I'm interested

i'm interested

I am interested

Henry Ewing explains this well in his advance conditional classes. (A tutor in 7sage for anyone who does not know about him.)

@Tekashi_&_69_Law Also, if the question seems too difficult I just say to myself 'these are just words and logic' that's it. Just words that follow logic.

It’s funny how sometimes I miss easier questions, but then get very difficult ones right without much trouble.

For me, this question felt surprisingly easy for a five-star difficulty, so I wanted to share my approach.

First, this is an inference question (MBT/MSS/MBF). These don’t require adding assumptions. Instead, everything you need is already in the stimulus—you’re just identifying what is most strongly supported. I like to think of it almost like a math equation expressed in words: you’re not filling gaps, just following the logic that’s already there.

Now, going through the choices:

A. The term “primary” is never mentioned or supported in the stimulus, so this introduces an unsupported idea.

B. “All shifts” is too strong. The stimulus talks about drastic climate changes, not all changes. Even small changes would count under “all,” so this overgeneralizes.

D. This introduces a relationship that the stimulus never discusses.

E. This confuses necessary ideas for advancement with advancement itself. The stimulus doesn’t go that far.

That leaves C.

C is the most supported. It reflects the idea that drastic climate shifts lead to migrations: DSC → M

Taking the contrapositive: ¬M → ¬DSC

In other words, if a population remains settled, the climate must be relatively stable. That aligns directly with the stimulus, making C the best answer.

Thank you for this video. I appreciate the valuable info.

Sounds good! I am interested.

Sounds good! I would like to join.