This has a important answer to remember. The answer isn't sufficient to validate the argument, but it is necessary.

I would assume it's ai. You can probably build these games pretty quickly with claude by yourself.

You need to realize that the seeds need sunlight to germinate and not just light (moonlight for example). If the seeds germinated with any light, then even if they were plowed at night they would still be exposed to some (non sun)light. If that's true, then b would be correct, not plowing wouldn't expose it to any light, while plowing would expose the seeds to some light.

Can you send me a link

Can you add ai coach to my account

The statistician us actually making a flaw. If we have 1 study with 1000 people and another with 1100, can't we just combine the results. So it's as f there was a study with 2100 people.

I got it right without understanding a word of it. I figured the argument had a premise but was missing a conditional statement for the premise to do anything. E was the only answer that was a conditional statement, so it was the only answer choice that had the possibility of working.

I think the main thing is to understand the concepts, that conditions go in one direction and not the other. For some hard conditional reasoning questions you will need to map it out though, especially in match the argument questions.

Dostoyevsky says you need to be a good artist to achieve your goals. This doesn't mean that you aren't a good artist that your art cannot unintentionally represent perspective. Because maybe you tried to serve one political veiw, but with bad writing served a different one. Therefore (a) isnt good, because even a bad artist can unintentionally serve a certain political view.

They forgot to ask all the students that dropped out why they did.

Is B saying that alchemy is so removed from from chemistry that it's not chemistrys origin?

I looked at this and thought every answer was correct

If E would've said "complex" instead of "sophisticated", would it be correct? Generally the main point is in the last paragraph, not first.

They did us dirty leaving the trap answer first

The passage says nothing can be refunded of the purchase price. But they don't say if they can be refunded halfway. Therefore (D) is wrong, gardening tools can be refunded, just not a full refund?

#help

This is such a flawed argument. It assumes just cause people believe most of the budget is going towards counseling, it is. It also assumes that most of the budget shouldn't go towards counseling.

I read terry, decided it was a necessary sufficient flaw, skipped pat, and then searched for this flaw. I got it over a minute under target time. 😁

I assumed when the author said that the 2nd theory is grounded in the 1st, that the 1st now has the same problems as the 2nd. So I assumed that after the conclusion the 1st theory didn't support overly harsh punishments anymore.

In the Avatar movie, even if we agree that it has that titanic scene, the argument is still bad. Just cause avater has that sad scene,maybe other movies have sadder ones and make them more touching than Avatar (with the made up titanic scene)

I have the same problem in the app

The passage take about most large nurseries probably (most likely) guarantee disease free plants. Doesnt most+most = some?

Why cant it be the area studies department isn't new, maybe it's old and got shut down?

C doesn't need to be true. We know working too much jeopardizes lives, it doesn't matter why. It can be cause "the more hours one works in a week, the less satisfactorily one performs one's work" but it doesn't need to be. There can be other reasons.