#11.

He uses it to show why Dunham was the perfect fit for science in dance. Anthoropologists were not dancers. Dancers were not anthropologists. It was great!

A - No, we are not talking of the scientists doing something, we are speaking of the dancers.

B - I don;t think it's trying to show us that one is more qualified than the other. I think it is telling us that it hasn't happened because the intersection never was present, until Duinham.

C - I am not sure if this would be the purpose. Was she motivated because of this? I don't know

D - CORRECT - it didn't happen before because no one could really do both.

E - Tension? No.

#10

They want to impress their peers who think that research should be scientifically rigorous and legitimate

A - There is nothing to suggest this. Misinterpreted it?

B - Absolutely not. We are making the claim that their "peers" don't even think dance is a worthwhile study

C - CORRECT - if they don't want to study dance because of their peers, it must be that the peers believe dance to not be scientifically rigorous.

D - Again, this is another one that feels like it came out of left field. Where do we talk about business?

E - No, they just have a general view of dance and think it is not worthwhile to study.

#9.

A - this is incorrect because we do not compare periods of time

B - I am not sure if she did this or not. Maybe, but it isn;t mentioned.

C - CORRECT - Others believed that effective data collection could only be done through detachment.

D - Again.. what is with this political crap?

E - Maybe she did, maybe she didn't. We do not know

Question #1

This is a main point quesiton

A - The passage is more about her contributions to dance, not anthropology

B - Maybe, specifically African American culture, but this is not the main point.

C - Political concerns? No.

D - No, this is not the main point. This may be true, but we want to find something that talks about her research methods and how they helped to change dance

E - CORRECT

Scientists have found bacteria that was fossilized in rock that is 3.5 billion years old. The fossil show that the bacteria was complex, and it must be that they already had a long history at the time they were fossilized. Earth is only 4.6 billion years old, so the first life on earth (bacteria) must have came at a time where the living conditions were bad. This shows that life can arise under difficult conditions.

Conclusion: Life can arise under difficult condition

Evidence: Bacteria found had to have come as soon as earth was created. It already had a complex life by the time it was fossilized at 3.5 billion years.

It supports the claim that life must have came during a time when conditions were harsh, indirectly supports conclusion.

A - It is not the conclusion

B - No, there is support from the argument

C - CORRECT - The claim that scientists found this bacteria supports the complexity and in turn supports our MC.

D - No, it supports the claim that life must have come at a time when conditions were harsh

E - No, it does not support two different conclusions

People might praise someone who can paint real pictures, but completely dismiss someone who does abstract art, but there is obviously something other than replicating a scene that people appreciate in art. Otherwise, photography would have replaced art completely.

- Gives a situation about people liking painting with scene, even though they could dismiss abstract. Point out that there must be more consideration to why they like it by providing an example of what would have happened if it were based solely on replication.

A - No, they are saying that there is something else missing here.

B - No, he is not defending their tastes. He is saying that there tastes must not be considering something

C - No, he is not explaining a historical fact. He is using it to show that maybe they also like the art because BLANK.

D - Correct - he is using photography as an explanation as to why they must like the art for more than the replication of a scene.

E - No, he is not supporting a claim. He is saying that maybe they are missing something.

This is an NA question.

Astronomers used to think that earth remained motionless while the stars revolved around it. Because of this, they said the stars were not more than a few million miles away. If they were further, they would have to move at great speeds to circle earth during day and reappear at night.

Conclusion: Stars are not more than a few million miles away.

Evidence: If further, would have to move at great speeds to circle

NA: Stars do not move at great speeds.

A - No, this goes against the stimulus

B - This is not necessary for the conclusion to be true.

C - No, this negates a premise that we are given.

D - CORRECT - if stars did in fact move at great speeds, then they could be further away per the stimulus.

E - I don't think this is necessary because i feel that "roughly" is subjective. There are too many variables in this AC.

Allowing schedules to be tailored to needs doess not increase the satisfaction on behalf of managers, but this is probably because they already have the autonomy to adjust their own schedules. These flexible schedules do increase satisfaction, productivity and attendance among non-manegerial. The benefits do dissapate, and they are reduced if the schedules are too flexible.

A - We do not know this. We think that it is because they already have autonomy, but we aren;t sure.

B - CORRECT - it will improve the morale of some, but not all (ie managers)

C - We cannot know this for sure. It seems the benefits drop

D - Way out of context

E - We already know they don't work

Some ad claim that unrelieved heartburn can cause cancer. They are wrong.Only 5% of people with heartburn have a very specific disorder that can increase risk of cancer.

Conclusion: It is not true that unrelieved heartburn can cause cancer.

Evidence: The risk of cancer requires a specific disease called Barrett's esophagus.

A - No, this is evidence.

