Often times an incorrect answer choice can be eliminated when it describes something that is not discussed in the stimulus. Not here. Even though bacteria which don't have phenazines are not the topic of the stimulus, the correct answer is about those very kinds.

Answer D makes the claim that Miller's Fish Market must have the most exotic fish in the city because it is located in the harbor of the city which has more fish stores than anywhere else in the city. The answer choice would be correct if it instead had read that the exotic fish stores in the city are located in the city harbor and since Miller's Fish market has the most exotic fish in the harbor it, therefore, must have the most exotic fish in the city.

Your lawyer friend speaks truth. I know many a lawyer who joke about the terrible laws schools they attended and who are extremely successful. Also, let me tell you about my lsat journey which began in 2017. I took a PT and scored maybe in the 130s. I then read the powerscore logical reasoning bible and the logic games bible twice. For years, I struggled on the analytical section, but I finally broke into the 150s this year. Just relax and enjoy the ride. I am a firm believer that some of the most rewarding things in life are also the most difficult to achieve. If it were easy, everyone would be doing it.

What's interesting is that the only way of knowing that the premise for the first argument reads A and B therefore C is because of the conclusion of the second argument.

I've never interpreted "more telling" as meaning "outweighing" but rather to mean "reveals more [information]"

Thanks for this explanation.

The conclusion states that "often" people portray themselves as they wish to be perceived but the necessary assumption only says "at least some." If "some" is one or more can that be equated with "often"?

What does PSA stand for?