moment of silence for my fellow autisticy peeps who can't do tone or attitude to save their life

I totally agree with you. Like does the meaning they acquired over like 1000 years not count for significance even if it's abstract? this is the only time i've ever felt like the test is incorrect, but maybe I'm just still not seeing it.

maybe it depends on when this replacement happens, but it feels like it's speaking strictly about the image for sheep on the inscribed tablets circa 3000 BCE. that's the symbol. can it be replaced without loss of significance?

I think I feel weird about A because yeah, I get that the abstract symbols aren't figuratively representative of anything. But it seems like they have a clear lineage that gives the symbol it's meaning? And I don't think there would not be loss of significance if the symbol were replaced.

The fact that the symbols are traceable (the early symbols, the inscriptions that correspond to them on "envelopes," that they correspond to later inscriptions of farm products, etc.) tells me that the symbol did develop significance due to history and utility.

Like, all "language" develops meaning over time. and other than onomatopoeia I guess, words never really have a direct representational tie to the thing it's signifying. They acquire meaning?

I know I'm probably wrong, but I'm really frustrated that the test that hammers me over the head with being vigilant towards sneaky assumptions is putting me in this position on this passage.

I could really use some help getting out of this thinking trap.

#help "Studying two freon gases—types of CFCs—they observed that, when released into the lower atmosphere (troposphere), these gases slowly diffuse upward into the stratosphere. There, subjected to massive ultraviolet radiation, they break down into their constituent elements, including chlorine. The resulting increase in the concentration of chlorine in the stratosphere is devastating to the ozone layer. Chlorine and ozone chemically react in a way that both destroys the ozone and regenerates the chlorine atoms."

is this not a laboratory experiment because it's field research? I guess I just assumed that there would be some lab work involved in making those observations.

ya chlorine being the "most damaging" but never said to be in the passage...I can't wrap my head around how I should have known to put this. It seems equally valid to just write about the damaging effects of chlorine without marking it as the most damaging.

This section (especially the last two) really messed me up. I was scoring in the mid to high 170s and then on this one I just missed 4.

i think what's going on here is 2 things really that together are super tricky. So, we are looking specifically at

prey > that have B+W coloration > that have few or no (0) OTHER adaptations to counteract predation> that survive > that ARE predated on by these "other species" (some kind of specific predator).

I think few or no other adaptations indicates they DO have the camouflage adaptation-- "no other adaptations"

Then we are also being asked to find the answer that MOST resolves the paradox. I think A, C , and E all do maybe to some extent, but C most directly provides an explanation for WHY the CAMO adaptation (that we know they have) actually works. We're getting an explanation for why that camouflage adaptation actually does work.

numbers we know less about than that given adaptation, and "not as great a liability"

idk that's the best i can do with it

@DeenaAli hey! thanks for taking the time. I appreciate your thorough explanation.

I just can't wrap my head around how the second use of "realistic" refers to a quality that allows the world of the story to resemble actual life.

@andrewkim9604612 I still don't really see how endured implies strength necessarily? like it could be very endangered and weakening as time goes on, but still enduring?

...strong?

@Mjamail also, maybe give working backwards a try? Sometimes main point comes clearer to me when I've answered the rest of the questions first. Again, I don't have data to back this up really, but going backwards just feels better to me

i'm not sure if you're doing the low res strategy. it works for some people, but personally, I do better without it. I like reading the passage once slowly and carefully ("aloud silently," or moving my lips to each word helps me), then I do the questions I feel good about, and read it once more quickly / for structure before I answer the harder questions. I actually almost never write anything down.

flagging is my friend

@Kihla333 also maybe early decision