Group 3 chose to save a female scientist, a male army officer with mental instability, a male doctor, and a female university professor to survive in an underground bunker for two years based on its limited facilities. The scientist was selected because she could reproduce, was likely intelligent due to her career, and had knowledge of biology that would help the group survive using the bunker's greenhouse, water, seeds, and limited medical facilities. The mentally unstable army officer was also chosen because his condition was not believed to be hereditary.

1. Group #3 decided to save the scientist (female), the army officer who has mental instability of some sort
but is useful nonetheless (male), doctor (male), and university professor (female). The facilities in the
bunker were the deciding factors for the final decision in who we thought should live. The facilities
available included the following: sewage system, water, seeds, some clothes, a few books, some medical
facilities but no operating material, and a greenhouse. The group needed to be able to survive for two
years. The scientist (female) survived for the following reasons: She is female and will be able to
reproduce; being a scientist she must be smart, so she will pass good genes to her offspring; being a
scientist (biologist) she will have knowledge of plants, animals, and humans, and having water, seeds,
and a greenhouse she will be able to set up a system and means of food, future needs for food and
other resources. The next choice was a hard choice to make, the army officer who has mental instability
of some sort but is useful nonetheless, obviously because he has some sort of mental instability. Looking
at the reproduction angle, his mental instability was caused by his experience in the army, a trait that
will not pass to his offspring, so that is not a problem