- Joined
- Jan 2026
- Subscription
- Live
Admissions profile
Applications
Discussions
Does anyone know if these types of questions (answer choices are questions) are still being used on the LSAT? I rarely see them.
can I get a W in the chat for getting this right in 43 seconds. if you see a conditional, question that conclusion !!!
remember that weaken questions aren’t about which answer 100% makes the argument false. it’s about, relative to the other answer choice, which one weakens the most? 4/5 of these answer choices either have no impact on the argument or strengthen it. POE.
I immediately eliminated B because I thought we were only talking about Dickinson's poetry.... reminder to always read carefully!
I was getting really caught up on what we know about what's going in the certain region and what's going on outside of it. Can we know if the dinosaurs and plesiosaurs lived outside of the region? Dinos, yes, because the stim states "the era when dinosaurs roamed the EARTH", so it is safe to assume they lived outside the region too. Plesiosaurs, no, we don't know if they lived outside the region (but for plesiosaurs it doesn't matter). Once I established this, the right answer became obvious.
A) We know dinosaurs must live on land. We know that the southern half of the region was covered in water for a portion of the Mesozoic era. Nothing in our stim tells us dinosaurs couldn't live in the north for the entire Mesozoic era.
B) Plesiosaurs could live in the north too. There could be some water there for them to live in. We don't know, so it can't be false.
C) Plesiosaurs did not exist before the Cretaceous period, therefore it must be true that they didn't inhabit land before then.
D) My first thought is that if the Dinos couldn't live in the north, and the south was covered in water, where would they go? The key to this for me was: "the era when dinosaurs roamed the earth." So we KNOW dinosaurs existed OUTSIDE the region we are discussing. So, they could have lived outside of this region and we could avoid this water/no water debate.
E) Has to be false. We know that there is a period of the Mesozoic era when the southern half was covered in water. The Dinos can only live on land. So, they couldn't have lived in the southern half of the region for the ENTIRE mesozoic era because for a portion of that time, the southern half was underwater.
these except questions always trip me up because I always accidentally click the wrong answer
Definitely a process of elimination question for me and a reminder of the fact that we are choosing the most supported answer choice, not the perfect answer choice. A can be eliminated because both authors are not 100% certain in when the snow will melt. They would both agree with A. D can be eliminated because both authors hint at a higher likelihood of snow melting after Jan/Feb. And then C and D can be eliminated because of their certainty. Neither author is very certain about anything. Lurano would disagree with B, but Jenkins honestly wouldn’t fully agree. He said that there is a likelihood the snow might be okay. C has that same reasoning. Lurano would disagree, but again, Jenkins wouldn’t agree 100%. He admits there is a chance that the research could get done after February. That leaves us with E. It isn’t perfect in my opinion, but it’s what’s left!
key word in the stim is “any”. The author is claiming that ANY improvement must stem from some across the board quality of psychotherapy. AC A says no, actually, you only measured a specific type of improvement, not ANY improvement. So now you can’t make the claim because your evidence covers too narrow of a scope.
So the answer is as simple as saying yeah those nations are lying because their oil levels did in fact change?
Hi all,
I just took my LSAT argumentative writing (a little late...), but noticed that during the exam, my computer was underlining misspelled words and giving me suggestions to edit them.
I didn't even think to turn this off before the test. I have never used Grammarly or any writing tools, so I didn't even think to disable anything.
Did this happen to anyone else? What happened? Help!
can I get a W in the chat for me getting a 5 star question right after months of studying
How are we supposed to conclude that the opposite of “bland and innocuous” talk shows that air mainstream political opinions are talks shows that are disturbing and controversial? These adjectives don’t match up.
I got so hung up on this because to me, a refuge is a separate, man-made space for animals, NOT a natural habitat!!! And so for me, I couldn’t quite justify how making a man-made refuge equates to protecting natural habitats. I did go with B on my first try, but second-guessed myself on BR. I chose D on BR. As I always forget, these weakening questions need to weaken the link between premise and conclusion. So how can we weaken the fact that because the rate of endangered species continues to rise, efforts to preserve natural habitats is wasted? B gives us proof that the efforts to preserve natural habitats have a positive outcome. The rest of the answers to me are clearly incorrect. So I should have seen through D and went with B despite my fears about “refuge”!
Thank you for your explanation of E!!!