him saying that this is one of the most tempting traps in RC makes me feel better about choosing D but this questions still makes me want to cry 😭😭😭 level 6 ass question
This type of question is really important to capture flaws in our reasoning. I see that in the comments there is debate about A being right because it fails to clearly communicate how the lack of intensity of projectiles striking Mars during the LHB period would show no support for hypothesis 2.
But I do think A can be seen as ruling out and failing to support hypothesis 2. This is because the time period mentioned allows us to make the inference that we would see an increase in intensity of projectiles striking Mars during the period '3-4' billion year period, while seeing a decline in the '4-5' billion year period. However, if as A says there is a lack of evidence for the increase in intensity during the 3-5 billion years, either before or after the conclusion as hypothesis 2 would suggest, then hypothesis 2 is not supported at least for one inner solar system planet—Mars.
When the question states there was no evidence of "increasing intensity" my mind goes to the possibility that it was already intense - hence supporting the outside the moon/earth system - and that an increase from a large amount of intensity to a crazy amount of intensity is not saying the same thing as there was no evidence found on Mars for the intensity of bombardment associated with the LHB. I got rid of this choice based on the ambiguity of increased intensity. How could have I approached this better without discounting this concept in other questions where it is important to recognize
They also ratcheted up the difficulty by having A say "during the period three billion to five billion years ago" instead of "during the late heavy bombardment." Basically adding in another logical move for you to make: recognizing that the LHB occurred 4 billion years ago.
I ruled out A so confidently and chose D so confidently... My first thought with A was "Ok, but just because it didn't impact Mars doesn't mean it still didn't impact others."
Fun fact about the LHB not covered here: It is hypothesized that the sudden changes in the orbits of the gas giants may have caused the LHB to occur.
Jupiter, in particular, plays the role of the "vacuum cleaner" for the solar system, or a "magnet" for dangerous objects like asteroids. There is a belief that Jupiter rapidly started to migrate towards the sun very early in our solar system's history, meaning that Jupiter's gravitational pull/force started to clean out the inner solar system while some of the early planets were developing. Some scientists think that this may have blunted Mars' maturation and growth (especially in regards to the building of its core) and that if Jupiter hadn't stopped migrating towards the sun, Earth probably would have faced the same fate as well.
Luckily for us, Saturn started to migrate towards the sun as well, and this movement caused Jupiter to pull back from its migration path, and the two planets eventually found resonance with each other at a safer distance from the inner solar system.
Long story short, Jupiter was moody early in the solar system's history, but it's now our friend and we should thank Saturn for keeping him in check. (I guess the period of disturbance that the two caused for the LHB would be the exception)
I chose D when looking at the question initially but saw how it was a trap answer pretty quickly. For me it was thinking back to the LR Flaw lessons that attacking an opponents argument is not the same as supporting your own argument.
how on earth does decreasing evidence for a competing theory not help your argument
1
Topics
PT Questions
Select Preptest
You've discovered a premium feature!
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!
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.
65 comments
him saying that this is one of the most tempting traps in RC makes me feel better about choosing D but this questions still makes me want to cry 😭😭😭 level 6 ass question
What's the level of difficulty this question is?
oh hell no
whattt the helllyy
I understand why A is right but I would 100% get this wrong without being walked through it
yea so ill be skipping questions like this on test day. what a waste of time
This type of question is really important to capture flaws in our reasoning. I see that in the comments there is debate about A being right because it fails to clearly communicate how the lack of intensity of projectiles striking Mars during the LHB period would show no support for hypothesis 2.
But I do think A can be seen as ruling out and failing to support hypothesis 2. This is because the time period mentioned allows us to make the inference that we would see an increase in intensity of projectiles striking Mars during the period '3-4' billion year period, while seeing a decline in the '4-5' billion year period. However, if as A says there is a lack of evidence for the increase in intensity during the 3-5 billion years, either before or after the conclusion as hypothesis 2 would suggest, then hypothesis 2 is not supported at least for one inner solar system planet—Mars.
very happy to have gotten this right!
crying sobbing throwing up dying live laugh loving rn
When the question states there was no evidence of "increasing intensity" my mind goes to the possibility that it was already intense - hence supporting the outside the moon/earth system - and that an increase from a large amount of intensity to a crazy amount of intensity is not saying the same thing as there was no evidence found on Mars for the intensity of bombardment associated with the LHB. I got rid of this choice based on the ambiguity of increased intensity. How could have I approached this better without discounting this concept in other questions where it is important to recognize
They also ratcheted up the difficulty by having A say "during the period three billion to five billion years ago" instead of "during the late heavy bombardment." Basically adding in another logical move for you to make: recognizing that the LHB occurred 4 billion years ago.
Is there any way to see the curve for these types of questions (ones not given to us in drill format)?
pain
Weakening your opponent's argument is not the same as strengthening your argument.
Only reason i didnt see D as being right is because you're only ruling out a small piece of evidence compared to A having multiple surveys.
pov: when you really do be comprehending
Getting this right is a nice little morale boost
I ruled out A so confidently and chose D so confidently... My first thought with A was "Ok, but just because it didn't impact Mars doesn't mean it still didn't impact others."
Thank you so much Kevin for such a great explanation! #grateful! : )
Fun fact about the LHB not covered here: It is hypothesized that the sudden changes in the orbits of the gas giants may have caused the LHB to occur.
Jupiter, in particular, plays the role of the "vacuum cleaner" for the solar system, or a "magnet" for dangerous objects like asteroids. There is a belief that Jupiter rapidly started to migrate towards the sun very early in our solar system's history, meaning that Jupiter's gravitational pull/force started to clean out the inner solar system while some of the early planets were developing. Some scientists think that this may have blunted Mars' maturation and growth (especially in regards to the building of its core) and that if Jupiter hadn't stopped migrating towards the sun, Earth probably would have faced the same fate as well.
Luckily for us, Saturn started to migrate towards the sun as well, and this movement caused Jupiter to pull back from its migration path, and the two planets eventually found resonance with each other at a safer distance from the inner solar system.
Long story short, Jupiter was moody early in the solar system's history, but it's now our friend and we should thank Saturn for keeping him in check. (I guess the period of disturbance that the two caused for the LHB would be the exception)
Ignore my positive comment on the previous question, this question literally makes me want to quit studying lol
I chose D when looking at the question initially but saw how it was a trap answer pretty quickly. For me it was thinking back to the LR Flaw lessons that attacking an opponents argument is not the same as supporting your own argument.
i actually ate this up in like 30 seconds
I got this right, I wish it was a drill lol
how on earth does decreasing evidence for a competing theory not help your argument