I LOVE!!!

AC B: this weakens. it was hard for me to see this in timed conditions, because I read it as simply restating a premise. but we were only told that most of the best sales reps had an engineering degree + didn't have sales experience. we were never told that most of the people at the company are part of this group. if most people hired at the company are part of the group, then obviously it is easy to see why the best people at the company are part of that group. lets say theres 50 employees, and 45 of them had no prior experience + have an engineering degree. the chances that the top 10 sales reps will have a degree + no prior experience is so high. this weakens by showing why they are the best, the pool of them is bigger.

we are told that ppl who drink 3 cups of decaf a day are 2x as likely to develop arthritis compared to ppl who drink 3 cups of regular coffee. therefore, this means that decaf has something that damages connective tissue and it must not be present in regular coffee. if we asked this question "does caffeine slow down the process of arthritis?" and were told "yes" then we would know why the arthritis rate is higher for decaf drinkers (alternative cause, it isn't something in decaf but rather something missing from it). i didn't pick this b/c i felt like it hurt the argument, but we only want something that can help us EVALUATE THE ARGUMENT.

@amytorres i meant cosmic justice btw oops

i chose C first time. i felt like the author of passage A wasn't completely dogging on perfect justice the way passage B was. but they never claimed that we should aim for it either. they simply are saying it's impossible to attain, so we should aim to look at the outputs/consequences rather than the inputs. i was also tempted by A. but i thought "action" was too general. passage A doesn't say we shouldn't do ANYTHING because we do not have the info. it says we should not be aiming at perfect justice because we are not smart enough to do so. i also noticed in the second paragraph, it says "even if we knew what all the critical factors were, to perform the complicated calculus necessary to understand how the complex interrelationships among the various variables should affect our ultimate conclusions." its a lot of mumbo jumbo, but what i took away from it was that EVEN IF we DID have COMPLETE INFO, we simply do not have the brainpower to be able to discern it perfectly enough for perfect justice to be reached. ultimately, E is the best AC.

i chose E mistakingly, though i do have trouble w/ these questions. i need to focus on the sentences that come before the topic the question is asking about. in this case, the first sentence of the last passage says there was no accepted explanation of how hydro and helium could possibly produce the energy the sun requires. therefore, her findings couldn't be easily accepted due to their preconceptions of the iron. so by mentioning that NOW we know what nuclear fusion is, the author is trying to give a reason as to why the critics didn't accept her view. they had no basis to do so. E is wrong because although i do think the author implicitly likes payne and her hypothesis, the mention of "nuclear fusion" does nothing to suggest that she relied on incorrect data. i was also tempted by C, but this AC has it backwards. the lack of knowledge about nuclear fusion wasn't WHY payne didn't accept the iron hypothesis; P2 tells us why she wanted to reexamine the data. not having this knowledge doesn't do anything. B is correct because it is exactly what we are looking for.

i chose D under timed conditions because i did not like the "prevailed" in B. i, like everyone else, took it to mean that her alternative must have prevailed. but now i understand B is correct bc she proposed an alt to the VIEW THAT PREVAILED. in other words, she proposed an alternative to the iron hypothesis. D is really tempting still, but i did sort of not like "the first." also, the entire alternative she proposed wasn't just that it contained helium and hydro, but that 90% of the sun was made up of them. THAT is why her view got rejected, not just b/c she said it contained them.

i got this wrong because i glossed over "physical traits" in AC D, so i thought it sounded like A in the sense that it had to do with creating a profile of optimal sheep based on genetic characteristics. i ended up going with B, but looking back, this entire passage was solely about wool. the last paragraph mentions nothing of any other areas of agriculture, but i think i confused "industry efforts" with a more vague agricultural industry. stupid mistake, but f it we ball.

13/16 and 16/16 BR!

i lvoe these so much more than sa questions

i understand why A is right, but i'm having trouble explaining to myself why D (the answer i chose), is wrong. pls #help

first time i get a level 5 right first try

5/5 omg

got this right from POE

27 seconds over but got it right first try! i've been scared to diagram with pen and paper but it's led me to right answers, i will focus on timing later on when i am more confident.

22 seconds to spare !!! :D

5/5 yay

5/5 lessgetit

for #5, i did:

things being compared: normal weather days vs very cold days

quality: maintain a lower indoor temperature

winner: normal days

i took it to mean that 59% of households maintained a lower indoor temp on normal weather days versus very cold days. i feel like i was so close, but i think the missing link was accustomed.

i picked E but then last min switched to D ): got it in BR though