I did not choose C because in the stimulus it says the harder to remember passwords are "generally" written down, and if they are written down they are the greatest security threat. Couldn't it be true that some of the people (at least one) with the random passwords do not write them down? That is how I interpreted it under timed conditions and on BR, and then once more as I am reviewing my BR mistakes. It only makes sense if you interpret the "hence..." that follows to apply to all 'hard to remember' passwords rather than only those that are written down.

C says they are always a greater security threat. Sure this is generally true, and always true if the password is written down, but, crucially, I did not think it was a definitive rule we could draw from the stimulus.

Both answer choices A and C seem to rely on assumptions, and A seemed like less of a leap than C. Of course we shouldn't subject ourselves to greater security risks.

Nvm, he maps it out like that to negate AC (D). Makes sense now

Could AC (D) be said to be a sufficient assumption? That is why I ruled it out as my answer choice. I was then confused watching this video, wondering why JY included it in the (herbal medicine) subset outside several months?

I understand JY's explanation but I still think AC (E) is poorly worded. It says the evolutionary significance of Tiktaalik cannot be determined by comparing it to species of its time, and I took that to mean that the fingers are thus irrelevant. Like, if its significance cannot be determined by looking at its peers, then its distinct features must not be as consequential as the argument wants to postulate. I chose D because it sounded like it was postulating fingers to be a precondition for being a land animal, but I now see why that is wrong.

@elaine760 Thank you so much! I'm going to try this and will get back to you if it does not work (hopefully that won't be necessary)

The conclusion says aboriginal people in Canada (generally) made birchbark canoes, which is why the use of region in AC B tripped me up. E is just too strong though, I think it is a sufficient assumption

@elaine760 I still have yet to experience the problem again, but I am now experiencing problems loading videos. I purchased a couple individual prep tests and I was going through PT83. I tried watching the live commentary, but it kept stopping (presumably to buffer). Tried to reload the page, with no effect. Eventually the video will continue but is taking a long time to buffer. I tried instead to go to the individual explanation videos for each question and I'm experiencing the same issue. I am confident the issue is not my computer because it is loading other videos fine (no trouble loading a YouTube video over 1 hour). I can take a screenshot, but I doubt it will help because the page looks normal, just having trouble playing the video.

"A does not provide an adaptive mechanism"--strong disagree here. Big litters certainly qualify as an adaptive mechanism, but they don't necessarily increase survival chances. I did not choose A for the reason JY mentioned earlier, that it might take hundreds of prey to sustain the predator, and thus this does not resolve the paradox. This seems like a poorly written question. Every answer choice requires some assumption(s), as described in the comments below this

@elaine760 I'm also on Windows 10 Chrome Browser. It only does this sometimes, maybe it is my internet connection. I will try to take a screenshot next time it happens. Thanks for the response!

"yeah but why, Boris?"

-me anytime I look up Brexit news

B is the opposite reasoning. It is trading a short term cost for a long term gain, whereas the question says you should not take advantage of a short term gain that will result in a long term loss.

Tough question. I ruled out C because the stimulus says bicyclists are "partially responsible" for half the accidents, meaning the author did consider the possibility that more than one factor contributed to the accidents, but after watching JY's video it makes sense. Chose D because, although it is weak, it is true (passes the first test). Good question, will revisit

How far away is your test? Mine said the same thing for a month or two, but the issue has since been resolved (October test). I live in a decently populated city with multiple colleges and they have me at a testing center two hours away in a smaller city. Pretty dissapointed, but what are you gonna do.

All this to say I really doubt you will be screwed out of your money. You might have to make a long drive to a distant testing center, but I assume this issue will resolve itself with time. Other than that, I would recommend trying to contact LSAC yourself if you're still freaking out.

I should add that I took the June test, and got a 160 but my studying was almost all on my own. I have made tremendous strides thanks to 7Sage, but my point here being that I already have a more than decent grasp on the test, I just don't want to lose those strides I have made up to this point.

@53333aisling

Thanks for the response. I figured that was the case. I can get there already on some of the easier sequencing games, but with grouping games I find myself more often taking a long time just simply drawing out my game board. I feel like I'm getting a lot out of the set up and pushing out inferences, but not getting as much out of doing the questions over and over. After I have done the questions a couple times, my mind takes shortcuts. For example it will be like I know C is the wrong answer so I quickly prove C is wrong without really thinking about the inferences at all whereas I feel much more engaged during the set up, regardless if I've seen the question before or not... not sure how to remedy this. I try to force myself to go through each necessary inference, but honestly that's a lot easier said than done.

Nevermind, I found an older thread discussing exactly this.

I'll drop a link for any interested:

https://classic.7sage.com/discussion/#/discussion/90

#help on a question like this, do we just skip the opponent's argument altogether since we are only dealing with the proponent?