21 got me for the exact reason he said, I put E because I thought D could be political but could not so it wasn't a strong enough reason. I had completely flipped what I needed to, it went over my head. Any suggestions on how to get better at stuff like this? Just paying more attention and doing more problems, or is there something I am missing?

Third one I want to try to explain for myself. You read the first sentence and reach unless. In my case the ears perk up a little because this is where I think it gets good. I see "unless they are as intelligent as humans" and go hunting for the reference to this sentence. Which is about communication, and it ties into that we can't go out looking for them. Which means if we can't communicate, the only way to find them is to look. I got a little confused because I figured the answer choice would be "If we cannot communicate with aliens, we will not be able to find them." Since we cannot go out and find them as it says in the passage, but I saw D and pieced it together that it was the right answer. I just shifted my assumption around and got "The only way we can find aliens if we cannot talk to them would be to look for them". Again, I have no clue if anyone else does this, but I hope this is helpful to someone, and hopefully I can get a comment of someone else who does this.

I commented on the last one how I do these, and this one was the same way. Found the conclusion and read the sentence directly before to match the two up and "connect the dots". Then I found the answer choice that would bridge these two sentences together and boom, question correct in 38 seconds.

I'm not sure if the way I do it is right, but when doing these questions, I just find the conclusion, the first premise that follows, and try to connect the two. For this one, I read the first sentence, notice it is the conclusion, then find the "P1" and try to bridge the two. This almost always results in the right answer, the only times it is wrong is when I personally don't read correctly. To me, I saw this and said "Okay the education is not effective and doesn't lead to student insight. This must mean that if it leads to insight, it is effective." And then I found D from there. I'm not sure if this is 100% foolproof, but on my analytics for PT's I have almost a 90% across the last 5 PT's. I would love to know if any of you have any comments on this to know if I am doing something wrong or if anyone else does it this way. I don't really graph it out in my mind or on paper, just playing a quick 1-minute game of connect the dots LR style.

When I quick viewed the question to try and solve it before the video, it had me sweating a little bit tbh. Anyone else get confused on this?

Tell me how I immediately knew it wasn't C and then spent a minute straight contemplating between A and D. I somehow dodged the tough trap answer, and then went between the right choice and a very easy wrong choice smh

I know this was 2 months ago and you might not need this anymore, but the way I thought about it was since 1970 the country Q had been stockpiling coal. Say in 1990 they had 300 tons left over. The only way that could decrease is if in 1991 if they used more than they mined. Even if they mined less than they did in 1990 (say 1 ton in 1991 compared to 10 in 1990), it wouldn't matter unless they also consumed more than they mined. The total amount of coal they have cannot go down unless they consume more than they mine. I hope this helps a little bit, if you even need it anymore.

As soon as I turned my drill in, I immediately realized how hard this question got me. I never even considered that it rolls over each year until it was too late. These questions are tricky

A true scientist at heart, gotta make sure you have a large sample group for a solid result though

Am I wrong in thinking that the first sentence is supported as a conclusion because of the "since" in the next sentence? Because the "since" indicates a premise that could contain a conclusion, but is definitely a premise, wouldn't that switch the argument from the conclusion to premise? If it was context or another premise, there wouldn't be a since there, right? The only way I was able to figure out what the main conclusion was by doing that and comparing it to the two other options, where the one after the since fed into the last sentence, and the last sentence was missing the certainty that the first sentence had. If I am totally wrong, please feel free to correct me, this is just how I looked at it.

"Fuck yo couch" Could this be a Rick James reference? Lol

The first line sent me into a laughing frenzy, I literally had the same exact thought

I don't mean to be that guy and gloat, because trust me I am not that good at these questions. But how come on some of these level 5 difficulty questions I get them easily, but the 4 or 3 level questions trip me up? Is it because I am overthinking everything or was I lucky that this one connected so fast?