I think it's more about the fact that, so far, D was the only answer that matched Passage 1. Since the question asks for an answer that's correct for both passages, and D is the only option that fits Passage 1, it's the most likely candidate going into Passage 2 because we don't have any other viable option from Passage 1. If we had two strong contenders after reading Passage 1, then we'd need to wait until reading Passage 2 to eliminate one of them

wait why did i never think of doing this before

how tf are we supposed to infer that from just this much context?

I chose C because I thought that if the bombardment hadn't decreased, there would be more hypotheses based on recent studies, and these new craters would allow people to study where they originated from better (since the more recent they are, the better they can be analyzed). But if the hypotheses are all centered around this bombardment and what it caused, it probably means it was the strongest of them all. I'm not sure if it's right to think of it this way.

I thought the author was just introducing another hypothesis, just like the previous ones, except this one was more recent. How can we tell it's actually the author's opinion?

@Jsonf I think it is more of a general statement rather than the author's personal opinion, because it refers to weaknesses that have little or no relevance to the legal case, such as revealing unrelated illegal activities a person may have committed in the past. The point is that this information is generally not useful to the case, not necessarily that the author personally believes there is no point in mentioning it.

'this is perfect!!... and i'm not referring to murdering his father"

@CarlosHernandez03 I just double checked a few things from the passage instead of re-reading it entirely

how do we know if it's the debate is ongoing?

But why do we care if the not studied plants contain any different substances from the ones already discovered when we eventually will have none most likely (both discovered and undiscovred), IF the forest is NOT preserved? why do only the undiscovered ones get affected by this change?

"WHO CARES?"

Answering this question would have made an excellent medieval torture method back in the day

Aren't these questions technically written from a first-person perspective? For example, if an answer choice says, 'someone was harmed as a result of my practical joke,' we're already reading that statement from the speaker's point of view. Why would it need additional indicators showing that the speaker actually believes someone was harmed?

I wish the video made it more obvious which answer choice is correct after the explanation 😭 The instructor sometimes circles an answer and then later crosses it out or changes it, so this is already the second time I've mistakenly assumed the wrong answer was the correct one

‘Grammar is and will always be the king.’ No greater pain have I ever felt than reading this as a bilingual person :(

@LSATKilla87 I don't think there's a certain rule for that, just do whatever works for you the best

Alright this question was a bit insane i'm ngl

I shamefully admit to watching a video in which the original guy was no longer the one speaking. I take full responsibility for this ungraceful act and am prepared to face any consequences that may arise from it. As humanity has learned throughout history, society is constantly changing, and unfortunately I, too, became a victim of that change. Therefore, I humbly ask for your forgiveness, Original Guy. Please return to the other videos. I miss your voice, I miss the familiar flavor you brought to every explanation, and I miss the comfort of believing that, with your guidance, I might actually ace the LSAT someday.

@hjcraig you got this, give it some time and practice