A is saying should take a critical stance about economy but the conculsuion is focused on self indulgance.

I don’t know why but this weakening question is so challenging for me.

I chose C and still feel it looks good. I did not chose E but it was a contender. And I do understand D. Maybe the reason I got stuck is that I didn’t think about looking for the MOST vulnerable answer. Can anyone help me understand this a little bit better. I can take a break and return to it.

This was so confusing but I get it after watching the video. :( I choce C, I didn't understand what E was saying and I certainly didn't get the conclusion. Next time, I will pay attention to the words after "But" as the conclusion is there. Maybe draw a large circle.

How was this a 3 star? Anyway, now I get the impact zone is central and worldwide is spreadout.

The first sentence is stating the existing thinking. Then it goes on to say But, this catastrophe was probably not responsible. So the Chcxulub was NOT responsible. Why? Because any asteroid kills near impact zone not worldwide.

So to break this argument, E shows that most of the dinos were at the impact zone. So if the asteroid hits that target zone, then this would wipe out all the dinos. This matches the gap.

@LadyMidnightGlamour I can send a Zoom invite whenever we find a good time. Thanks

I watched a video and made notes, you can see it under the Notes section, I hope.

I get it now. I picked B but argument wasn’t talking about the 1K businesses. It was a fact.

I am interested. I am available most evenings except Mondays when I have piano class. I am in Pacific time.

I am also taking the February exam, my second try and scoring the same. I read all the responses and I think I am going to keep studying and going through core curriculum and live classes, just keep going. I really don't want to wait another year but if I have to I will just do it. Its a little scary that this process could take more than 4 or 5 years but better than not doing it.

Interested

From the video, I learned that A is a sub-conclusion. It is actually saying what can lead to not having motion sickness. So it is a not X then not Y. I like to see the patterns in these questions.

I got this answer wrong because I chose A. I understand after watching the video why D is correct. I was considering D at first. I think that the question is asking for an assumption for the argument. The argument is actally about the sugars playing a major role in elevation. So the assumption has to relate to this conclusion. The place i go trapped is that I didn't make it very clear in mind to focus on this conculsion. I am going to work on first clearly stating the conclusion so that I am clear what the question is asking.

When he explains it in the video, I get it. But it seems like a puzzle. I really have to pay attention to the question as well as it is saying what Dr. Khan is saying.

Hi, can you please explain how the thinking pattern and logic in this question can be repeated on the LSAT? which part about the question is the key takeaway? Is it the first sentence? Is it understanding how to draw the pie circle diagrams? For example is that the 2 ven diagrams do not intersect? Thank you in advance? Great video btw.

Hello online study group

Hi I am taking LSAT in February. I’m interested in study group and or accountability. Thanks

I use a 15 minute timer and study and take small breaks. The timer really helps. I don’t like taking ADD meds daily, can’t sleep well at night.