I overthinked this one..

lol

oh wow, i actually didn't catch the assumption even the second time when I reviewed this question, i used poe to get this one right.

P: The price paid for a new car increased to individual income

(assumption: we're talking about everything under the individual domain)

C: price paid for car relative to income > price paid for car relative to income 25 years ago. (before I only spend 25% of my income, now I need to spend 45% of my income.)

A: This couldn't be weaker because it introduced this "more than one wage earner per household," Honestly I think we're talking about individuals here so what does 1+ wage earner have to do anything about this?

B: how come a used car has anything to do with this? we're talking about purchasing a new car

C: I chose this one on my first try, and I think this one actually strengthens it...If after inflation and my income declined, now looking back at the price paid per car, it makes sense that on average I need to pay more to buy a new car

D: new car sales increasing > pop increasing doesn't say anything. We're talking about avg car prices here.

E: The prices are driven up not because what the individuals paid for the car has increases. The individuals' price paid prob stayed the same, but a larger percentage of non-individuals are buying more expensive cars.

I used this approach to get my br round correct.

geo or worms? /worms, then geo.

answer D says: /geo. which is a direct contradiction against the stim, which weakens then reasoning

Finally, got one right!!!!!

I'm so frustrated at this point.

I always go for the opposite option (I chose D lol)

Against or Abstain

Abstain -> voter decided

?

C: /Abstain

The ? is probably /voter decided -> /abstain aka we don't want the matter to be taken into the hands of voters

A. assumes that the voter will decide in favor, and we don't really know that

B. We don't want voters to decide. perfect

C: what in favor?

d: /abstain -> /voter decided. I chose this one because I map out the relationship wrong,

e: nah

Almost fall for D..

translation of the stim:

many worker got ill because of t.

dunno know about t, but sitll should be responsible.

bc if the company investigated earlier, it is preventable.

preventable -> responsible

D: be responsible, whether preventable or not

E: preventable -> responsible

(understand + intention) → wrong

I hope this type of question is not on my test..how do I nail these questions on my actual test

I went over the thing in a untimed BR session..

and yeah. I got the right answer..bc all other answers did not make sense lol

OMG this is tripping me up.

How do I know if the recorded is suppose to be the shiny bright keyword in the stimulus.

I was gonna choose A but I quickly crossed it out because it looks too straightforward.

I then went for D because I feel like they can properly explain why number of galaxies only relate to the theory of galaxy formation but not how universe mass is estimated. Now that i read again, i can see why this doesn't work...whatever the total mass of universe it's not going affect the theory, and it has nothing to do with why estimate about universe mass never changed.

silly me~

I'm not a biologist, but I chose the right answer just because I know some shark biologies...

2nd time doing this question..still wrong..

I got this one wrong and I cannot believe that the target time for this is 1:45..

what???

I immediately crossed out D bc I kicked "member of FVC" in domain.

FUCK

I was gonna choose C but then I vaguely recall the "all before most ," and turned to D, which is more strongly inferred. Yay!

Also writing everything down in lawgic just make the entire "oldest mistake in the book" harder to make~the direction of arrow is super clear

I love this lesson. I've always been fried in the MBT questions.

I feel like we can have a bit more content combine grammar and lawgic to help us with these parse the question

-poll may distort the outcome since they are not reliable

-publish one week before would give no chance for candidates to explain.

C: We should ban the publishing of polls (doesn't impair freedom of speech anyway)

weaken: attack the relationship (premise and support)

A: During the two week before election (including one week before), ppl's decision don't get influenced anywas. Weakens! The premise support the conclusion because the poll may distort the outcome. Now this is saying that poll does not affec people's actual outcome, so this effectively weakens the argument.

Not B. OK..but we are not talking about an uneven election, but allll elections. Plus, it stated that poll does not decided the outcome, which kinda strengthen it.

Not C. This one also kinda strengthen it. Ppl see the poll and decided not to go there -> poll distort the outcome.

Not D. draws attention, but so what? how is it related to the argument.

Not E. I don't think we care about whether the voters are informed about the election or not, we care about whether the p: poll distort the result justfies the C: we should ban publishing the poll.

I just realized that it's the comeptition..was rushing throught the stim

Almost went for A...

D is better since this talks about the cost and benefits, and the cost is much greater than the benefit, which weakens the argument.

P: The private sector pays much more than the sectors

P: RS has no problem finding jobs in the private sector

C: if RS are motivated by self-interest rather than duty, then they are going to private industry.

A. less likely to receive glory. If we negate: equal or more likely to receive glory, which is consistent with the argument.

B. negate: Some RS in gov earn more than RS in the private sector. still consistent with the argument, as most RS in private does not represent all RS in the private sector. The avg salary in private sector can still be much higher.

C. Not related

D. negate: if they provide very good benefits compared to private sector, then those who are driven by self-interest would choose to stay, which means they don't need other motivations.

E. if they don't work longer hours, then gov RS would still go away

This feels like a math problem tbh

Total coal supplies: the amount of coal mined but not consumed.

T1991 < T1990. No ins and outs.

T1990 = 100

T1991 = 75

T = Tpast + mined - consume

assume: the coal mined every year is the same

assume: past 1990 = 90

1990: 100 = 90 + 20 - 10

1991: 75 = 100 + 20 - 45

consumed in 1991 is much higher than mined in 1991

My problem with this question is that I was trying to connect Hydrogen info and Li info. I wrote the assumption as "Temp to burn H are same or lower compared to temp to burn Li."

Ouch..