how did we know that it was memorization > high cost and not high cost > memorization?

would it not be safe to make a slight assumption that even if the warming happened before the gas buildup, the gas buildup caused the heat to stay within in the planet? That's literally what the stim says, thats how the gas buildup caused the warming.

how da hell can anyone answer this question in 2 minutes with all the mapping. Maybe practice i guess.

wouldn't B be descriptively inaccurate because it concerns itself with the matters of larger bodies of water, while the stimulus clearly dictates "this pond?"

We are literally constantly taught not to assume things that are not described in the stim. yet it is ok for us to assume that because one thing cannot cause Y, it can also not cause x? there is not information about subtypes determing diseases?

We cross out A because of "many" but don't eliminate B even though it has "routinely." If A was "most" or B was "often" do we change the answer?

How can we ever assume that what a painting symbolizes is ONLY extrinsic properties? What if it just includes them? We know that extrinsic properties are irrelevant and we should not view symbolism as relevant, and we can assume that they overlap and belong in the same groups, but ONLY is crazy.

isnt it crazy how misreading "in the best interests of the producers" as "never in the best interest of a producer" completely changes the logic.

They have an email that you email asking for a transfer of your subscription. I believe it is studentservices@.com

I read the correct answer like "the equipment would reach everyone but the gov" instead of "the equipment will reach everyone, not just the gov." I completely understand why the second one is NA, but am I right in assuming that if the first one was an answer choice it would not be correct?

There is nothing in the stimulus that stipulates that a repressed country must not let tech get to their gov's hands to break free. They can break free even if the gov has tech.

#help

feedback to myself and others: try to match the logic of the stim to the answer to a TEEEEEEEE. The fact that the difference between right and wrong is in the stim it has the purpose while in wrong answer c it has the effectiveness is really easy to miss when taking the test.

if it it failed something in the sufficient side how is the assumption not a sufficient assumption?

can someone please explain to me how this answer is not also sa. I got it right but spent too long on the question.

The problem I have with NA vs SA is that I just can't seem to see how one is affecting the necessary part of the argument while one only affects the sufficient part of the argument. I get the whole "necessary assumption" prevents the argument from compeltely failing, but in this issue, how exactly is the addition of knowing that it is no easier to domesticate the animals a necessary assumption instead of a sufficient assumption.

how exactly is this different from mss? I feel like a lot of MSS questions discuss broad principles

so D is better than E only because of the uncertainty that D matches with the stimulus?

Does this work as an SA too because if adding this as a premise, it combines with the given premise in the stimulus and helps make the conclusion better?

So I guess A is wrong because it is too specific about the first premise and isn't broad enough to include the conclusion, while C is so broad that it concludes the conclusion? I don't know if any practice in the world can help me answer questions like these in a minute 30.

If D is true then why even bother overrunning cost if its not going to increase your profit?

the answer is almost like a necessary assumption question. We have to assume that good reasearch is only available to be cited once it is complete, right? If it weren't, then good, multi-year projects can be cited so often and still be good, multi-year research.

I don't get the explanation of why B is wrong

Any tips on how to understand and answer these questions faster? I got it right on blind review because I was able to take my time in fully understanding the answer choices.

One reason why A is better than E is because E dissproves and attacks the validity of the presmide along with the hypothesis, while A replaces the hypothesis only, which JY says should be the goal instead of touching the premise. You are not trying to disprove anything, just find an alternative to the hypothesis.

Just to clarify, is the expected time at the bottom of the passage the expected time to read the passage or the expected time for all of the questions? Because I am reading it in around 2 minutes and getting only the hardest questions wrong. If its true that I can take 9 minutes and read it then this will definitely help and I dont have to rush.

I don't understand how A is any "wronger" or D is any "righter." Just like D is implied in the opening paragraph, how is A not implied in the last one. Is it just the"lawyers" part?