In this task, you will be presented with a context passage, a question about that paragraph, and a possible answer to that question. The task is to check the validity of the answer. Answer with "Yes" or "No".

[Q]: The film is set in Igloolik in the Eastern Arctic wilderness at the dawn of the first millennium .  http://atanarjuat.com/legend/legend_film.php The wind is blowing over a bleak snowy landscape while a man tries to herd away some marauding dogs .  We hear the voice of an old man singing a childish song .  Inside a stone house a strange shaman by the name of Tungajuaq , who comes from up north , is singing playfully to the gathered community and camp leader Kumaglak .  But among the spectators there are some mistrustful faces .  Flash forward to another day .  Qulitalik is bidding goodbye to his sister Panikpak , wife of Kumaglak , promising to come if she calls for help in her heart .  She gives him her husband's rabbit's foot for spiritual power .  Qulitalik tells his sister , `` Tulimaq is the one they 'll go after now . ''  It seems that Qulitalik is leaving to escape a threat , and the hope is that one day he will return to help .  As Panikpak watches him leave , we hear a voice-over from a woman : `` We never knew what he was or why it happened .  Evil came to us like Death .  It just happened and we had to live with it . ''  Flash back to the original scene in the stone house .  The visitor and the camp leader Kumaglak are in a `` friendly '' spiritual duel involving binding in leather thongs .  But Panikpak is startled when the stone lamp in front of her breaks in half , and , to the horror of those present , Kumaglak falls over dead .  The visitor removes the leader's walrus-tooth necklace from Kumaglak's body , and , passing by Tulimaq , he puts the necklace around the neck of Sauri , the son of the murdered leader Kumaglak , saying , `` Be careful what you wish for '' . <sep>Did the visitor ever interact with Kumaglak?<sep>Friends
[A]: No


[Q]: You couldnt survive without your skin. It has many important functions. The main function of the skin is controlling what enters and leaves the body. It prevents the loss of too much water from the body. It also prevents bacteria and other microorganisms from entering the body. The skin helps maintain a constant body temperature. It keeps the body cool in two ways. Sweat from sweat glands in the skin evaporates to cool the body. Blood vessels in the skin dilate, or widen. This action increases blood flow to the body surface. This allows more heat to reach the surface. The heat is then able to radiate off the body. The opposite happens to retain body heat. Blood vessels in the skin constrict, or narrow. This decreases blood flow to the body surface. This reduces the amount of heat that reaches the surface. When this happens, less heat can be lost to the air. <sep>What happens when less heat reaches the surface of your skin?<sep>Cools the body
[A]: No


[Q]: Tocqueville asserted that the values that had triumphed in the North and were present in the South had begun to suffocate old-world ethics and social arrangements. Legislatures abolished primogeniture and entails, resulting in more widely distributed land holdings. This was a contrast to the general aristocratic pattern in which only the eldest child, usually a man, inherited the estate, which had the effect of keeping large estates intact from generation to generation. In America, in contrast, landed elites were less likely to pass on fortunes to a single child by the action of primogeniture, which meant that as time went by, large estates became broken up within a few generations which, in turn, made the children more equal overall. It was not always a negative development, according to Joshua Kaplan's interpretation of Tocqueville, since bonds of affection and shared experience between children often replaced the more formal relation between the eldest child and the siblings, characteristic of the previous aristocratic pattern. Overall, in the new democracies, hereditary fortunes became exceedingly difficult to secure and more people were forced to struggle for their own living. This rapidly democratizing society, as Tocqueville understood it, had a population devoted to "middling" values which wanted to amass, through hard work, vast fortunes. In Tocqueville's mind, this explained why America was so different from Europe. In Europe, he claimed, nobody cared about making money. The lower classes had no hope of gaining more than minimal wealth, while the upper classes found it crass, vulgar, and unbecoming of their sort to care about something as unseemly as money; many were virtually guaranteed wealth and took it for granted. At the same time in America, workers would see people fashioned in exquisite attire and merely proclaim that through hard work they too would soon possess the fortune necessary to enjoy such luxuries. Despite maintaining with Aristotle, Montesquieu, and others that the balance of property determined the balance of power, Tocqueville argued that, as America showed, equitable property holdings did not ensure the rule of the best men. In fact, it did quite the opposite. The widespread, relatively equitable property ownership which distinguished America and determined its mores and values also explained why the American masses held elites in such contempt. <sep>How did Europeans' and Americans' attitudes toward amassing wealth differ?<sep>Europeans had no interest in it, while Americans desired it
[A]:
Yes