B - Again, evidence

C - CORRECT - This is supported by the fact that it is actually from a disease, not heartburn.

D - Yes, they do... but this is not the main point.

E - What? Where did this even come from..

This is a principle question

You say that if they were to confiscate the earnings from a burglar when they start working, it would be stealing. BUT, there is corrently legislation being considered that would take those earnings and give them to a victim fund. Clearly, even if we are "stealing" from a burglar, it is justified.

If we take and give back to victim, it is okay.

A - No, this doesn't help the argument. We want something that says that stealing is okay because they are giving back.

B - Incorrect becaause "same people they victimized". The stimulus mentions a fund, not a specific person.

C - CORRECT - The motive behind taking the money is what justifies it.

D - No, we are not talking about crime in general.

E - No, we are talking about the complete opposite

I GOT THIS WRONG AND WILL REPLY WITH WHY

This is a MBT question.

The most important part of poetry is to communicate the values n which others should live through the use of heroic figures. Heroic figures act as role models and give meaning/direction in their lives.

A - CORRECT - by giving values too those, they are giving direction.

B - No, I do not know if they accomplish it or not.

C - We do not know this. We just know they use heroic figures

D - I don;t know about groups of people

E - No... we don't know this. Maybe novels do this?

This is a paradox question.

During the industrial revolution, standardizing processes and decision making made things more productive. Today, however, companies thaat are already productive are furthering their productivity by giving their employees greater decision making.

Why are the giving their employees discretion if productivity came from standardization?

A - Irrelevant. This doesn't help us resolve the paradoz.

B - Who cares. This doesn't explain.

C - Robots? What? No.

D - No, this does not explain our question. Our question wants to know why we are suddenly giving them more decision making abilities.

E - CORRECT - Ok, management is taking things from a personal level and applying it broadly, which is helping productivity.

This is a weaken question

Even though we have more humans on earth, we currently only use a small fraction of water. Therefore, the claims that we are going to run out of water in the near future unless we slow down the amount of humans is false.

What would challenge this conclusion?"

A - I don't think this would do anything to the conclusion. So what if they are hard to predict? We are saying that if it DOES happen

B - CORRECT - maybe we could have more people in one area than another, but they would not have as much water.

C - This would probably stregthen..

D - The premise is directly saying this will not happen. We cannot change that.

E - Does this matter? No.

This is a flaw question.

A class stored similar fruits at three different temps: 10, 20 and 30 degrees. The class concluded the colder the temps, the fresher something stays. 10 degrees freshest, 20 degrees fresher and 30 degrees fresh.

Conclusion: The colder the temp, the fresher it is.

Evidence: 10,20,30 degrees compared.

A - no. We are specifically talking only about the test results.

B - I am torn on this one... maybe? but i don't know if they were all in the same area or not. So this doesn't seem to be the major flaw.

C - I believe this is correct. What if we put it in subzero? Would it still be fresh? I would think not since it would be froze.

D - This doesn't seem to be an issue.

E - Not the flaw.

Find the NA.

A study showed that people who take care of problems quickly are less likely to develop gum disease than those who do not think about their problems. Because stress effects the immune system, it is clear that at lease some forms of the gum disease came from a weakened immune system.

Conclusion: some forms of the disease came from a weakened immune system.

Evidence: People who deal with their problems do not get the gum disease

People who avoid problems get gum disease

stress weakens immune system.

NA: Not dealing with problems causes stress. While taking care of problems do not.

A - Painful conditions? Not mentioned in the stimulus. Trash it.

B - CORRECT - this matches my prediction.

C - No, we would think the opposite

D - We don't know this..

E - Again, this is not necessary. Maybe they find them stressful, but not addressing them causes more stress.

This is a flaw question.

Our company should not have been criticized for not being environmentally friendly. Companies that are environmentally friendly are those that do all they can to pollute less. Right now, we pollute less than we did before. Furthermore, there is no way to completely get rid of pollution.

Ok... but what if they can reduce pollution further, even if they cannot get rid of it completely?

A - No, we have to trust that the statement being made is true. There is not a way to produce absolutely no pollution.

B - What? This seems crazily out of place.

C - Again... this is not what it does at all.

D - They did succeed in reducing it. The premise says that.

E - CORRECT - this matching my prediction.

Songwrites make most of their money from the radio - because a hit song is played a thousand times and they get paid for each play. There are only a small number of songwriters who actually write a hit though, and only a few right many. Writers of hits are often asked to write a song for a movie soundtrack, but they decline. Why? Because although the songs do become hits, their writers writive single up-front payments than continued revenue from airpklay.

A: We do not know this. Maybe someone wrote a hit but it is not being played on the radio.

B: This goes to far. The stimulus does not support this.

C: Correct. If they don't want to write a song for a movie because of the single up front payment, then they must be thinking they could be making way more from the amount of times it's being played.

