2 years late but adding to @FaviPapi's explanation, what helped me understand why B was wrong was considering its negation a potential alternate hypothesis. Negating B would be "Mosquitos are attracted to humans by body heat." If this were true, this would completely destroy the hypothesis (conclusion) that the stimulus has, which is that mosquitos are attracted to humans because of another gaseous substance.

I understand why A is correct, but I'm still having trouble fully ruling out C. Any advice?

Thank you, your explanation of why D is wrong really helped

When I read precondition, I definitely though sufficient. smh

#feedback I know others have already provided feedback but a quick 2 min video on this would be helpful, thank you!

#help I keep accidentally choosing the answer that proposes an alternative hypothesis rather than the one that strengthens the original argument. Anyone have any advice on how to break out of this mindset? Is there something in my reasoning/thought process that I can change?

Thank you!

#help when we write this using formal logic notations, how do we know that its a ↔? I got lost on that

#help Hi, I can't find this module under CCv2. When I click on the hyperlink in your earlier comment, it shows "Lesson 0 of 0."

Click on the little check mark instead

Right before let's review, is the argument actually valid in that form then or are you saying I misunderstood the structure of the argument so it's invalid? The phrasing is really complicated #help

Are negate necessary indicators the same as sufficient in the sense that the conditional and contrapositive are like twins or no?

#help Added by Admin

harry styles is studying for the lsat now??