@samekman86 PM me for stats!

Thank you so much all!

@kingse414, it helps a lot for my own learning to explain it! I hope my comments have been helpful!

hi guys! this post blew up lol! I already have a few study partners, but if y'all are interested in setting up maybe a blind review of PT 86 sometime this week, let me know and I can coordinate.

P is saying because they settled, they expected to lose. The contrapositive is if they had expected to win, then they wouldn't have settled.

J is saying whether they expected to win or lose, they still would have settled.

AC (E) describes the disagreement perfectly.

Say the national building codes mandated that no blue paint be used in commercial buildings. Local building codes in this guy's city say that in addition to whatever is mandated nationally, no red paint can be used in buildings.

The defendant is a developer that painted the outside of a large commercial space blue. He's saying "You shouldn't impose penalties because I didn't know which rule applied." And the judge goes "Not valid, everyone in your position should be aware of the national codes, since naturally they would be less specific/less strict than the local codes." Answer choice (C) thus makes sense.

If the cost of the rental would greatly exceed the actual purchase price, and everyone NEEDS to finish the game, then it would make sense that they would just buy the game outright. Say it takes 2 weeks to finish the game, then you'd be paying $40 x 7 (2-day intervals over 2 weeks) for a total of $280. For an $80 game?? That makes no sense. So the conclusion that sales would exceed expectation makes perfect sense.

Argument structure:

Either A or B

B → not feasible

---------------------

A

Dioxin present → hormone abnormalities

Dioxin not present (carried downstream in a few hours) → fish recover quickly

(C) Strengthens likelihood of dioxin being the cause by showing that its absence leads to an absence of its effect.

Contemporary novels —> moral transgression are sensationalistic —> /experience world from moral perspective of novel’s characters —> /enter internal world of novelist’s mind —> /social significance

AC (E) is just the contrapositive of the last 2 parts of the logical chain

I missed the memo clearly!! thank you @kjsmith9141!

Thanks guys!!!

Hi, I live in Denver in the RiNo area and would be interested. However, I am currently in the mid to high 160s so not sure if you would be interested. Feel free to message me

@christianmckinnon1543 said:

Haven’t seen this posted yet, but was the history RC terrible or what? That one messed me up bad.

It was horrible. You're not alone lol.

Luckily RC was my last section, so I didn't have how horrible that section was weighing on me throughout the rest of the test.

@lizziea900 we had the same test. I found games to be super easy, LR tough and the 2nd RC passage awful

If a private corporation won't sponsor agricultural techniques such as crop rotation (that are unlikely to lead to marketable results) → only the gov't will.

AC (C) blocks out competing explanations. Why not a different entity besides private corporations or the government? Because it's rare for anyone else to.

AC (C) doesn't work because who cares if they're encouraged... do they actually heed the advice?

Still struggling between (A) and (E) though, any #help is appreciated

If it wasn't the case that most of the disintegrated vehicles were made out of wood, we might have better models other than the small ceramic models that existed - because those models would have survived through the years.