Question: Copper-alloy touch surfaces have natural intrinsic properties to destroy a wide range of microorganisms (e.g., E. coli O157:H7, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), Staphylococcus, Clostridium difficile, influenza A virus, adenovirus, and fungi). Some 355 copper alloys were proven to kill more than 99.9% of disease-causing bacteria within just two hours when cleaned regularly. The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has approved the registrations of these copper alloys as "antimicrobial materials with public health benefits," which allows manufacturers to legally make claims as to the positive public health benefits of products made with registered antimicrobial copper alloys. In addition, the EPA has approved a long list of antimicrobial copper products made from these alloys, such as bedrails, handrails, over-bed tables, sinks, faucets, door knobs, toilet hardware, computer keyboards, health club equipment, shopping cart handles, etc. (for a comprehensive list of products, see: Antimicrobial copper-alloy touch surfaces#Approved products). Copper doorknobs are used by hospitals to reduce the transfer of disease, and Legionnaires' disease is suppressed by copper tubing in plumbing systems. Antimicrobial copper alloy products are now being installed in healthcare facilities in the U.K., Ireland, Japan, Korea, France, Denmark, and Brazil[citation needed] and in the subway transit system in Santiago, Chile, where copper-zinc alloy handrails will be installed in some 30 stations between 2011–2014.
Is there an answer to this question: 355 copper alloys have been proven to kill what percentage of bacteria?

Answer: 99.9%


Question: All signatories to the CPPCG are required to prevent and punish acts of genocide, both in peace and wartime, though some barriers make this enforcement difficult. In particular, some of the signatories—namely, Bahrain, Bangladesh, India, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, the United States, Vietnam, Yemen, and former Yugoslavia—signed with the proviso that no claim of genocide could be brought against them at the International Court of Justice without their consent. Despite official protests from other signatories (notably Cyprus and Norway) on the ethics and legal standing of these reservations, the immunity from prosecution they grant has been invoked from time to time, as when the United States refused to allow a charge of genocide brought against it by former Yugoslavia following the 1999 Kosovo War.
Is there an answer to this question: During which times can a perpetrator of genocide be charged?

Answer: both in peace and wartime


Question: By 1820, Charleston's population had grown to 23,000, maintaining its black (and mostly slave) majority. When a massive slave revolt planned by Denmark Vesey, a free black, was revealed in May 1822, whites reacted with intense fear, as they were well aware of the violent retribution of slaves against whites during the Haitian Revolution. Soon after, Vesey was tried and executed, hanged in early July with five slaves. Another 28 slaves were later hanged. Later, the state legislature passed laws requiring individual legislative approval for manumission (the freeing of a slave) and regulating activities of free blacks and slaves.
Is there an answer to this question: What wasn't planned by Denmark Vesey?

Answer: unanswerable


Question: The primary physiological cue for migration are the changes in the day length. These changes are also related to hormonal changes in the birds. In the period before migration, many birds display higher activity or Zugunruhe (German: migratory restlessness), first described by Johann Friedrich Naumann in 1795, as well as physiological changes such as increased fat deposition. The occurrence of Zugunruhe even in cage-raised birds with no environmental cues (e.g. shortening of day and falling temperature) has pointed to the role of circannual endogenous programs in controlling bird migrations. Caged birds display a preferential flight direction that corresponds with the migratory direction they would take in nature, changing their preferential direction at roughly the same time their wild conspecifics change course.
Is there an answer to this question: What is the primary cue for migration?

Answer:
changes in the day length