- Joined
- Oct 2025
- Subscription
- Core
Admissions profile
Applications
Discussions
The political one… I… okay 🙃
After getting it wrong during the drill AND BR, I said “I bet it’s such and such” and of course it was. I should have slowed down a bit more but idk.
4/5
Dang, I was doing good up until this one.
What threw me off was the “guaranteed” so I didn’t think E would be the answer. I was between B & C. Retook and selected E because it made more sense than A & B. Ugh.
We’re assuming Pat isn’t a member based on the information we are given. Anything else is just based off of what we think could happen and low-key making hypotheticals.
It may help to view this question as a “Solve for x” type of math equation. Copy and pasting what I responded to another comment with:
Member + 10 or more rentals = Last Location
Member + less than 10 rentals = Main St
Say hi to Pat.
Pat —> x + less than 10 rentals = Walnut Ln
What is x? We know that Pat rented less than 10 movies so let’s look at the rule regarding members who rent less than 10 movies.
We KNOW they can ONLY receive a coupon at Main St.
Okay cool.
Pat CAN receive it at Walnut Lane. She is NOT limited to ONLY Main St. This means… Pat must not be a member.
x = /Member (not a member)
It says “past month” for both members who haven’t rented more than 10 videos and the ones who have.
Member + 10 or more rentals = Last Location
Member + less than 10 rentals = Main St
Pat —> x + less than 10 rentals = Walnut Ln
Basically, solve for x. Pat can’t be a member.
I got this right but it took me 15+ minutes to get it. I had to map it out and then go through each AC to do POE.
Got it down to B and D. Chose D because B could have been false.
Ive been staying relatively close to the timing for majority of these questions but this one made me feel like my brain was short circuiting.
I think so. Sometimes I get it right but for a different reason that what was discussed right off the bat or I’ve eliminated answer choices but for a different reason. It’s always good to get another perspective (if you have the time to cruise through the course).
Yes but we also don’t KNOW whether they are successful in meeting the other half of the requirement to be an overall success or not.
If it explicitly said “No, they don’t have economic success.” then we could say that they aren’t an overall success.
C accounted for that.
Took me a while but I got it right!! I was between C & E. Crossed out C for the exact reason that was explained.
@AL1 The motorcoach driver is saying that professional drivers are more competent drivers BUT the police officer doesn’t even acknowledge that.
For all we know, the police officer could actually agree with the motorcoach but they try to remain neutral by saying that ANYONE can drive within the speed limits if they WANTED to.
It’s like when a friend says something kinda crazy that you MAY or may not agree with. Like, I’m not going to tell you you’re right and put the battery in your back but I’m not going to lie and tell you that you’re absolutely wrong.
Motorcoach = reduction of speeds will CAUSE SOME people who are BOTH law abiding AND competent drivers to break the law (we can assume he’s talking about professional drivers)
Police officer = ALL drivers (professional AND non-professional) can drive within legal speed limits if they want to
@lexxx74569 I know this was years ago but in case anyone else comes across this.
I eliminated A when I read it because it could go both ways for Talbert because they could say no, it doesn’t promote mental maturity OR they could actually agree that it DOES support mental maturity BUT it’s taking away from other things of value aka “science”.
I was between A and E but cancelled out E because it specifically mentioned “large scale” and while it did speak about people doing things in numbers, the stem also talked about singular people.
The author wants everyone to vote. Everything else is just the negative effects of people not voting aka support for why he thinks every single person should vote.
While I understand why C was wrong, pointing to the use of “never interfere” being the reason why it’s wrong is a bit perplexing to me because in the last lesson, the use of the term “all” was perfectly fine.
They’re both “strong” so im a bit confused.
The use of “all” really threw me off. So much so that I eliminated it as soon as I saw it. BLOWN!
@harpito.0 It could be true but one would need more details. What if this only started happening in the last decade? That means it wouldn’t matter if they are 25 or 55 (idk how long whales live for so bear with me lol), they’ve still been affected for 10 years.
While we one could say that older whales are more susceptible to hearing loss due to their biological makeup as they age, that would be based on outside “knowledge”/“assumption” rather than you sticking to the the information given right in front of you.
@cyberuba If you got to the stats of each question, you can see the difficulty level.
@KelseyKeanna For anyone that may come across this question as well.
When I read E, I said “Okay, let’s say we recognize it. Now what?”
From there… is that what the author is trying to tell us?
I was between B and C.
B to me said hey, there are so many genetic differences individually that it makes sense for there to be so many genetic differences reef to reef. However, I didn’t go with that choice because I kept reading it and thinking that this is just telling me something rather than explaining.
Decided to go with C. This explanation helped me to understand what the issue was with B and how I could have knocked it put quicker because I also made the assumption that they were mingling.