I note nearly all my incorrect answers- but I do not review the journal itself.

@JhovannyAcevedo I believe I understand: The question is asking us to weaken the argument. The argument is stating that anyone who follows the diet WILL loose weight. AC D is saying that SOME who DID follow the diet, did not loose any weight.

Wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait wait. This does not make any sense. Why is AC C not a acceptable alternative explanation? This would prove that people were also doing exercise on the side??? #help

I got this wrong initially but chose AC D for the following: "BR: Because even if the youth DO buy all the products- the older would still have much more money."

Would a fair assumption not be that: because the reforms came about, it had support? Also, although i saw the connection of the egalitarian terms for AC E- I was not convinced that it was influenced by it. Any thoughts? It just stated that it was egalitarian not that it was influence by egalitarian ideals?

"The last element can be problematic," Is this not a fair assumption of being ineffective?

@JhovannyAcevedo I find that I MUST be able to note down what I did wrong, what I did right- the discussion tab is full of notes of people that help me understand so quick. But what will work for you- will work for you!!

@JulienHajenius Hi! The video lessons are certainly so good- I personally actually just skip the videos and go straight for discussion on questions I get wrong. This however, is partly due to my work environment (I study on free time).

Wait Wait, this does not make sense. The same logic to justify AC A was to deny AC B. The stimulus already tells us that the conventions held at the city were Large?? AC B however, does make a assumption on how those tax revenues will be obtained- amount of money spent. Please ##help!

@RobertCarlson I had this exact question. In my mind, AC B is reinforcing the stimulus because: since the testers did not know of the fat content- they were able to give a sincere answer that both tasted similar.

I overlooked AC A as I thought this was too broad: for example for LR- would this not be too broad to say that they are reconsidering beliefs for all infections as whole (As opposed to neurological)? Also, would not skepticism be a fair foundation to assume weak support??

@Kevin_Lin Thank you!!

I might be missing something but- from POE, all the other AC are eliminated but AC B seems kind of irrelevant as well? I am still not understanding how AC B weakens the argument. Specifically- the wording. "Normally" would imply that it not ALWAYS the case- which means that a communal object could in theory still be in a tomb. Furthermore, just because it is inherited does not mean it would not be in a tomb. You can die with an inherited item- no?? Any insight would be appreciated.

@Aroldan15 Oh snap- game changer.

@johnigarzabal722 Okay I like this! I got AC D correct- but curious on why the focus is on climate and not food? My focus was on the food production.

I do not see the "Strong Disagreement"- apart from the actual Whig sentence (which I read as neutral)- is there any other sentences I should be looking at for that "Strong" emotion?

How can I differentiate AC B from AC C for the future? Although I understand why it was not correct- it seems like the wording on AC C states the same as AC B: a critic states that Cullen's poetic persona vacillates from poem to poem.

Here is my confusion though- the question states "If true..."; thus it would be appropriate to assume that, for AC B, the people that are concertgoers are also people who live in the vicinity? OR is this too big of a jump?

Would appreciate additional help. These C-N and linking questions are one of my biggest weak points. It is just not registering. I feel as if I can eliminate based on logic- but do not understand the diagrams. It just had not clicked/ broken through.

A) Generalization that ALL societies will thrive just because they have effective news- does not follow logically.

C) Same as A- insufficient, confusing necessary with sufficient.

D) Same with A & C

So I was able to POE these three but using that same logic somehow erased E as well. I choose B not only by POE but because it seemed sound logically. Feel stuck- I have grown to recognize these necessary and sufficient problems- but still don't understand them. #help