B, to me, seems as the right answer. Can someone explain to me why is it D?

Admin Note: For the Discussion Title, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question." This way, the community can better assist you or answer your question. Thank you.

The answer for this question does not make sense.

Admin Note: For the Discussion Title, please use the format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of the question." This way, the community can better assist you or answer your question. Thank you.

Ok I understand why the answer I marked, C was incorrect, specifically because of the last part of the sentence says "some clearly never were". However, the correct answer choice, option D also confuses me because it says that small amounts of the Co2 entered the soil from the atmosphere. The confusing part in all this is that the premise says the plants make the Co2 and put it into the atmosphere, so I do not understand completely why option D is correct. I understand why my answer of option C was incorrect, however.

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

Does anyone have a good template for their wrong answer journal for reading comprehension?

I would like some help in identifying some ways in which the following passage could be flawed: both if it were to be modified and also as it is currently. In other words, what would I have to modify in order to make the passage flawed, if it is not already? Some necessary assumptions for the following passage would also be much appreciated.

"In the past 1,000 experiments, whenever an experimental fungicide was applied to coffee plants infected with coffee rust, the infection disappeared. The coffee rust never disappeared before the fungicide was applied. Therefore, in these experiments, application of the fungicide caused the disappearance of coffee rust."

Thank you

Hi! My name is Robert and I am a 23 year old from New York. I work full time at my district attorney's office with hopes of taking the LSAT in November or December 2023. I work 8 hours 5 days a week and I study 1-2 hours after work, as well as studying on the weekends.

I was curious if anyone else was in similar situations? Do you work as well and do you study before or after work? I am trying to stay disciplined and study everyday. If anyone has any tips or advice feel free to share, thank you.

Why is E correct? I keep getting caught between C, D, and E. Why are C and D incorrect?

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

I am consistently missing 3 to 5 on RC and I am unable to get it down to a -0-2~3 range. Has anyone been in this situation and are you willing to share tips for getting over the hump?

I take notes for each paragraph, try to highlight wrong portions of answers. I seem to miss analogy questions a lot and I noticed that every time I change my answer I tend to get it wrong. I feel like I need to be disciplined about changing my answer from my gut instinct, but I seem to convince myself that I should change it every time.

thanks!

Has anyone found value in watching the passage videos for RC? Have they helped you improve in your process at all?

Was stuck between A and C on this one. A was right to me because the author seemed to "presume" that a person wouldn't value their life more than freedom. Can anyone help break down why this was an incorrect way of thinking this through?

If anyone can explain this question type to me in simple terms that would be great! The only question type I can't nail down!!!

Can we go over why it is not A? I switched from A to E but I am trying to reason out why A is wrong rather than my reasoning right now which is that E is better than A. Is it because A doesn't have a conditional which results in the daughter not protecting the life. A seems to focus on protection of life but the MP of the stimulus is listening to the father's wishes which the stimulus in E highlights.

I need help understanding why A is wrong. I kinda get why D is right even though it says "unsurpassed", which seems pretty excessive to me.

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

Hello! I usually score in the 168-169 range, but I am not sure if it’s just that i find the PTs in the 80s more difficult, but I got a 166, 166, and then a 164 on a couple of the PTs in the 80s. I have also been trying to PT 2-3 times a week. Do you think it’s because of burnout/fatigue, or just the difficulty of the PT in the 80s? Any tips or advice would be appreciated!

Does anyone know how/if we can do prep tests that simulate the Prometric interface? Are the current practice tests in Lawhub only reflecting the ProctorU interface? How are others who are taking the August 2023 LSAT simulating the interface?

Here is what it currently says on LSAC's website: "To familiarize yourself with the content and interface of the LSAT, we recommend using the free Official LSAT PrepTests® that are available through your LSAC LawHub account. LawHub also includes a series of tutorial videos that can help you get better acquainted with the test’s format and features."

After multiple reviews, I understand why B conflicts with information in the passage. I do not understand why answer choice D does not. I see it as, if reporting became more accurate, then there is an alternate reason for why the incidence of injuries changed between 1950-1980. Please help and let me know where the flaw in my logic is. Thanks!

When working through an RC passage, do you place an emphasis on the color of the highlighter you use when you're highlighting certain pieces of information? For example, do you always highlight the author's opinion, purpose of passage, opposing views, ect in different colors so you can tell them apart quicker? One of my biggest weaknesses in RC is spending a large amount of time going back and re-reading the passage to find certain information needed to answer a question. I think things would be faster if I came up with a color system where I could quickly go "okay, I'm looking for author's purpose. I highlighted that in pink. Here it is." Anyone do this? Which parts to you think is the most important to highlight?

(I haven't gotten to the RC modules yet, so my bad if this is a topic that is already discussed.)

I'm looking for an explanation to this question. I chose D (which is the wrong answer). Thx!!

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

Logic games has consistently been my weakest point. I find that I have developed a sort of "block" to them (when I get to that section I freeze and almost immediately give up). I can understand them for the most part when watching videos and follow along, but it becomes a problem when I attempt to do a drill. Does anyone have any suggestions to help this? I have tried reteaching myself game board set ups multiple times but I still do not feel confident in HOW they should be. Any encouragement or advice would be much appreciated!

Hello! By the end of this week, I am going to have completed the core curriculum for LR, LG, and RC (wooohoo!). BUT, now I am struggling on planning what I should do after this.

I am thinking of attempting to do 1-2 PT a week and then dedicating the rest of the week to reviewing my errors. Does this sound like a good plan? Should I do the practice test timed from the beginning? Instead of doing full PT should I do a section at a time, review it, and then do the next section?

I am planning on taking September and November LSAT.

Thank you in advance for all of your help!

This question doesn't seem like it would be an NA question, it seems more of a SA question due the stem. Is this correct to assume?

Hey! Can someone help explain why this one has the answer E instead of D?

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

I chose E but struggled between that and the correct answer C. I focused on the idea that she was a "competent mechanic" and therefore her opinion in this scenario was founded however in the second piece of evidence provided it was less clear whether or not she was a competent judge and therefore how could those two be related. However I can see that the two scenarios are not related whatsoever which is why C is correct.

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

Hey! Can someone explain this question? Thanks!

Admin note: I updated the title to reflect the following format: "PT#.S#.Q# - brief description of question"

Are there any suggestions for not confusing the sub-conclusion with the main conclusion?