The only reason I understand this is because I did undergraduate mock trial and played defendents. We looooved a stealing thunder moment

Another way I think about eliminating D— because the question stem is asking us what the author (the dude who doesnt fw medical textbooks) thinks about medical textbooks, D doesn't make sense on the basis of his argument. He is for custom-made illustrations, and without any clear concession indicators in the passage, accreditting the idea that the illustrations he doesn't like would be better about not misrepresenting the jury wouldn't fit within the context of his entire argument.

JYs handwriting is something special, everytime I look at his chaining I get more lost trying to understand what it is even saying

They should use this kind of interactive assignment wayyyyy earlier in the coursework. This would be massive when learning relationships early on.

@YehudaNissani The way I like to imagine it is by looking at each sentence within its own "world." Take Question 2 for example, which I initially struggled with. The "world" within this question is focused on which period faces a slower change of seawater change. Because the sentence argues that seawater changes more slowly during glacial periods, and slower change is the emphasis of this "world," glacial periods would be the winner. It is the difference between assuming that "slow" = a bad concept and cannot be the winner, and focusing on what the sentence is actually getting at.