You already know that the ratio is not the same from the last sentence of the stimulus. Having that additional info is not helpful in the slightest since it's repeated.
the double negative structure on question 19 really messed me up damn
This question messed me up because I didn't know what presupposition meant
The geographer didn't develop the hypothesis about clearings which the author favors, he merely developed the hypothesis about fear of the wilderness without making that extra step
Have heard that international LSATS use previously undisclosed LSAT exams. Since the most recent LSATs in the past two years have been much more difficult and with harder curves, would this mean that the international LSAT is therefore slightly easier than the U.S. one.
This is pure speculation on my part but I believe that it may be the case.
This question is confusing because it's a weaken question nested into a Sufficient Assumption Question. The conclusion is that you need to reject the statement from Tolstoy that KLE->not FP. To reject this, you provide the sufficient condition but deny the necessary condition which is where you have KLE and FP. The AC that gives KLE and FP is the correct one.
It's convoluted wording , but it's picking out of the last sentence of the stimulus as it's support. Since a brown dwarf's lithium can not be consumed, that mean it must have lithium in its atmosphere which matches up with answer C once you flip the double negatives
That's a natural assumption that anybody with a basic stem background would know and that I almost fell for. However, there is a specific line where it says "a part of the former becomes a functioning part of the latter". We don't know if that part that is consumed is the part that contains its genetic material or not. In real life, it is the case that all of the genetic material is consumed but the stimulus does not provide that info.
One of the mistakes you're making in your thought process here is that you are trying to attack the premises and assumptions here. It doesn't matter that most people send roses, since the stimulus gave us a conditional statement that you presume to be true, that if they knew drew well they would know that he prefered violets.
I just gotta say, this is the most BS question in all of LSAT history and I genuinely believe it should be redacted. The answer hinges on this presumption of the meaning of these pesticides, which naturally should refer to the pesticides that the US manufactures and exports, not the category of pesticides in general