Whoever wrote this question needs shoved into a locker

I dont see how C is wrong. The stimulus states that BST is used "in an effort" to boost milk production. How can we just say that because they used it, it automatically boosts milk production? Nothing in the stimulus says that it actually did boost milk production.

F. Winter Is Coming.

We're also supposed to just assume that single celled creatures are all small. Lol. Horrible question

My irresponsible drinking habits turned out to be useful for something after all

I cant tell if E is horrible or really good but i chose it anyway because the rest of the choices blew

Lol at the score range on this question.

The argument proceeds by doing whatever the LSAC wants to fucking claim that it does, and by not doing literally what ever else you may conceivably think it does.

Stupid, bullshit question. Arbitrary ass question.

Explanations for B and C: "Yeah, not that either." Lol. What a joke that people pay for this service only to get half assed explanations on answer choices, on a level 4 difficulty no less. #feedback

I cannot understand how A doesnt strengthen the argument. If people believe that technological advancement can result in job loss, then they would resist the advancement. That strengthens the argument. What the heck am i missing? #help

Answer choices A and B both seem pretty arbitrary and require assumptions. A obviously contradicts the premise, but there is no rule indicating that this cant ever happen. There are in fact correct answer choices on the LSAT that have done this very thing. And if A is true, then it definitely helps to resolve more than B does. B requires assuming that those who report the least amount of control over their work do indeed feel a lack of control over their work. ON TOP OF THAT... we dont know which nerve disorders are going to arise from this! This answer choice also doesn't address anything about those who do report the most control over their work. So we're stuck between contradicting the premises, or making two pretty big assumptions. Stupid

B is the correct answer disguised as a bad answer.

What a stupid question

Did anyone else find this entire section to be more difficult than normal? Even the first 10 questions or so are littered with conditional reasoning and other taxing stimuli... what a slog this was...

I originally chose C and then changed it to D after determining that C was weak. Why is it that D is wrong?

I am aware that we are concerned about modern civilizations that rely on irrigation. In my opinion, answer choice D addresses this by saying if they dont rely on irrigation, then they have nothing to worry about, thus weakening the argument. Where or what am i missing that i cant grasp why D is wrong?

Lmfao questions like this are so bullshit. LSAC just picks an answer and then says fuck all to justify it.

Any of these answer choices could conceivably weaken the argument. All of the sycophant subscription companies just go along with whatever instead of giving valuable explanations for why other answer choices are wrong. Because they cant.

Questions like this on the actual exam are just to be skipped and not sweated if you miss it

Making the arguments so absolutely horrible that they cant be understood lol

9/10 test takers are skipping this question on the actual test

The use of "or" in the stimulus is so awkward and dumb.

I had this narrowed down to A and B and went with B ultimately because i thought that if A is not true, the argument still works. How do we know anything about "later in the spring"??? What if there is just as much frost after planting later in the spring????

For being a 5* difficulty question, i got this one quicker than id normally get a question of lesser difficulty. I initially chose B, after reading D and thinking that D is something that they would actually agree on. I'm glad i read again though - because it is obvious that Waller definitely agrees with D. However, I couldnt really identify Chin's stance on public opinion negating the existence of ESP. All Chin says is that public opinion is a filtered down effect of the cultural elite. How in the hell are we supposed to know to tie that back to evidence for/against ESP? Chin's response is based solely on skepticism, not what evidence does or does not surround ESP.

I eliminated the other answer choices and got D, but still have trouble grasping Chin's stance.

The question stem here is extremely deceiving. I thought that Method of Reasoning questions require us to focus sequentially on the structure of the argument. I chose A, which i understand is wrong because i misread the answer choice. Technically speaking i dont see how B can be correct.

Lets break down what B literally says and refers to:

"Referring to an inference that is clearly flawed" = I assume this refers to the inference that the radio station is popular with listeners. Got it.

"That is clearly flawed" = Clearly is a strong word, but ok lets say it is clearly flawed.

"in order to undermine an analogous inference" = The analogous reference is a comparison of voters with a political candidate. We arent trying to undermine that. Were trying to undermine the radio listeners. Thats why I think B is ass backwards.

Reading the stimulus of this question sounds like something that would be rattled off by Jordan Peterson. As is the case with many questions on this test lol but this one specifically. Just a bunch of big words and mumbo jumbo.#feedback