From reading your comments, do you even want to go to law school? Or do your parents want you to go to law school? You say you do, but if I really wanted to go to law school, I would care more about disappointing myself, rather than my parents...Also, you're probably going to be more of a disappointment to them when your law school acceptances come out, versus waiting another year (if they care about the "name brand" value of the school).

Take the LSAT when you are ready. If you are fine going to those schools in which your LSAT/GPA will be accepted, then by all means, take the test ONLY if you feel you will score higher than a 155. Don't let other people force you into taking the exam when you are not ready - people did that with me, and despite my gut feeling, I listened to their advice and ultimately had to cancel. Just know that once you take the December test, you will only have one try left (for a two year period). Also, even if you waited until February to take the test and applied next cycle, you would have much needed time to work on your essays and such, and apply early.

And by support, are you referring to financial? My parents did not support me financially, verbally, emotionally, or otherwise. My mother in particular has been extremelyyyy vocal about her disapproval of my choice in career. And I turned out fine (scored in the 97 percentile for the October test) after starting out at a 148. Yes, I had to spend an extra year out of school than I had originally planned, but all in all, things worked out for the best (in terms of my score).

@ @ C is irrelevant primarily because it references all shows W&W produces, not just the new ones. Your second explanation doesn't distinguish between the new shows, and all shows. If I read the answer choice and thought it said "new shows", rather than all the shows W&W produces, then yes, it is irrelevant because it references the non-canceled shows. These non-canceled shows may be all horror shows, and not include any police dramas. But the primary reason it is incorrect is because it references all of W&W shows, when the stimulus only provides us with information about W&W's new shows (that most of W&W's new shows from last year were canceled).

Just a FYI to future people looking through this thread.

Y'all are forgetting that the proving grounds are designed such that "ONLY THOSE students most committed to being science majors will receive passing grades...". If even one student who is the least enthusiastic (and thus not among students who are the most committed) passes the course, the proving grounds has not served its purpose.

Q.E.D.

Some necessary assumption answer choices can be extreme. The stimulus just has to have the extreme language to back it up.

The stimulus refers to a change over time (i.e., over the past decade, there has been a decline in the amount of people earning chem degrees). Thus, the answer choice, in order to explain the paradox, must also refer to a change over time. Answer choices A-D refer to situations that, ostensibly, have been the same in the past decade. Thus, they cannot explain the paradox. If students in 2000 have been unsure of their major choice, and students in 2010 have also been unsure of their major choice, how does this explain that there has been a SIGNIFICANT decline in people earning chem degrees?

I thought both LR sections in PT75 were pretty easy (I finished with 5 minutes to go on the actual test, which is not an occasional occurrence). On the actual exam, I screwed up on the LG, but this was due more to test anxiety than not being ready since I usually go -0 on LG. The last game was different. I would say LG was more difficult than LR this time around.

I liked E, but the reason I didn't pick it was that I felt it was backwards. I thought it should have been, "typically, the more widely a beverage is used in a particular place, the longer the beverage has been in use in a particular place." Does the "order" matter at all? Does the order of directly proportional relationships matter?

I'd actually like to know some techniques as well. I've found that on a few PTs in the past, I have those lingering negative thoughts and it affects my performance. However, on the June 2015 LSAT, when I totally messed up on an LG section, I did not have those thoughts. Granted, it was right before the break. But my first section was LG, so I just convinced myself that the section I bombed was the experimental (it was not haha). So maybe convincing yourself that the section you did not do well on is the experimental may help (obviously this won't work for the fifth section, but at that point, lingering negative thoughts is no longer a concern).

UPDaTE! They replied to me later last week (I think it may have been Thursday). They were moving the physical address of their business (as evidenced by the watch I received today), so they missed a couple of emails. I received my new watch today. I'm scared to use it haha. So yeah, sorry for my freak out. In other news, I scored the best I ever had on a PT after getting a response from them. Correlation = causation? Anyways, I hope everyone has as good luck as I did!

I haven't opened the watch - would rather send it to them than do it myself. Unless you are technologically capable, this close to the LSAT, I would take it to a watch repair store. The malfunction I had was the big hand of my clock was loosened (it wouldn't stay into place, it would just swing around on its own accord, if that makes sense.)

Don't you have a 180 watch? Isn't taking the test a lot better with said watch versus another method? It's not necessary nor is it sufficient for success. However, I have been practicing with the watch for most of my PTs (a count up timer in the interim of waiting for it to be fixed). It's entirely too late for me to get used to or well acquainted to another method. I think it is both possible that I may lose points as a result, as well as it is possible that it may have no effect. In my case, I strongly believe it will have an effect. Different things work for different people. Consistency works for me (especially two weeks before the exam), inconsistency doesn't. You may be different.

Don't really like pictures or gifs pets, but thanks for your input! :)

@ I had my friend email the guy (Matt) about ordering a watch, and he responded the very next day!! I did a little digging, so I have more contact information on him/his partner, but I'll give him until the end of the day in the off chance this is all a big misunderstanding.

He should know, after the LSAT, I'll have a lot more time on my hands. I will get my money refunded, plus the money I used to send the watch to him, the money I will use to get a new watch, my $179.00, and my legal fees. This is just criminal. Why would you do this to someone who is taking the LSAT? Obviously, they are not going to let something like this slide, and they know where you live...

I would honestly just try to take it to a repair shop and have them fix it. I should have done that to begin with (or had my father fix it), but since Matt said he would take it, I sent it to him. So I am literally without a watch, and my $$$.

Unfortunately, I bought it with my debit card, but honestly I doubt that any banking service would provide return protection for something you've had for three months/used! I'm not as concerned about the money as I am about not having it for the upcoming LSAT (just a few points lost could cost more $$$ than 60.00). The 180 watch is the best one out there.

@ I used that exact email, Dillon. It's possible he is going through his weekend emails, but he did promise he would ship it on September 1st, and it is yet to arrive! And I need to practice using it while I am doing my PTs.

Maybe he will reply tomorrow, and I'm just freaking out over nothing. Tryingggg to be optimistic :)