I understand why a vast majority of questions from before PT115 were basicallty told to F**k off with the new exams (150 and up)

When only 30% of people get it right I dont think its a question that should be asked

Im sorry but its kind of insulting to make a bunch of people that want to become attorneys, that study written law, read b.s. like "cosmic justice" which contradicts most principles we have learned

Yeah nah

NOT TO MENTION TORONTO AND NEW YORK ARE GEOGRAPHCICALLY BOTH IN THE NORTHEAST!!

Im sorry but why are we discucussing literal BS on the LSAT. Astrology is fake and has no scientific backing which doesnt even allow it to be considered a Science based reading. The LSAT should not be writting quesitons that do not pertain to the real world or aspects of society that have 0 relevance to law. I shouldnt have to worry about have pre requiste knowledge about astrology when I go in to take a test to get into LAW school

All I heard is that there is no NA. If it isnt specifically NA then these people shouldnt be putting it on the LSAT especially if it takes 20 mins to explain.

Tesifying at a trial doesnt mean you witnessed the crime though. This is a very bad assumption out of the writers and the person explaining the video

Its not "biases" jy its common sense

@TeklaCo The writers of the test are in for a rude awakening because most of the current day test takers can put down defenses for these asnwers that make the LSAT look like a game that they try to play with us.

Yeah im my opinion either B is right or theyre all wrong. Idk how LSAC gets away with defending these answer choices

#Feedback Can we get line numbers like passages in the video because this takes way to much time to sift through the passage to find the proper sentences

#Feedback J.Y... "no, no, no" is not a proper explanation for question answers when only 59% of people got it correct, just because you know doesn't mean we do <3

#Feeback I would actually prefer an explanation to why I got the question wrong instead of JY just telling me it was a "mish mash"

Why lable the section as a MP question if its not actually a MP question?

THE LONDON UNDERGROUND HAT IS A MUST!

This question genuinely made me angry and I genuinely have 0 clue on how any of this has anyhting to do with being a lawyer