I don't know how this question even exists. There are so many assumptions and pre-existing knowledge you need to know in order to eliminate A. I had no idea muscle tissue and spleen weren't associated or are two different ideas. I mean for all I know maybe they work in complete connection with each other and therefore one can't operate without the other or something. It's so difficult to know when to have a reasonable assumption vs when not to on some of these questions, it seems so inconsistent, which is really throwing a lot of confusion in how I study...anyone else finding this?

#help (Added by Admin)

I know this is a fairly old response, but I completely agree. It's why I eliminated E. I couldn't justify it as a reason they would know before the wreck occurred based on the information given. How would we assume that? Are we to assume they replaced this the same week or right after it occurred, and even still does that mean we can say it gives us an indication? Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't. I went back and forth with A and E. Didn't love A, but thought E was the "trap" answer so I ended up eliminating. Ugh.

Thanks! I think after I read this 1000x times I FINALLY understood why A is wrong...hopefully I don't make that mistake again!

The fact that JY started this off by saying WTF to the first paragraph made my heart sing. That was literally me when I read that paragraph 15x and was like hmmm...nope still nothing. Thank God it wasn't just me!

#help I chose D originally, but was stuck between A and D. On BR I changed it to A, and I'm still having trouble understanding why A is completely wrong. JY doesn't really explain it he just says it doesn't "wreck" the argument, well why not? If I negate A, to "some people do want it to go to someone random", then wouldn't this wreck our support that laws that are set up that in the absence of will it could go to a distant relative a person doesn't know instead of a good friend, which would hold the conclusion to be that wills are something someone should have? I understand why D is right, but don't know why A is absolutely wrong. Can someone please explain?

#help - I didn't fully understand this as a causation question because of the words "can result". I interpreted this to mean that it isn't something that will, but is possible. Could someone further breakdown the causation/correlation identification for questions a bit more?

Did anyone else read B as "product" that meant it wasn't necessarily cigarette products? To me I read that and thought am I to assume they mean cigarettes, or all products in general, which is why I didn't choose B.

#help - can someone explain to me the difference between attacking the P & C vs just attacking the support of it. In this question specifically, it seems as though AC D attacks the conclusion by stating that these flints were used for other purposes so it wasn't for aesthetic sense, it was to do other chores outside of hunting. Does that not attack the conclusion? I feel like the explanation JY gives about never attacking P or C is hazy, especially for this question. He said that D attacks the fact that it wasn't for aesthetic reasons, so doesn't that therefore attack the conclusion???

Hmmm interesting that Sandy is a girl and Alex is a boy....are we to assume that by their names? Both Sandy/Alex could be unisex. Chuckled a bit when JY said the girl vs boy thing

Hey I'm interested in studying with a group as well! My email is amasci18@68748.com. I'm scheduled to write the Nov. LSAT.

#help - So I got to the correct answer, however, after listening to JY's explaination I thought it would clear up why A was wrong, but it didn't. It took me a while to eliminate A before choosing D, and JY simply says "A is wrong bc W doesn't talk about the set of several genes" in the statement. Everything about this AC is excatly what is written in W statement in the first sentence, except for those few words. So for JY to say it wasn't even talked about confuses me a lot, to me it is talked about....What am I missing?

When I did the blind review of this I understood what exactly I was looking for, I feel like when I read the questions and try to look for the answers quickly I miss things. How do you get past trying to get the answer within sufficient timing. I know the recommendation is to practice first for accuracy, which I try to do, but sometimes it takes me 3min to almost 10min on tougher questions to find the answer, which obsviously wouldn't bode well on test day. Anyone have recommendations on how they up-ed their accuracy to eventually up their speed? Or is it just practice, practice, practice...#help

Any updates on forming this study group? October's around the corner!

I’m interested, and from toronto as well!! Please let me know!

Hello! I’d be interested as well. Although not taking the test until fall, would still be great to have people to study with. Thanks!

I almost second-guessed myself with this one, because I thought B was "too obvious". Since in the second sentence of the paragraph it stated the strategy was to renovate the train station. In my head, I thought, sure this would lead to the conclusion that the train station should then be renovated because it's the best strategy for the end goal - attracting residents. Anyone else almost get tripped up by B?

What helped me with this question, although I found it a lot easier to deduce the answer, was taking it at face value. I think making just minor assumptions from the answer choices helps me connect it to the stimulus more accurately. Not sure if this will always work for MSS type questions, but for this one specifically it did. The stimulus didn't provide enough reasoning to say definitely that the other answer choices other than B were correct.

Answer choice A trapped me :(

Interesting, I had a different experience with LR bible. I started with it a few weeks ago, because it's probably the #1 recommended material series online for LSAT prep, but after reading the first few chapters, I felt more uncertain than I did before reading them. Maybe because it's soooo detailed, and for me, that doesn't always work, especially if I already have a good foundation of something, it can steer me wrong because it's teaching me a different way of understanding something I already understand...if that makes sense.

So I think it's more paranoia right now because it's the first time I'm studying for this exam, and since these books are so highly recommended, I feel like why aren't they working for me?!

Maybe I'll use one of them to help reinforce things where needed, I hear for LG they're pretty good.

I also bought the LSAT trainer which has been helpful. Let's hope I'm covering all my basis!

Hello,

I'm having the same buffering issue. I haven't enrolled in the full course as I'm a bit apprehensive since the pages, videos, and altogether site seems to move slowly :neutral: it's a little strange that it takes a good almost 5 mintues for something to load. I don't think that's a reasonable amount of time especially when you're trying to watch/learn multiple aspects of the course. What exactly is going on?