Can someone explain why C isn't ruling out an alternative explanation? I thought it was giving us that it is NOT environment that is the reason.

This explanation is a bit confusing since I am not sure the contrapositive says an outright ban. I also thought that "NOT acceptable for people to have access to a vast array of misinformation" strongly implies regulation. Since we are saying not acceptable for people to have "a vast array" meaning limit the amount they can have, not sure where the interpretation of completely banning it comes from. #help

@AsemanShahsavand Makes sense, thanks!

How does "a few" equal "some"? Some can be 1 but a few cannot. #help

How do we know which is a subset of which? In reading A, I could see it working that S was a subset of E. #help

Mike is great

@steamboatwillie same

#help I got stuck with "life as we know it". I thought the flaw something like just because this is how we know life starts on Earth here that it is not necessarily how it starts elsewhere. Can anyone help?

The reason I didn't pick A was because of the language in the stim that says of "Several vendors" so I thought it couldn't be possible that Hall Dining is the only other service. Anyone one have an idea here? I went with D thinking that since students didn't know all the options, they might have disagreed as to who to pick. Like the majority agreement was about getting someone new, but there could be disagreement about who #help

I got stuck on A because I thought it was supporting the sentence "have done so along prescribed pathways has only recently come to the fore". Wondering if anyone can explain why that was a bad idea to support besides it not mentioning fear. Like I was thinking it was adding plausibility to the idea that the Mesolithic people were even aware/used the paths.

#help

@AsemanShahsavand So if I paint the Mona Lisa, by this definition the painting is not mine, even though I created this version? I am confused on why we are not defining something being mine as in I painted it, not that I invented it. It seems for this definition to work I can't copy something that was already made and then call it my own.

@TheBigFatPanda This was my instant reaction as well. Can someone explain how we can take the notion of sovereignty within a country and apply that to having unlimited power in decisions with multinational organizations?

#help

Could someone clarify the different ways the word frequency could be used? Here Kevin explained it as proportion which totally makes sense but I think other times I've seen it used as just the raw number, so I wanted to make sure it could be used in either sense

It just feels inconsistent in how they want us to infer the author's tone. Saying "one obvious way" is not needed since a natural way was enough to convey that this isn't something the author necessarily agrees with. But within the paragraph it gives more. Saying "illicitly" (in a way that is contrary to or forbidden by law) implies I (author) know this goes against what is right, again a word that is not a needed to simply convey something was taken from them. And of course a pivot word like BUT has nearly always been the contributing sentence towards the author's main point, so a little confused on how they expect us to see the author's position or lack of one.

For the second statement, how are we sure that the same domain applies? I caught a difference in the first sentence that discussed a food not ordinarily containing fat, but in the second they specify a label that STATES the food ordinarily contains no fat. I'm getting at the difference between something being X and someone stating that the food is X. So I didn't think the second rule necessarily included the same domain of foods that do not ordinarily contain fat

@haena 😭 is it not lol

If the last sentence in the stim says "all of he friends like black tea", how can D be true? I understood that sentence to be (If Sam's friend -> likes black tea). In other words among her friends there is a min of liking at least 1 tea.