Yes this happens to me a lot! I thought it was a Safari issue only (I'm too stubborn to switch to Chrome 😭🥀).

I haven't been able to figure it out other than I think if I got too many 7Sage tabs open, the page refreshes more often since it cannot handle me being on 2+ 7Sage pages or more. I don't know if you also have more than 1 7Sage tab open, but I always think this is what makes it refresh for me as a person who keeps millions of tabs open.

I'll be so open to seeing if anyone else solved this issue because it's super annoying when taking timed PTs and it jumps me back to the beginning. 😞

I always loved watching this show. 💙

Please feel free to correct me! 💙

So I guess there's a difference between B and E is that...

B only addresses one group (Aerobics classes) but it could still be possible that the people lifting weights could also do aerobics, which can skew the data and say...now wait, doing both makes us confused which one contributed to helping handle stress... we still need to assume that those doing weights did not do more aerobics on their own time.

While E addresses both groups in that it means that people doing aerobics did more aerobics than did the people doing weights, meaning that each group mostly performed their main exercise...or else if the aerobic group did more weights and the weights people did more aerobics, then we would say, "woah 🥲 how can you conclude that author?"

Not gonna lie, I was scared they were gonna quiz us on every type of LR question like in the individual drills for each section. 🥲 Glad it's just the question stems because I never move past a quiz or drills until I am happy with my score. Ahhh!

In other words, I appreciate the ultimate LR quiz being left to our choice in doing whenever in the drills/practice (which I will do after doing RC section). 😅

Also I don't mean to put words in your mouth but, I want to say I support that this is for you 🥹 because why keep going? You want this, and probably will be more passionate than other law school students who didn't suffer a lot throughout their LSAT journey.

I also have to comment again for tips on what I did for my anxiety...

--I wore a cotton mask with lavender oil on test day (or something calming). I did this in undergrad...helped me so much. 🪻

--eating good before the test...I couldn't have any of my favorite snacks ): but eating as healthy as I could the week leading up to test day I felt helped my energy and mood...

--remind myself why I'm doing this...for me its the community I hope to represent as a lawyer...I have my family I look up to and they to me...I know everyone is different...but we gotta hold onto something...even if it seems irrational or naive to some😭.

Just wanted to say (love your username btw) how proud I am to see you push through this...don't let people tell you because of where you started you can't reach where you want to be...you got this. 💙

Since you are in the high 150s (where I believe I'm also at...) I don't know how much these tips will be helpful for you...you probably tried everything and anything. So I apologize if I sounds like a broken record...maybe someone else reading this can find it helpful... 🥲

General tips:

--Studying with others that are supportive of you...yes even though you can study with people (online/in person, sometimes their energy can affect your motivation to continue...so a good and supportive study buddy helped me last this long...

I lead a active Discord study group and its the one thing that helps me stay motivated...

--Taking up curriculum outside 7Sage (I personally liked the Loophole LR book, and the Powerscore LR Bible).

-- taking breaks if you are having a bad day or know you will not learn what you are looking at...

This is your choice but basically if I know I am too tired, I'll cut back difficulty or take the day off because if I cannot learn why I got something wrong for next time...I might as well give myself some self-appreciation and time off...naps, study breaks...etc. I cried many times in my LSAT journey...

-- You are currently doing this but yes, talking about this test and sharing how you feel helps. This journey is lonely and can be super long for a lot of us...so finding the right crowd to just talk about it, kinda tells us that it is gonna be all right...even if our score isn't where we want it to be at the moment.

In my opinion here's what helped me break 130s-140s:

-- really knowing the question types (me mistaken most strongly support with "strengthen" (most support) because I read it too fast literally docked me points for so long.

-- knowing your task for question types... I may not know what exactly I need to do for pseudo-sufficient but for the rest of the question types, I have a better idea of to do for them (I may not know the right answer but that's a totally different issue).

--Reviewing questions I got wrong and really finding ways to remind myself what "silly mistake" I made...I used to just get it wrong, say "oh well", and move on

--recognizing the conclusion, premises, and context/extra info, etc.)

150s-160s:

--saying things out loud when studying with others (repeating what they mean if they are right or repeating what they mean when I don't understand a certain idea) or writing it down.

--Making sure I don't make the same type of mistakes and really hone down on niche logic rules when I see them...I am currently at this stage where I keep making the same mistakes and they consistently hold me back from 160s-170s...If I avoid this, I know I'll break my current plateau...

(example: some answers are right but they are contrapositives of the answer I'm looking for, the contrapositive of "some/few" is "none", etc. of things I know I'll forget on test day because of anxiety or whatever I may go through)

--paying attention to words and saying to myself...huh, something suspicious is going on here...or that's kinda sus for the author to say that...so sometimes actually reading the stimulus first helps...

---

If you feel the need to seek accommodations for the exam, there's that option LSAC created to test takers. Because of the nature of this test really impacts the outcome. Many test takers that have ADHD, OCD, vision impairments and the like, they seek these accommodations, though it shouldn't be seen as some sort of special advantage, as I believe it was intended to give people with chronic/extreme anxiety or disabilities a fair shot at this test...🙏

Wishing everyone luck and many breakthroughs with their LSAT journey!

