The CIA investigated hypnosis as a possible tool for interrogating prisoners. Why did they decide it was unsuitable for that purpose? A. Hypnosis is completely effective, it just takes too long to entrance the subject. B. Hypnosis requires a trusting relationship between the hypnotist and subject. C. Hypnosis breaks the spirit of the subject, making them unable to answer questions. D. Hypnosis can make the subjects talk, but they talk only about their childhoods. Please select the best answer from the choices provided A B C D.

pretty sure a is right

question - in 1827, john walker, a druggist in a small english town, tipped a splint with sulphur, chlorate of potash, and sulphid of antimony, and rubbed it on sandpaper, and it burst into flame. the druggist had discovered the first friction-chemical match, the kind we use to-day. it is called friction-chemical because it is made by mixing certain chemicals together and rubbing them. although walker's match did not require the bottle of acid, nevertheless it was not a good one. it could be lighted only by hard rubbing, and it sputtered and threw fire in all directions. in a few years, however, phosphorus was substituted on the tip for antimony, and the change worked wonders. the match could now be lighted with very little rubbing, and it was no longer necessary to have sandpaper upon which to rub it. it would ignite when rubbed on any dry surface, and there was no longer any sputtering. this was the phosphorus match, the match with which we are so familiar. according the paragraph what was the benefit of the new phosphorus match? it burst into flame when rubbed on sandpaper. it was made by mixing chemicals. it could be ignited on any dry surface. it threw fire in all directions.

answer - matches required natural chemicals

well, i can't read it so i'll ask you questions about it : )

if you were a reader and you read the introduction, would you want to read more?

does it start with a question? if so, is it something you would want to read about?

and ask any friends or family for their opinion : )