D: This goes from some to most. We can't make that jump.

E: We don't know this. What if they make money some other way,

This is a method of reasoning question

Warrington responds to Lopez by adding in the fact that yes, classical antiquity is crucial, but because we have other departments that actually integrate this type of study, we don't actually need a department for this alone.

A: W does offer additional reasons, but they are to negate his conclusion, not support it

B: No, he does not mention anything about tradition

C: No, he does not respond to the claim that the university is not committed to liberal arts

D: No, he does not object to the reasoning the Lopez presents, he is actually in agreement with it

E: CORRECT - he wants Lopez to consider the fact that other departments engage in the study of classics.

Saying "I tried to get my work done on time" does not, by the wording, mean I did not get it done. BUT, it would usually be correct to think that I in fact had not gotten it done. Why? Because if I did, I could have just said "I got my work done".

This is an MSS question:

A: CORRECT - we know that what he says does not outright state his meaning, but, because we understand the context and implications of his word, we are able to determine he probably did not get his work done.

B: We don't know this. There may be plenty of other words that function in this same way

C: Nonverbal cues has nothing to do with this stimulus.

D: We don't know whether he was intending to convey this or not. What if he was?

E: No, in this instance the listener did have the knowledge.

This is a paradox question. Why is it that animals that have just black and white, not camouflage that is effective in helping hide, are still able to survive for a long time?

A: No, we don't care how big the herd is. I want to know why they don't need camouflage

B: Who cares? We know some of it works to help animals survive.

C: CORRECT: What if the black and white is seen different by other animals and is indeed camouflage?

D: No, who cares if it helps them avoid each other? I want to know how they avoid being eaten.

E: Ok, maybe it is not as bad at night, but how are they not getting eaten during the day?

Rita and Hiro are arguing over survey data. Rita is telling Hiro that his results are WRONG because people lie on surverys, which cause for serious understimates in the data. Hiro agrees that people lie, and that yes, they are probably underestimes, BUT, the rates are probably close to being ACCURATE. They disagree on whether the data is right or not.

A: CORRECT: They disagree on the data and whether or not it is representative

B: No, they both agree that people lie

C: No, they do not mention a different type of measure

D: No, they both agree they are underestimates

E: No, they never speak of the amount of people needed to render the survey correct.

A survey found that the more people engaged in exercise, the lower their risk of lung disease. Because other surveys found the same results, it must be true that exercise is good for your health.

A: It does not ignore anecdotal evidence - there is none given in our stimulus

B: It does not just consider one. The last sentence tells us that OTHER surveys also have found the same results.

C: CORRECT - although this is a real life scenario, we are not told of other potential benefits BUT lower lung disease, which is a good thing for health. We cannot conclude that just because the two are correlated, that it causes the other. What if people who exercise do not smoke, and THAT is why their lung disease chance is lowered?

D: No, it does not assume that anyone without lung disease is in good health. It is saying that BECAUSE exercise lowers lung disease risk, it therefore has a good effect oin health.

E: No, "more frequently" addresses the potential for a wide range of times someone exercises.

Cynthia and Enrique are talking about the transit authority. Enrique believes they should allow themselves to exhaust it's funds so that the government will step in, but Cynthia thinks it should not exhaust it's funds because the government will just allow them to go backrupt.

This is a disagreement question:

A: CORRECT - Enrique believes this, but Cynthia does not.

B: Neither of them give an opinion on whether the government SHOULD provide additional funding

C: Neither of them speak about raising fares

D: Enrique mentions that the government will not provide funding now, but Cynthia does not

E: Neither of them speak about if the transit authority can "afford" to do this.

R: I do not want to see Winter Fields. I read a review about it that was terrible.

C: Why wouldn't you want to see it? That paper is just terrible to begin with, but I don't know why that would influence you.

C is misunderstanding when R says the review was terrible

A: No, he understands she is talking about seeing a movie

B: No, he mentions the review, so he knows she is talking about a piece of writing

C: No, he also refers to the local paper correctly

D: CORRECT - while R is speaking of a review that is referring to how good the movie is, C believes she is talking about the writing piece itself being bad

E: No, C does not mention "in years".

This is a weaken question.

The mayoral race is between two candidates: Chu (prodevelopment) and Lewis (places limits on development. Chu will probably win, because prodevelopment candidates have won for the last 6 years.

A) I would say that this does interact with the stimulus, but that it does nothing to weaken it or strenghthen it

B) Financial backing? This nowhere in the stimulus

C) CORRECT. Ok, but they have issues with overdevelopment, AND the voters know this. They probably don't want someone to add to this problerm.

D) He worked as an aide? Who cares

E) Maybe that is true, but he is thought of one now, and that is what will influence voters.