There isn't a point practicing with the old format. The more time you spend with the new format the better as you will have to test with it

@ReeseWalter But they're prepared to donate to it, so the total amount prepared to either join or donate may be greater than 30%

@vayne_top_main Its 4.50

I feel like no one is mentioning while A is better than C. Yes, they both require assumptions that both the incidence of food-borne was actually reduced by the hand washing, and the fewer public gatherings were evidence of the public heeding the campaign, but the reason A is right is because the promoted hand-washing is directly one of the tenets of the campaign. There is no wish-washing that. But I few like telling people to avoid public places when they get sick is actually not the same as there being fewer large public gatherings. They would be held either way, it's just sick people wouldn't attend. C has that extra assumption that ties the two together that makes it worse than A.

@GabrielLerma We don't even know if the mom loves the sis more regardless that's another assumption - I think the lsat writers just had their own concept of healthy families in mind to think this is a reasonable assumption that it would cause emotional harm, but not in many families I know

I understand the sufficiency/necessity problem with C, but in what world would two people give a sole reason as the cause for restaurant's failure, would you not assume that if the sole reason was removed, then the two people would then believe the restaurant would not fail. This wasn't a logic question, it was about what we can infer Xavier and Miranda agree about. I think it's clear they agree with C.

It also feels so wrong to think that Xavier thought the new restaurant was a "risky" venture. Maybe I see it. I just hate this question

I understand why B is correct, but I don't get why A is wrong. The belief is that people when looking as the abstract art so it is equally as pleasing as a child's art. So when you get participants and ask them to judge it's aesthetic pleasingness compared to another artwork and take that judgement as proof of your argument, don't we need to assume that they are better at judging in this case than the general case of the popular complaint? Otherwise, why would we care about this study?

WERE LOCKED LETS GOOOO

If the conditions are the same everywhere, then he is presuming by definition that it is also the "normal" condition. I don't see how a condition that appears no where in the country/region is the "normal" condition. Additionally, I feel as though in this case, getting three cars that consistently do very worse on a metric touted is pretty good evidence that something is wrong. If you buy a product that falls very short of the advertised specs, like a computer piece or car, you don't just chalk it up to not having a big enough sample. I think this question is ridiculous.

Got D by POE but it's really loaded with an absurd amount of assumptions

In the Blind Review portion of the desk you can hover over the circled question number, and it will tell you why it was highlighted for BR. Reasons could be answering incorrectly, taking too long, changing your answer often, answering way too fast, and there may be more I don't remember. Unless you have many questions to BR, I prefer not to check the reason and try to reason through the question with no time constraint, squeezing everything out of the question and the ACS. Most of the time, I will know then if I got it wrong or if it was circled for a different reason.

It's useful at this point because I am used to it, so the number gives me a good estimate of how well I did on a drill compared to the expected difficulty of the drill or section, like a golf score. But I don't ever use it to estimate if I am getting closer to my goal scores. My PrepTest equivalent on full sections is generally several points lower than the average scores I get on my Prep Tests. Also, I hope it's reliable for full tests ;)

If the economy was prosperous in both 75 and 76, why did it take until 76 for the amount collected to rise substantially?

So we're supposed to assume they are vegetables who can't accurately talk about anything in the world

Focus on accuracy now, trying to fully finish timed sections is not doing you any good

Is this also a sufficiency/necessity mix up? The premise states effective directions must be repeated many times, so how can the author conclude that the directions are effective on the basis of them being repeated many times?

Ill get a perfect score on a drill and be like 164 lmao

@cmemery2020 7Sage will recommend questions for blind review for several different reasons, its best not to look at which, hence "blind." Therefore when blind reviewing a question you have to fully understand the question before moving on because you may have actually been right. Now I don't know if OP is BRing this way, but a high BR is a still a good sign

@KSki They are trying to make it more difficult

@ArdenAmarelo You don't need to assume higher GPA, he just gave that as a stand in for "increased in achievement levels" as its more tangible and easy to follow