So doesn't it say that modern day faking began with Michelangelo and that he inspired imitators? Would an artist from the modern age of faking not be contemporary??

To be fair, lichen can't grow in the future, so it would be a weaker tool to predict future earthquakes no?

I chose E but in BR I thought I caught the flaw, which was it said that Roehmer's always been impartial but her column is just to please her loyal readers. Now that I read it as I type it, I realize that maybe her loyal readers are impartial readers...

Looking back now, E makes the most sense. If the splitters primarily cared about preserving a variety of species, they would focus on endangered ones. The most endangered species would be the ones grouped in by others, like if 100 golden egg laying geese were bundled up with 1 million Candadian geese as one species, they'd want to split them first in order to save the golden geese.

Whereas if there were 500k of the gray and black sparrow each, because neither of them are individually endangered, they would not prioritize them. Hence, despite should've been split, they aren't.

Which means all the species being split are the ones endangered, therefore more protected species.

I thought the difference was in market reaction speed, very fast in A and much slower (due to manipulation in B), hence a digital camera vs. old fim.

This is insane, I missed the "FOR"!!!!!

It's insane I didn't see the word unsurprising....

Rare circular reasoning!

Willing to follow moral codes while ignoring their own welfare > Empathy. (/E > /WF)

Missing: /WF > /C or C > WF which would be if we want a civilized society we need people that are willing to follow moral codes while ignore their own welfare. Which is A.

==================================

/Empathy > /Civilzed Society

I know both "rest" and "day" but what does "rest day" mean? Resting a whole day??

I thought of this as businesses are buying 60% of new cars, which means individuals are buying 40%. Only the rich individuals can afford cars so that's only 5% of their income. While 25 years ago indviduals were buying 80% of the new cars, and even the non-rich could afford cars so on average it was like 20% of the average income. This suggests that in the current age, only rich could afford cars and therefore the average price to income ratio actually decreases.

Months later still coming back to review this