i steered away from c because it said 'recent years" which is never mentioned int he stimulus

yes, yet it doesnt explain why the cheetahs are not rainbow-coated instead of dappled-coated, which is what he pointed out against c

So it is basically a sufficient assumption question.

do you not have to make an assumption that the city's residents like the city government's plan? let alone that those surveyed constitute a good representation of the city's residents.

who said that the region surrounding Granville did not also implment the change???

what if i lack absolute knowledge in meteorology and say that hurricanes are big tornadoes. when you are inside a hurricane you notice the wind and the rain but it could have been just a storm as well if judged by the ordinary eye. now, why would the lsat presume that medium and large tornados are easier to spot? there is a lot of cherry picking when it comes to "reasonable" assumptions

@Dlowitt maybe small tornados can be more easily spotted than medium or large tornados

why does JY negate "some subjects sometimes" into "all subjects all the time" - would it not be "not a single person not even once"

i could indeed recognize the assumption as "promised" equating to "ought to" or "should" - however, i could not find the answer that would match how i would articulate it; and d is very convoluted

"latest" technology is a bit broad term; what if "latest" technology in fact encompasses the last three centuries? are we not making an unwarranted assumption then that by latest we mean what has happened recently, in anything but the last 30 years?

why ongoing?

completely missed the 'violate" part of the stimulus?

i read fatalities instead of facilities

the stem says that they didn't have contact with a third civilization - can it not still be possible to have received influence from a third civilization without the need of "contact"? like, hearsay or records about that third civilization

got D in blind review through perhaps a faulty assumption: that somehow dinners eaten outside one's abode are just as vaoluable in nutrition, variety and number of courses.

i didnt read the stem properly, glossed over LEAST

I chose D but why, would it not be better to talk about proportion or percentages than "how many"

twice the target time; how are we supposed to do this under time pressure

We are assuming through answer choice E that the significant pay raise will be enough for them to afford moving within 30 minutes commute to their office.

I chose D, however, one must assume that there is a causal link - if you say it does not always cause it, doesn't that mean that there are times in which it does actually cause it?

It is a big assumption jump with E, that just beause people watch television for longer time, then that translates into the tv watchers spending more on the tv advertised products and thus ratcheting up profits for the companies there advertised

i backtracked from C beause I could see that the family as a whole could benefit yet the family members as individuals stand to lose

I thought that B was descriptively accurate yet did not amount to a flaw per se. When is it actually behooving to choose the cookie-cutter sample representative flaw answer? Jus because this time it is an ad we have to rise the level of scrutiny?

I was hesitant between B and C but steered away from C because the stimulus said "historians may try" - may is different from must, is that a reasonable approach so as not to confuse a may statement with something that is required?

But there is no mention of "common enemy" in the stimulus.