Im having a hard time figuring out how you are suppose to come to the correct answer choice, it seems I just can not comprehend how to do these types of questions... please help lol

When can we expect the explanation videos for this PT?

Can someone explain why C is right? I initially chose D and can now see why D isn't necessarily true for Passage B, but I can't figure out why C applies to Passage B.

Hi, this is a necessary assumption question.

The conclusion is "by using recycled glasses instead of glass made from raw materials, bottlers can lower their costs and benefit the environment at the same time."

The answer is D. "purchasing and transport costs are not so much greater for recycled glass than for raw materials that they outweigh the savings in energy costs resulting from the use of recycled glass."

I cannot understand why the answer is D.. and also I cannot get the meaning of D. The savings in energy costs are outweighed by...

please, help me!

Admin Note: Edited title. Please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question"

I am really struggling to see improvement on logical reasoning. I consistently score-8/-9. I have went through the curriculum on 7sage and have been consistently drilling. There is not a single question type I am always getting wrong, it seems to be random. I am starting to panic as I plan to take the January Lsat.

Can someone explain this to me?

Hello everyone! I am consistently getting flaw or descriptive weaking questions wrong. No matter what I do, I just cannot improve. Does anyone have tips for these types of questions? Also, just in general. I always get stuck between two answers and choose the wrong one. Sometimes I choose the right one and over think and then I change it. How can I gain more confidence in myself?

Hi everyone,

So bewildered by this question that I have to post on the discussion forum. Why is answer choice E correct??? After analyzing all the answer choices, it seems to me that NONE of the answer choices is even close to being correct. If someone can see a flaw in my reasoning, please advise.

Missing Assumption: the higher amount of pollutants in the Baltic Sea is making the Baltic seals more susceptible/succumb-able to viral diseases and therefore is what's causing the higher rate of viral deaths in Baltic seals (compared to Scottish seals).

In other words, we're assuming that it is not some alternative cause that's causing the higher viral death rate in the Baltic seals (for example, what if the viruses infecting the 2 islands are different, and the virus in the Baltic sea is just more deadly than the virus in the Scottish sea?)

A: Irrelevant - doesn't make it more believable that the higher rate of viral deaths in B is due to pollutants. Knowing more about the Scottish seals doesn't really matter here!

B: Might've be a potential strengthener if it said "Baltic seals" instead of "Scottish seals", but even then we would have to make the assumption that the virus infecting the two islands were the same kind of virus in order for us to see this as a strengthener.

However, it's still talking about the Scottish seals, which again is not what we care about!

C: Easiest choice to eliminate. Irrelevant!

D : "The kinds of pollutants" is irrelevant to our discussion here, because we care about the amount and not type of pollutants. In other words, even if the pollutants are different between the 2 islands are different, I'm not more convinced that the higher amount of pollutants in B is what resulted in the higher rate of viral deaths in B.

E: Also irrelevant to the issue at hand! Even if the viral death rate was higher for other sea mammals in the Baltic sea, it doesn't make me believe more that it is SPECIFICALLY the pollutants that are causing the higher viral death rates! The only thing this AC does for me is convince me that there is certainly something different between the Baltic and Scottish seas that's making the Baltic seals die more from viral diseases, however we have no idea if that "something" is pollutants or if it's something else! For example, given the additional info in E, it could still very well be that it is NOT the pollutants causing the higher viral death rates, but a deadlier virus that infects all marine mammals in the Baltic seas - because the virus in the Baltic sea is different and deadlier than the virus in the Scottish sea, the seals die more from this virus in the Baltic seas (than in the Scottish seas from the weaker virus). It could still very well be that the higher level of pollutants in the Baltic seals' blood is just a coincidence and not the real cause of their higher viral death rate.

If you see where I've gone wrong in my reasoning, please help!

Admin Note: https://classic.7sage.com/lsat_explanations/lsat-23-section-3-question-13/

I got this answer correct but I did not diagram. Not sure how to diagram this stimulus. Thanks!

Can anyone explain why pt 93 s3 q25 is A and why B-E are wrong? I struggled with this one but ended up choosing D.

Can anyone explain why S3 Q24 on PT 93 is B and not C? I know C has the conclusion less clearly delineated but other than that it seems to match up slightly better.

Was anyone else completely stumped on how to even go about this question? I’d love to be able to discuss it._

Can anyone explain why E is the correct answer choice? I thought the premise sets out that we could only choose from anarchy and totalitarian government control. If we cannot question the premise, why is this E correct? Thanks!

Hi All,

This is my first post, so if I make any major "faux pas", please let me know. This post is regarding a MSS question on PT Feb 1997, Section 3, Question 16.

In this question stimulus, we are given a discussion about zebra mussels—an invasive species in the Great Lakes that possesses some redeeming qualities. Zebra mussels consume algae that they filter from the water, and in discharge streams, they improve water quality by removing some amounts of hazardous waste.

Question stem: Which one of the following is most strongly supported on the basis of the statements above, if they are true?

Responses:

(A). Zebra mussels arrived on transatlantic freighters, and displace native species.

