I have a bad habit of mis-reading questions where I don't acknowledge a keyword in an answer choice that makes or breaks the question. It has happened on quite a lot of questions, and when I look back, I'm not sure why I did not see the obvious keyword that made a question right or wrong.
I spent 3 minutes on this question, almost eliminating D because I did not see the word "not" after "could not" and thought that this was a very dumb answer choice. It was only re-reading it after 2 minutes when the other ACs didn't make sense is when I caught the "not."
I appreciate the deep dive into AC (B). I immediately ruled it out because I believed it strengthened the argument, so there's a strong chance I would have considered that answer had the question stem asked us to strengthen the argument. Definitely emphasized the importance of attention to wording and really analyzing each AC as it relates to the stimulus!
I chose E in attempts to deny the assumption of the geologists "earliest known traces of multicellular animal life."
What if worms existed 500 million years earlier than other multicellular animals? It sounds like E gives an explanation for why worms could have existed for example, 600+ million years prior, because "evidence of their earliest existence is scarce" (due to soft tissue).
Doesn't this weaken the conclusion that claims worms could not have left the tracks?
@AOnifade I chose the same but I think you have to take it as true that multicellular organisms only started to exist half a billion years after the sandstone. So, even if it was the first multicellular organism, it still would be one of the first known ones, which puts it 500 million years after the sandstones. You would have to make the assumption that something we do not know has to be true in order for E to weaken the argument.
Isn't B wrong because it would support the argument? I don't see how it is bait... The timeframes line up, even if it could be referring to earlier times.
@ohsosasse if the geo processes that made the marks were 750m years before and the marks were made 1b years before, they would both be more than 500m years old yet it would be impossible for the geo processes to have made the marks, therefore not strenghtening.
could someone explain the "priority" category in the answer key? Some questions are marked as high question difficulty but low priority. Other questions are lower in question difficulty but high priority. wouldn't the high priority questions always be the hardest ones? also what does "V." stand for?
what does priority even mean? are they scored differently? or are we just supposed to pay attention to them because they're hard?
I feel like I missed a lesson on answer key notations because I also don't know what "Psg/Game/S Difficulty" means.
I believe that high priority appears next to a question when you have answered it incorrectly both on your timed and BR attempts. Low and very low priority appear when you have, at some point, answered it correctly. You can think of it as a message to you, as a test taker, personally. These questions, in other words, should be high priority for you, because you missed it on the first go through.
Also, I think that "Psg" is meant to refer to the difficulty of parsing the passage.
#help why is it not an assumption that worms are a form of multicellular animal life? that seemed like the clearest gap in the argument to me, so i looked for an answer that attacked that assumption and found it in E. you even said we need to "make that connection" (essentially just assume that it's true)... but what if that connection (assumption) was disproven? would that not weaken the argument?
I chalked it up to high school biology knowledge. I'd read up on what the largest single-celled organisms are like for both functions and size. Using the term "worm", even if small, indicates a certain level of complexity that probably precludes the possibility of it being a single-celled organism. That said, I still had the same thought in the back of my mind that single-celled organisms could have been responsible until I saw that none of the answer choices really addressed that.
It's wrong for other reasons. But I also eliminated A since it discusses how precisely they can date a piece of 'sandstone,' but the stimulus only talks about the age of the 'marks' in the sandstone.
I'm confused as to why we're sometimes instructed to pick answer choices that directly attack the conclusion-hypothesis and then at other times instructed to pick answer choices that merely deny or support an alternative conclusion-hypothesis. What are the signifiers for when to implement these strategies?
I went with C instead of D because I thought just because the sandstone was found in that location, that doesn't mean that it is the location where it necessarily originated. What if it was moved there and thats just where someone else found it. But then again I am not familiar with sandstone. And with C you have to make more assumptions than you do with D
I think another thing wrong with A is that the premise talks about what year the marks were made in the sandstone, not the age of the sandstone itself. Choice A specifically refers to the age of the sandstone.
read too quickly somehow answered it as if it were a strengthen question. got the right answer in the alternative strengthen question universe. a win is a win. gotta be more careful
I was on C before D, but since I felt the arguer was arguing the marks were a result of geological processes and D spoke against the geological processes I went with D.
Another reason why I thought A was wrong was because of the word "precise." Let's say the scientists used a rough estimate instead and found that the sandstone dated 100 million years before the existence of multicellular animal life. This would still support the conclusion. My main point: the scientist could have had the most exact date or the least exact date and come to the same conclusion.
Subscribe to unlock everything that 7Sage has to offer.
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to get going. Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you can continue!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you came here to read all the amazing posts from our 300,000+ members. They all have accounts too! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to discuss anything!
Hold on there, stranger! You need a free account for that.
We love that you want to give us feedback! Just create a free account below—it only takes a minute—and then you’re free to vote on this!
Hold on there, you need to slow down.
We love that you want post in our discussion forum! Just come back in a bit to post again!
Subscribers can learn all the LSAT secrets.
Happens all the time: now that you've had a taste of the lessons, you just can't stop -- and you don't have to! Click the button.
61 comments
I got it almost tripped with C lol
How does answer choice D not block a hypothesis? I never understood this one
I think every question I have had the right answer but then changed it because my brain has last minute thoughts smh.....
