For some reason I kept reading it as just a general idea of why it is important to fund space exploration.

I eliminated D because of the "less often" and B although it took a few read throughs, I did not find anything wrong with it

Learned that in many of these flaw questions that writers are throwing huge hints to figure out the right answer.

For some reason I read the stem as we were describing the FIRST set, ugh. I gotta read slower

I originally did not pick E because I was so caught up on the fact that we don't know if there are other means for increasing the yields but I did not catch on that that was exactly why its correct!

This is causal reasoning so I have to remember that there are a few ways to explain that relationship. If we rule out that there are other means of increasing meat yields then it makes sense that farmers will go out of business if the antibiotics are phased out.

totally missed the part of the conclusion where it says "when they" and was too focused on "in general" gotta read slower and with intentionnn

During timed conditions I did not totally grasp the stimulus because of how many times they repeated some words. After breaking it down premise by premise and conclusion (D) was so easy to spot.

bruh I missed so many key elements in the stimulus that should have transferred to the correct AC. I was going for structure and did not pre-phrase the flaw beforehand. I was in between A and D and after reading D I just made a quick judgment and picked it. Really need to map back the AC to the stim.

For this one, we are trying to strengthen the cognitive psychologists hypothesis on the fact that eye witnesses mistakes leads to convictions. (D) is simply stating that the judge tells the juries about instances where the eyewitnesses stories were erroneous. That does not prove if those eyewitnesses testimonies actually led to conviction or not. The other answer choices in some shape all point to a person being convicted for a crime.

I understood the stimulus but my prediction was exactly E and felt soooo confident. Was humbled quick af. I can see why D is correct now, the stimulus just had so much info that I only cared about the last sentence and forgot about everything else like which contract varies with cost. smh.

bruh, I was thinking A was too straight forward and thought the right answer would be more complicated than that.

I chose (E) but I overlooked "recent climate" to quickly. I should have been more strict with that wording and eliminated. I did not choose (C) because honestly I did not see the connection at first with the pests and the climate, I thought it would be adding too much outside info but i have to remember that outside info is perfectly fine!!!

I think I was just stuck on the idea that we have to strengthen the fact that glutamate can be the only possible answer to cause the effects once it leaks. I did not catch that we are strengthening the fact that it does leak.

Ultimately I got the question wrong because I did not truly understand the argument. I was stuck on the conclusion and weakening the idea that winning a debate does not do anything to help a candidate. Ending up choosing E.

My notion was flawed because

1.) The author said it does "little" to help and not that it doesn't help at all.

2.) E in a way restates the conclusion, no matter what committed individuals are going to vote for their candidate of choice.

I was not thinking at all about those who did not watch the debate. I feel like I just added my own assumptions while trying to understand the stimulus.

A little annoyed at myself for overlooking the answer not one but TWICE! For some reason on (B) I really did not like the fact that it was recommending something so surely. That is why (E) seemed good to me regardless of the "most".

You can see it as the author is assuming x.

I feel like many of the trap answers are A and with the timed constraints its so easy to fall for them ugghh

Is strong language preferred in PSA question types? The "only" in (A) deterred me from it.

@crorosco02956

The way that I saw it is that (C) gives an explanation on why anglers would have more opportunity to catch bass (because the power plant gave anglers greater accessibility to the river) thus allowing more people to go and fish, increasing the amount of bass captured.

Where as (D) justifies why there would be less anglers fishing (because the level of noise increased) so anglers would not want to be in that area which then causes a decrease of fishes being caught

I hope this helps!

@tspinnanger I believe so since we are strictly looking for the parallel structure