take in more air for their size than adults do. Some air pollutants damage the environment as well as the health of living things. The type of damage depends on the pollutant. Air pollution can also harm the environment. What is an answer for this question: Which country had more environmental damage because of air pollution?
++++++++++
output: India
Please answer this: I have a new situation: Two climate experts studied different continent to observe climate changes. Jordan studied Australia, while Jeb studied Antarctica. But I can use this background: Some of Antarctica has been warming up; particularly strong warming has been noted on the Antarctic Peninsula. A study by Eric Steig published in 2009 noted for the first time that the continent-wide average surface temperature trend of Antarctica is slightly positive at >0.05 C (0.09 F) per decade from 1957 to 2006. This study also noted that West Antarctica has warmed by more than 0.1 C (0.2 F) per decade in the last 50 years, and this warming is strongest in winter and spring. This is partly offset by autumn cooling in East Antarctica. There is evidence from one study that Antarctica is warming as a result of human carbon dioxide emissions, but this remains ambiguous. The amount of surface warming in West Antarctica, while large, has not led to appreciable melting at the surface, and is not directly affecting the West Antarctic Ice Sheet's contribution to sea level. Instead the recent increases in glacier outflow are believed to be due to an inflow of warm water from the deep ocean, just off the continental shelf. The net contribution to sea level from the Antarctic Peninsula is more likely to be a direct result of the much greater atmospheric warming there.In 2002 the Antarctic Peninsula's Larsen-B ice shelf collapsed. Between 28 February and 8 March 2008, about 570 km2 (220 sq mi) of ice from the Wilkins Ice Shelf on the southwest part of the peninsula collapsed, putting the remaining 15,000 km2 (5,800 sq mi) of the ice shelf at risk. The ice was being held back by a "thread" of ice about 6 km (4 mi) wide, prior to its collapse on 5 April 2009. According to NASA, the most widespread Antarctic surface melting of the past 30 years occurred in 2005, when an area of ice comparable in size to California briefly melted and refroze; this may have resulted from temperatures rising to as high as 5 C (41 F).A study published in Nature Geoscience in 2013 (online in December 2012) identified central West Antarctica as one of the fastest-warming regions on Earth. The researchers present a complete temperature... What is an answer for this question: Which person observed warming in spring?
++++++++
Answer: Jeb
Problem: I have a new situation: Bill and Paul were farmers. Bill used insecticides to get read of aphids, while his buddy farmer Paul didn't. But I can use this background: Insecticide control of aphids is difficult, as they breed rapidly, so even small areas missed may enable the population to recover promptly. Aphids may occupy the undersides of leaves where spray misses them, while systemic insecticides do not move satisfactorily into flower petals. Finally, some aphid species are resistant to common insecticide classes including carbamates, organophosphates, and pyrethroids.For small backyard infestations, spraying plants thoroughly with a strong water jet every few days may be sufficient protection. An insecticidal soap solution can be an effective household remedy to control aphids, but it only kills aphids on contact and has no residual effect. Soap spray may damage plants, especially at higher concentrations or at temperatures above 32 C (90 F); some plant species are sensitive to soap sprays. What is an answer for this question: Which farmer used a strong water jet to kill aphids?

A: Bill
input: Please answer the following: I have a new situation: Two neighboring counties used different agricultural methods on their farm fields. Cook county used many fertilizers and pesticides, while Dane county used only organic methods and no pesticides. As a result, the waters in Dane county were cleaner. But I can use this background: Huge amounts of chemicals, such as fertilizers and pesticides, are applied to farm fields (see Figure below ). Some of the chemicals are picked up by rainwater. Runoff then carries the chemicals to nearby rivers or lakes. Dissolved fertilizer causes too much growth of water plants and algae. This can lead to dead zones where nothing can live in lakes and at the mouths of rivers. Some of the chemicals can infiltrate into groundwater. The contaminated water comes up in water wells. If people drink the polluted water, they may get sick. What is an answer for this question: Which county contaminated more water wells?
++++++++++
output:
Cook