User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Joined
May 2026
Subscription
Core

We can't seem to outrun them Pinkertons. Now old Dutch’s got himself a plan, figures I'd join amongst their ranks... through the law

Admissions profile

LSAT
Not provided Goal score: 172
CAS GPA
Not provided
1L START YEAR
2027

Discussions

User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Thursday, Aug 13

I eliminated (A) because I thought the projectile amount hitting Mars could be the same even if LHB effected the inner solar system, because maybe Mars sits in a far corner of the inner solar system and the projectiles remained the same, maybe some funny event counteracted with the projectiles falling during LHB, leading to a net even.

In hindsight, my reasoning was based on an unwarranted premise/assumption. Because LHB clear indicate an increase in projectiles

1
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Thursday, Aug 13

for purpose in context questions, do we only read the paragraph containing the target phrase or relate to to the broader picture?

1
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Thursday, Aug 13

@Xexne198 but the second hypo refute the use of "Late Heavy Bombardment," whereas the first sentence in the last paragraph explicitly mentions "Late Heavy Bombardment"

1
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Friday, Aug 7

I really like Kevin's explaination it matches with my line of thinking

1
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Wednesday, Aug 5

@TylerJSchneider best of luck to you mister

1
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Saturday, Aug 1

I thought the parts after the 'but' are the author's perspective (arguing against economist using their logic)

1
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Friday, Jul 31

1
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Sunday, Jul 19

@GTHOMP2 thank you mister

2
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Tuesday, Jul 14

NA is like blackwater all over again...

5
PrepTests ·
PT133.S1.Q5
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Monday, Jul 13

@yeramchoi168 this

1
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Friday, Jul 10

@GordonGianadda hang in there im in the same boat

1
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Friday, Jul 10

@mostxareyallyarezthusmostxarez yea right?

1
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Thursday, Jul 9

@slimcharlie great exlaination

2
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Edited Wednesday, Jul 8

@echeli dw im in the same boat

0
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Edited Monday, Jul 6

why arent the rules chained up?

like so: Comp. TOB RGBEL -> Justified -> Comp. TOB

I guess it would be pointless to arrive at the conclusion that the computer in typically used in operation of business (Comp. TOB)

2
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Friday, Jul 3

@Oblivion push pull legs

13
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Friday, Jul 3

I was bested by this duel but I shall prevail next time

13
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Saturday, Jun 27

@MissProsecutor yayy

3
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Saturday, Jun 27

@MissProsecutor brain broke -> time for break

7
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Friday, Jun 26

hey there mister

3
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Friday, Jun 26

you sir…are a fish

5
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Tuesday, Jun 23

@josephlidd22 same, looking for strategies to not get caught up by the grammar

1
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Sunday, Jun 21

the competing hypotheses don't counter the correlation, they exist to compete as the explanation of the correlation

9
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Tuesday, Jun 16

@NoaF123 you got this!

2
User Avatar
ArthurMorgan
Tuesday, Jun 16

@petvma yes! try going back to diagram the spanish 101 question as well, it helped me!

2

Confirm action

Are you sure?