Thank you. Really appreciate it.

#help. Answer choice A if negated does kill Trent's conclusion. If we assume that any asteroid that struck the earth struck land, not water, this would include the asteroid in question, rendering the crater in question not one created by an asteroid. Is A the wrong answer because we must accept that that crater was caused by an asteroid? Is Trent's first sentence a premise? I had thought it was one form or another of a conclusion. Thanks.

#help. But I thought we were supposed to read carefully, and based on careful reading, the statement, "The weapon used usually was a knife" means that the weapon used was not always a knife. If, in fact, guns or poison were used, this WOULD explain the increase in killings. So I don't understand why A is wrong. I get that E is correct, so maybe we rule out A because E is safer? Still, what worries me is that by my applying the requirement to read carefully, I think I came up with a logical answer that I'm now told is wrong.

I think I understand your explanation, You wrote:

"In this case the 'some people say' is needed in the argument if not the (but they are wrong) and the premise(s) that follow would not make as much sense.

Did you mean to write:

"In this case the 'some people say' is needed in the argument because if it wasn't there, the 'but they are wrong' phrase and the premise(s) that follow would not make as much sense."?

Thank you.

Ha. So true. Thank you for pointing that out.

Thank you. Very helpful. I assumed that commentators don't have opponents in the same sense that candidates do because the former are not competing in a game or a race. But I do see your point and really appreciate your having helped.

#help. I was debating between B and E but (wrongly) chose E for two reasons: The tutorial said to choose a choice that doesn't attack the premise. IMHO, both B and E do that, but I chose E because it showed that in actuality the premise had been invalidated before, whereas B did not. Also, the explanation implies that E has nothing to do with the premise, but E refers back to the premise in the same way that B does. E refers to the sentence, "On the other hand, if the flowers had been sent by someone who does not know Drew well, then that person would have sent a signed card with the flowers." Am I nuts?

#help. #help. The correct answer is "B," but I chose a different answer because B contains an inaccuracy. "B" says that editorialists are attacking "their" opponents, implying they're attacking their own opponents, but the opponents the passage refers to are the politicians the editorialists are speaking about, not other editorialists. This is a really poorly worded answer. I'd love someone at the LSAT to respond!