The explanation for why C is wrong falls short.. can someone help explain why its not the right answer? i feel like C is more specific to the stim while B is bringing up the "other" #help

Would you also say that B is incorrect because its an "any" statement and the stim is about a "some" statement? #help

The way i thought about A was that prices in general rose in Australia so the increase income for the sheep farmers didn't do much due to the high costs. but now I see that it's not what answer choice A is saying. That was my prephrase and I just made it fit into A. I see answer choice C is way better and a classic LSAT answer choice.

I got it right on BR because i had the time to read thoroughly. I really need to work on my timing so i have more time for harder questions like this

honestly the LR sections of preptest 75 kilt me

time and time again i am reminded to focus on the conclusion of the argument! so simple yet so hard to get it through my thick skull .

this passage was so easy during BR but during timed conditions i totally panicked. need to be better at staying calm during timed conditions. Any tips? I meditate during the day but any other tips/ideas to staying calm during timed conditions?

this argument vs general claim was so helpful!

why did i think E was a NA answer choice :(

4 correct B's in a rowwwwww. highschool me would be shakin in ma boots.

i just looked up what a balloon valance is. hideous lol

i hate when i miss a question because i have my flaw hat on! ughhhh

so just so i understand we are never suppose to question the premises in flaw questions? we should take what the premise says as truth? #help

I got this through POE because i felt like all the answer choices were so irrelevant to the argument.

damn you LSAT. you got me againnnnn

I still don't get why A is wrong #help

Skipppppppp

so we are trying to weaken the authors conclusion? that it's not a speaking staff? the warriors mace is irrelevant? or do we need to weaken that as well?

The way I thought about A was that it would strengthen the argument because then that would mean they were using these other fireplaces to create heat to stay warm, while the lichen and grass were used for smoking of the meat. Is this a bad way of thinking of it?

question 23 with "timber must be destroyed" -_-

This argument really confused me, esp since it was question 6 but somehow got it right.

Answer Choice A is there in case you didn't realize it's an argument by analogy.

can someone please draw this out for me and all the possible things we can conclude? i am struggling to under jy's drawings. #help

this explanation literally made no sense :( #help

tricky lsat with answer choice b by switching the conclusion and the premise!!!