Input: For thousands of years, people have found fossils. The fossils caused curiosity about Earths past. How did these organisms live? What type of world did they live in? Fossils can tell us a lot about Earths history. In ancient times, fossils inspired myths and stories. These stories included tales of monsters and other incredible creatures. What type of creature do you know that could inspire such stories? Of course, dinosaur fossils were once mistaken for dragons bones. Two thousand years ago, people discovered fossils in China. At the time, they were thought to be dragon bones. We know now that these were not bones, but fossils. So what is the difference?

Does the response "They killed peasants" correctly answer the question "What did fossils do in ancient times?"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
***
Output: no

Input: Have you are burned something on the stove or in the oven? Do you know why things burn? It all has to do with temperature. Changes in matter are affected by temperature. For example, what if you place a cake in the oven and you leave it in too long? What do you think will happen? Thats right, it will probably burn. The same thing will happen if the oven setting is too high and you apply too much heat. In either case, heat has affected the rate of change in matter. Its probably obvious that when the temperature is increased a chemical change, like cooking, will occur faster. What about a physical change? Are physical changes affected by temperature? Most of us have seen steam rising off a wet road after a summer rainstorm. This happens because the road surface is very warm. The warm road and warm air temperature causes the water to evaporate quickly. The liquid water is turning into water vapor, but it is still water. The evaporation of water is a physical change. So yes, temperature affects the rate that physical change occurs.

Does the response "Because the road surface is very warm" correctly answer the question "Why would steam rise off a wet road after a summer rainstorm?"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
***
Output: yes

Input: The Washington Supreme Court is asking the Legislature to approve a $90 surcharge on a court filing fee to help provide legal help for the poor in civil cases, Chief Justice Gerry Alexander said Wednesday. "Some might say, why should we support this when we face tough financial times?" Alexander asked in his State of the Judiciary address to a joint session of the Legislature. "It seems to me in America, where we rejoice in the fact that we are a nation devoted to the rule of law, we should not ration access to justice." The recommendation comes from the court's Task Force on Civil Equal Justice Funding, created in 2001 to look for ways to cope with the sparse amount of money available for such cases. As the task force was studying the issue, $900,000 was cut from state support for civil equal justice services. That prompted the state's two main legal services providers - Columbia Legal Services and Northwest Justice Project - to cut their staffs, Alexander said. The change would increase the cost of filing a lawsuit in Superior Court to $200. The total fee would be split, with 54 percent going to counties and 46 percent going to the state for a newly created equal justice account. Alexander also requested money for five additional Superior Court judgeships and one additional District Court judgeships, arguing that increased caseloads require more judges. Two of the Superior Court judges and the District Court judge would be in Clark County, with one Superior Court judge added in the joint district that serves Benton and Franklin counties and one each in Kittitas and Kitsap counties.

Does the response "Splitting of Fees" correctly answer the question "What prompted the state's two main legal services providers to cut their staffs?"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
***
Output: no

Input: After the 1998 embassy bombings, the U.S. government tried to develop a clearer picture of Bin Laden's finances. A U.S. interagency group traveled to Saudi Arabia twice, in 1999 and 2000, to get information from the Saudis about their understanding of those finances. The group eventually concluded that the oft-repeated assertion that Bin Laden was funding al Qaeda from his personal fortune was in fact not true. The officials developed a new theory: al Qaeda was getting its money elsewhere, and the United States needed to focus on other sources of funding, such as charities, wealthy donors, and financial facilitators. Ultimately, although the intelligence community devoted more resources to the issue and produced somewhat more intelligence, it remained difficult to distinguish al Qaeda's financial transactions among the vast sums moving in the international financial system. The CIA was not able to find or disrupt al Qaeda's money flows. The NSC staff thought that one possible solution to these weaknesses in the intelligence community was to create an all-source terrorist-financing intelligence analysis center. Clarke pushed for the funding of such a center at Treasury, but neither Treasury nor the CIA was willing to commit the resources. Within the United States, various FBI field offices gathered intelligence on organizations suspected of raising funds for al Qaeda or other terrorist groups. By 9/11, FBI agents understood that there were extremist organizations operating within the United States supporting a global jihadist movement and with substantial connections to al Qaeda. The FBI operated a web of informants, conducted electronic surveillance, and had opened significant investigations in a number of field offices, including New York, Chicago, Detroit, San Diego, and Minneapolis. On a national level, however, the FBI never used the information to gain a systematic or strategic understanding of the nature and extent of al Qaeda fundraising. Treasury regulators, as well as U.S. financial institutions, were generally focused on finding and deterring or disrupting the vast flows of U.S. currency generated by drug trafficking and high-level international fraud. Large-scale scandals, such as the use of the Bank of New York by Russian money launderers to move millions of dollars out of Russia, captured the attention of the Department of the Treasury and of Congress. Before 9/11, Treasury did not consider terrorist financing important enough to mention in its national strategy for money laundering.

Does the response "Wealthy Donors" correctly answer the question "What different possible funding sources for Bin Laden were considered?"?

OPTIONS:
- no
- yes
***
Output:
yes