Can someone tell me where I can learn how "blind review" works? I took the drill just now and answered 4/5 correctly. But my results say I only answered one question & left the other 4 blank. Then it shows me "my blind review answers" (with a couple showing a different answer than what I choose). Totally confused.

Again my breakdown differs from the expanation for Q3. Is mine technically acceptable:

"Maintaining maximum deterrence from aggression by other nations requires that a nation maintain a retaliatory force greater than that of any other nation."

1) the one nation with the strongest force vs all nations less stronger force

2) which set of groups above achieves maximum detterance of being attacked

3) the one nation

This is what I had for question 5. It differs from the explanation but I feel it would work:

"At least 59 percent of households maintained a lower indoor temperature than they had been accustomed to maintain on very cold days."

1) Other days v. Very cold days

2) which of the two sets of days maintained a lower indoor temp

3) Winner: other days (59% reflects the majority)

Does this make sense?

question, the LSAT is obviously all electronic. There's no way to circle, make notes, on the question? What's you advice then? especially with the more confusing, complicated ones?

Researcher: Over the course of three decades, we kept records of the average beak size of two populations of the same species of bird, one wild population, the other captive.

During this period, the average beak size of the captive birds did not change, while the average beak size of the wild birds decreased significantly.

I'm not expecting an answer to this as most of my questions go unanswered, but I was hoping the group could maybe chime in...I picked the correct answer (C), mainly due to the fact that food sources entered my mind while reading the problem. HOWEVER, I still am not entirely comfortable with this choice, as it's citing SURVIVAL and not changes to the wild birds' bodies. How do we not assume for instance, that the wild birds that survived were stronger birds with bigger beaks? This leads me to my next paradox...assumptions & presuppositions.

From the start of RRE questions, we were told to "F your feelings" (I'm paraphrasing & half kidding) and focus on what's in the stimuli. But based on the explanations in this video, there was a WHOLE LOT of presupposing going on!

I selected answer choice D for two reasons: 1) there was no comparison of birds and the sprays & 2) the zapper is environmentally worse. BUT, if we're going to be honest, especially in today's society, I'd be willing to bet more people (including the pest controllers) would go with B bc they would be more concerned with ridding their homes of mosquitoes than protecting the environment.

"Who the FUCK is Pat?!?!...and why is this fucking guy getting special privileges?!?" HAHAHAHHA

Sounds like the narrator is a fellow NYer and my hero! LMAO

"fuck yo couch!" kinda makes up for the lack of videos for the last dozen lessons or so hahaha

Going back to the Kumar example (which has been on my mind the past few days)can you please deep dive into the difference btwn "only if" & "if"? Yes, I understand IF is a sufficient indicator and ONLY IF is a necessary indicator, but it's still not registering for me. The words "more than" is really throwing me off.

Most of Harry Potter's friends are wizards. Most people who are not his friends are not wizards. Therefore, Draco Malfoy, who is a wizard, is probably Harry Potter's friend.

So are you saying this argument is invalid, since you're embellishing the invalid "Opera" argument? It would be helpful to say if it is or isn't, instead of being cryptic. Thanks.