One thing is that the argument never assumes that having porous bones is necessary for being a deep diver, its only an evidence for deep diving. However if you were to think this is necessary then I would think in this order:

Premise: (Whales) If deep divers, then porous.

DD -> PB

subset -> superset

Conclusion: (Dinosaurs) dinosaurs have porous bones, so they must be deep diver?

This is not a sufficient necessary flaw but an analogy. The way to weaken is:

DD -> PB

you take the subset out of the superset.

There are deep divers who don’t have porous bones or contrapositive there are animals with porous bones who don’t deep dive which in our case the latter is the ans.

this makes both A (if some is changed with most) and C the right answer.

I feel like this would be a very simple question for the real world. We would very normally think about whether the sizes of both the city's match etc. but for an LSAT question I think we just simply cannot bring in those obvious assumption unless explicitly stated in the argument.

@fl7dqf252 I think here the motorist was simply used as a premise introductory-almost like a story telling.

@EliK I have to agree with this. In order to make B the right answer, you still need to make several assumptions of your own.

@LSATDemon I think a more simpler way of seeing this would be thinking what the subject of the argument is which is copyright laws.

I think if we can keep our attention to copyright laws it helps to see why the other answers are wrong.

@weathersr1 you're right, the best way to think about this:

WEAKEN EXCEPT = STRENGTHEN or DO NOTHING FOR THE ARGUMENT

@Isabella! hey, so look at the conclusion they say that the marks are geological and not worms. I think you would get the answer wrong if you fixate on the worm instead of the geological process section.

To weaken that argument you need to find something that says it is not the geological process but something else.

@emmasabin I think its more of like a set of facts are true so they are testing what and how you come to a certain hypothesis. More like what can you reasonably conclude from the set of data you have.

@jrm98 TO ADD: Strengthen except means weaken or do nothing

@aurora67 I feel like if you were to read the correct answer choice you can easily tell that that's the right answer without having to dissect the other option. The 40-60 y/o experiment has a too different of a population to compare our first year students with.

I had a hard time understanding how B strengthened the argument until I saw the explanation.

#help can someone make a version of C that would make for a really good weakener for this argument? I did not completely understand the explanation on why C can have a potential to become a weakener.

@JaredKebbell I think one more thing to consider is we don't know the spread of the sample-maybe there was an equal mix of car accident back pain and sitting on chair back pain that got put into the two group equally i.e. the variations were equally spread.

I think you would need to make an assumption of an unequal spread in the groups before you can reach to E being the correct answer choice.

@kifill I don't think that would be correct. It doesn't matter how you guys got there but now that everyone is there kinda issue. It just gives your context on how you can arrive at the inception point of the experiment.

@AlenaKane I think what D essentially means is that the 12y experiment was just a better mechanized experiment, that is, since there is a placebo group we 100% know that the supplement didn't work. The purposeof a placebo is to show how many could have had a positive or negative effect without the supplement. "Did the medicine cause the improvement, or would people have improved anyway?"

So it really does not tell us about the discrepancy we see between the two studies, but just that one study was built in a better way to get to the result.

I think for me I kinda got confused between d and e because I wasn't too sure how a placebo affected an experiment, i.e. that it made the experiment stronger. I don't know why I assumed that half placebo and half supplement means zero net effect= "had no positive or negative effect"

need to come back to this just before the exam ...

@StanHolt Hii, I think you can translate it as:

"did not snore less/more frequently" =snored as much as before which means snoring did not increase or decrease with the abnormalities being fixed.

Hence, abnormalities are independent of snoring which also means that abnormalities are not causing snoring. Which, in turn, strengthens the hypothesis that snoring is causing abnormalities. Hope this helps!

@Kevin_Lin Hi Kevin, no I wasn't having the issue the next day when I logged out and logged back in. I think glitch had probably something to do with me subscribing back after a month.

This is probably one of the most useless questions ever. Why is there so many speculations? Literally any one of the options except for A could be the answer. You can make a case for all of them except for A.

A. Obviously Shakespeare would have a copy like duh-wrong

B. Yeah maybe whoever wrote the abridgement meant to write it specifically for the stage production for that one specific character (maybe that character was super popular?) in mind and did not care for the rest of Hamlet. They could have read the entire Hamlet, but just did not care to include everything which can be easily misinterpreted for them not reading it fully.

C. The actor probably just cared for their own role and wanted to make it look better and did not care for/read the rest of it. Maybe they had to make a career out of it, and people were just interested in their character.

D. Easy for a spectator to do an abridgement without reading the entire novel and favourably write only the character they liked.

E. Same thing as B

I mean, if you are speculating, none of these speculations is truly more reasonable than the other, except for A, which is really not reasonable.

These comment sections kill me LOL

@RainbowSherbet Thank you for the reply. I'm not using any VPN, all my setting are the same as before. But I subscribed back in after a month break-maybe that is throwing off my settings :(

#Feedback are people having technical issues trying to navigate the video? when I click on the video the it pops Fullscreen instead of showing me the options to navigate. does this have something to do with the upgrade?

@AlyssaV33 can you pls give the law hub link here! That would be so helpful

@ShahmeerRaza yes I do! What I've come to realize is that understanding the entire scope of why all wrong answer choices are wrong is arguably more important than just getting the question right, which the videos really help to develop.