I have a bad habit of mis-reading questions where I don't acknowledge a keyword in an answer choice that makes or breaks the question. It has happened on quite a lot of questions, and when I look back, I'm not sure why I did not see the obvious keyword that made a question right or wrong.
I spent 3 minutes on this question, almost eliminating D because I did not see the word "not" after "could not" and thought that this was a very dumb answer choice. It was only re-reading it after 2 minutes when the other ACs didn't make sense is when I caught the "not."
Anyone else struggling with this?
I appreciate the deep dive into AC (B). I immediately ruled it out because I believed it strengthened the argument, so there's a strong chance I would have considered that answer had the question stem asked us to strengthen the argument. Definitely emphasized the importance of attention to wording and really analyzing each AC as it relates to the stimulus!
I chose E in attempts to deny the assumption of the geologists "earliest known traces of multicellular animal life."
What if worms existed 500 million years earlier than other multicellular animals? It sounds like E gives an explanation for why worms could have existed for example, 600+ million years prior, because "evidence of their earliest existence is scarce" (due to soft tissue).
Doesn't this weaken the conclusion that claims worms could not have left the tracks?
#help
@AOnifade I chose the same but I think you have to take it as true that multicellular organisms only started to exist half a billion years after the sandstone. So, even if it was the first multicellular organism, it still would be one of the first known ones, which puts it 500 million years after the sandstones. You would have to make the assumption that something we do not know has to be true in order for E to weaken the argument.
Worm tracks? The Lisan al-Gaib must be near
I just want to punch myself in the face
got the last few questions incorrect. got this one correct. life is worth living again.
Isn't B wrong because it would support the argument? I don't see how it is bait... The timeframes line up, even if it could be referring to earlier times.
@ohsosasse if the geo processes that made the marks were 750m years before and the marks were made 1b years before, they would both be more than 500m years old yet it would be impossible for the geo processes to have made the marks, therefore not strenghtening.
It's just too vague.
worm tracks... sandstone... SHAI-HULUD
could someone explain the "priority" category in the answer key? Some questions are marked as high question difficulty but low priority. Other questions are lower in question difficulty but high priority. wouldn't the high priority questions always be the hardest ones? also what does "V." stand for?
what does priority even mean? are they scored differently? or are we just supposed to pay attention to them because they're hard?
I feel like I missed a lesson on answer key notations because I also don't know what "Psg/Game/S Difficulty" means.
I believe that high priority appears next to a question when you have answered it incorrectly both on your timed and BR attempts. Low and very low priority appear when you have, at some point, answered it correctly. You can think of it as a message to you, as a test taker, personally. These questions, in other words, should be high priority for you, because you missed it on the first go through.
Also, I think that "Psg" is meant to refer to the difficulty of parsing the passage.
#help why is it not an assumption that worms are a form of multicellular animal life? that seemed like the clearest gap in the argument to me, so i looked for an answer that attacked that assumption and found it in E. you even said we need to "make that connection" (essentially just assume that it's true)... but what if that connection (assumption) was disproven? would that not weaken the argument?
I chalked it up to high school biology knowledge. I'd read up on what the largest single-celled organisms are like for both functions and size. Using the term "worm", even if small, indicates a certain level of complexity that probably precludes the possibility of it being a single-celled organism. That said, I still had the same thought in the back of my mind that single-celled organisms could have been responsible until I saw that none of the answer choices really addressed that.
I had the same thought... High school biology was a long time ago!
It's wrong for other reasons. But I also eliminated A since it discusses how precisely they can date a piece of 'sandstone,' but the stimulus only talks about the age of the 'marks' in the sandstone.
I'm confused as to why we're sometimes instructed to pick answer choices that directly attack the conclusion-hypothesis and then at other times instructed to pick answer choices that merely deny or support an alternative conclusion-hypothesis. What are the signifiers for when to implement these strategies?
I had the same confusion!
I went with C instead of D because I thought just because the sandstone was found in that location, that doesn't mean that it is the location where it necessarily originated. What if it was moved there and thats just where someone else found it. But then again I am not familiar with sandstone. And with C you have to make more assumptions than you do with D
I made the same mistake.
choosing C is essentially denying something in the context, not the conclusion being made which is what D denies
In strengthen/weaken questions is the conclusion always a hypothesis?
no
C, D, E all seem good.. but D puts the nail in the coffin. It removes all doubt.
Ugh i was torn between C and D, I was leaning towards D. but then C seemed more relevant so I chose the trap answer :(
I think another thing wrong with A is that the premise talks about what year the marks were made in the sandstone, not the age of the sandstone itself. Choice A specifically refers to the age of the sandstone.
read too quickly somehow answered it as if it were a strengthen question. got the right answer in the alternative strengthen question universe. a win is a win. gotta be more careful
I was on C before D, but since I felt the arguer was arguing the marks were a result of geological processes and D spoke against the geological processes I went with D.
I am a fish and I took the bait😔
crying in the club bc of these questions ):
real
Another reason why I thought A was wrong was because of the word "precise." Let's say the scientists used a rough estimate instead and found that the sandstone dated 100 million years before the existence of multicellular animal life. This would still support the conclusion. My main point: the scientist could have had the most exact date or the least exact date and come to the same conclusion.