A is incorrect. This is because it is irrelevant how or why the Zebra mussels are here. We want to know what the implications of their redeeming qualities and presence in the lakes means for the chemical plant.

(B). If Zebra mussels spread to the Mississippi River, the clam industry will collapse.

B is incorrect. This response is irrelevant, we simply don't have any information in the passage to show that the Mississippi River clam industry will collapse. Also, we aren't really interested in this information either.

(C). There is no mechanical means of clearing the Zebra mussels.

C is incorrect. This response is irrelevant and is not supported by the passage. There very well could be mechanical means or other means of clearing the Zebra mussels.

After reviewing all of the answers, I was down to the final two responses:

(D). The algae on which the mussels feed would, if not consumed by the mussels, would clog the intake pipes at the chemical plants.

D This answer is incorrect. I anticipated that this statement is the most strongly supported. Based on my initial reading, it seemed like this would be a logical inference to make. The algae would likely clog the intake pipes, BUT FOR the zebra mussels consuming them.

Do we not have enough information from the passage to support this answer?

(E). Any hazardous waste the mussels remove from the chemical plant will remain in the mussels, if they do not transform it, they must be regarded as hazardous waste.

Answer (E) is the correct answer. This answer is the most strongly supported response. This answer is somewhat sensible, but it still seems a bit off. How do we know that the hazardous waste will go into the mussels? The last clause of the sentence makes sense "if they do not transform it, they (the mussels) must be regarded as hazardous waste". However, for this to be true, we must accept the first clause of the sentence, which I don't think we currently have enough support in the passage to make.

Note: This is the major curve-breaking response, and is likely a major source of error/frustration for many. I am one of the frustrated ones. In short, I am still a bit confused on why E is correct, rather than D. Answer E simply sounded a bit too a dystopian Sci-Fi of a response to be correct.

I would appreciate any feedback that you folks have to offer. Thanks.

Hi, does anybody know if there are any mock proctored practice tests happening before the Nov LSAT? If not, would anyone want to do a zoom call pt before?

Can someone break this one down for me? I am really struggling to understand how D is correct.

#HELP!

I took the October exam, scored 168 which wasn't too surprising since that had been my score on several PTs leading up to the test. I am signed up for next week & goal is to score 171+. Took the newly released PT 93 today & scored my highest ever, 175!!!!

I am super conflicted because if I take the test next week, it will be my 4th time & if I score lower than 168, I don't want admissions to think that the score is a fluke and not something I worked hard for. If I score higher than 170, great! However, is this a risk worth taking? For reference, I would like to attend a T20 school with substantial scholarships, looking at USC Law for which I fall right at the median LSAT but lower than median GPA.

This question was tough for me. I thought I didn't need the third sentence. Picked D but wasn't confident with it. Not sure how E is correct. Please help.

Hi,

This question has a 5-star difficulty but it looks like there's no explanation video on this.

What is everyone's thought process on this question. Here's my reasoning for why it comes down to C and D :

C. Some parts of the rock was under water, some part on land. Which one do we know is where the C-14 were found from (if its the unerwater part then it goes against the argument, if its the land part then it supports the argument). This is just not enough to know. This could go both ways. BUT it does cast doubt on the result of the study, how do you know which part of the rock you got your C-14 from.

D. Among the C-14 that were found in this rock, a small amount of C-14 come from the atmosphere. Meaning the rest of the C-14 can still come from remnants of plants and microbes. Doesn't weaken the argument much, but it cast doubt.

I picked D but the correct answer is C. Can someone explain their thought process and why C is a better ac?

Never thought I'd make it to the 170's, let alone 175+. Never stop believing in yourself, this test can be learned! I studied for 2+ years. I'm still in shock. Thank you, 7sage.

I am currently stuck between a 147-151 on PT. I have about 10 weeks until I take the LSAT and my goal score is a 154. I have gotten a 154 once, but that was untimed and I took double the time recommended. Does anyone have any advise on how long I should study or what I should do throughout the next few weeks?

We're done here. Best of luck to everyone and thanks very much to J.Y. and team.

This post isn't for those that already "have it"

This is for all my brothers and sisters who saw a long journey ahead of them with days of grinding, and plenty more discouraging days.

You can do it.

Special thanks to Owen, Ellen, Molly and Dr. D.

I will press forward for a slightly higher score.

It feels great to finally break the "7"

Hey guys,

so this is my third time taking the lsat i took it last year in October bombed that cause my anxiety messed me up, and made a mistake and took it within a month again and did horrible my anxiety and nervousness really gets to me. I was suppose to take it in August but didnt feel just ready, October was my next date but had an emergency in my family, now I am taking it in November. im STRESSED because my LR can be anywhere from -5 to -13, and RC is -6 to -12, I really just want to get a 160 is there any advice how i can do better in these two sections before the exam. Ive been trying it all and just feel so hopeless and scared. I'd appreciate any advice because I really want to succeed.

hi, im registered to take the Nov LSAT and I suck at LR. Averaging -13 on LR on recent PT. does anyone have any tips or tricks for weakening or flaw questions??? Or any type of suggestion for LR in general on how to do better?? I am trying to drill but I can't seem to get out of the same mistakes I keep making.