Leaving this here to remind myself when I finished. :D

Is this group still active? 😅 Is there an updated/permanent link?

I was stuck between B and D but chose D because...

the argument does not depend/rely on snails not being exposed to light because (I agree with a comment below), whether or not they are ordinarily exposed to light, the snails reaction may still be the same. The passage is talking about this snail living in the experiment and not just a random snail in some bright ocean. If the snail was brought from a place where there was bright light, and placed in a tank where the flashlight was the only "bright thing", it got retrained/reeducated to know what the bright light means "after several repetitions of this procedure" (3rd sentence).

so even if the snail used to live in a bright area before, the argument would not be destroyed because the experiment eventually lead the snail to react differently than it did previously (even if we assumed the snail grew up in a bright or dark place).

---

D is correct because the conclusion the author has is that the snail associates bright light with shaking the tank so D means that if the people doing the experiment would have just just shown the light ordinarily, or even if the snail lived ordinarily in the ocean with bright light, its tensing "foot" would not happen. Basically trying to say that the foot isn't just trying to hold onto things for any other reason and the light and shaking leading to the foot tensing is not a coincidence. If it was a coincidence, then the argument will be destroyed for sure.

Hope this helps :)

I guess this is a good reminder that "some" or "sometimes" means at least one...ugh 😞

so yes, people routinely let people go unpunished but now the author says basically we cannot let people go unpunished even once, or never!

D is saying basically that, where "routine non punishment" (routine = frequent...most?) with "sometimes" (at least once) not punishing...

I assign some with numbers...can be 1/once or (100) 100% of the time...I was looking for the once wordage but it came in the form of "sometimes"...

I knew the flaw but the answer choice wordage got me ): and I just picked B...🥀 It's ok ya'll we got this!

Omg this would come so much in handy when studying with others! The new updates are so much appreciated! Thank you 7Sage Team! 💙

Not gonna lie, I was stuck between D and E and ultimately I got D right for this reason... 📖

My explanation is kind of a break down of my thought process...I know there are other explanations out there but I thought for those that are super confused about how to approach LR questions...feel free to correct me on something :) I don't want to confuse/mislead people. 🥲

First sentence is like context where they are stating something as a fact...that there are researchers out there that do this thing... encourage weeds to grow in garden. The "because" that follows is just more context to support the fact, but this whole first sentence isn't the conclusion.

The second sentence is the CONCLUSION because the author is throwing in their opinion or something that feels like it could be placed at the very end of this paragraph and say, "this is what I think" or "this is what's really happening after throwing all these facts at you" or "this is what I conclude..." Or at least that's how I think about it.

The rest of the sentences are just another big "because"...

Like "the researchers’ advice is premature" because "for all we know, those kinds of weeds can deplete the soil of nutrients and moisture that garden crops depend on, and might even attract other kinds of damaging pests."

or

"the researchers’ advice is premature", why? Here is what I have to say to back me up: "for all we know, those kinds of weeds can deplete the soil of nutrients and moisture that garden crops depend on, and might even attract other kinds of damaging pests."

Even though the last sentence sounds like an opinion and can trick us to being a conclusion, we got to pretend that the statements they are throwing at us are so-called "facts" because its all about finding the main conclusion, and not caring about whether or not the "fake facts" that disguise themselves as opinions (and therefore conclusions) are true, so the last sentence can be considered as just a fact they are throwing at us to back up their conclusion/what they really want to say.

-----------------------

A: It was part of the same sentence as the conclusion but by itself its another fact that the author is throwing at us, like "hey even though we should limit the use of insecticide" but its missing the author's conclusion/opinion. So A was not the actual opinion/conclusion the author wants to say.

B: the fact says something about having an increase of unwanted pests, but who cares because that was not what the author concluded/their opinion. It sounds more like a fact/evidence...It was part of the facts in the last sentence the author was throwing at us...the evidence to back up their conclusion.

C: is wrong because that is what the researchers are claiming, not the author's just stated afterwards that this thing "advice" is premature. Similar to A, its stating things that others have been saying or the author says "well yeah, there's these ideas from researchers out there and all that...", but it's not the author's real conclusion...

D: is correct because it reflects how the author is against the advice of growing certain weeds in the garden. There was nothing else the author had attacked to be "premature". The researchers were over here saying/advising, "hey my advice is grow these certain weeds because " and the author is like "nuh uh, I think we shouldn't grow certain weeds... (notice the author didn't address/deny about the caterpillar thing, making it not part of the conclusion)"

E: I almost picked E because it shares the author's distrust from D ("skeptical") in the researcher's advice, but it says its because of reducing/decreasing the number of caterpillars in the gardens. The repelling caterpillars was just another "because" to back up the researcher's advice...that was premature, but measuring the extent that it effectively kicks those caterpillars out of the garden is not something the author was trying to argue against...it sounds like if we said, oh we'll let certain weeds grow...to an extent, because letting them grow full time will not be good, but what the author is almost saying that even though we should limit using insecticides, but we shouldn't really turn to weeds as our solution either, not referencing to what extent/measure it will work. The author really didn't care for the researcher's reasonings...they just were attacking their advice on using weeds. The caterpillar thing was not part of the advice but just a support/fact/reasoning to back up the advice