The problem is that A opines only on the trial court, but we don't have enough of an opinion on appellate court to make a reasonable assumption. That makes A the better answer.

In line 61, the word medium is used in context to mean the location where additional information and resources could be found--like a textbook, a wikipedia article, and so on. We are looking for a word that, in context, matches the workings of cross examination, so this does not work.

it's because the statement is conditional. He is saying "in a world where your principle was true, this would be the outcome". He's not saying that outcome is true in the real world, and is instead tearing down the principle.

I got to the correct answer quickly by finding the line at the end of the first paragraph, which states that critics often miss that the purpose of the genre blending is in order to advance a social message.

I misread A and thought that it was asking about the 17th century versus today. I totally understand why I got it wrong.

I went back and forth on D, and only picked it because the others seemed clearly wrong.

I slipped up on this one for sure. It makes sense now to frame it with the idea that the line's initial length doesn't impact the number of segments. It could be a mile wide or an inch wide, but that doesn't matter--especially on a computer.

I rejected B on question 20 because of the word "new". It was clearly a new "language", but hasn't fractal geometry been around for longer than that?

If you read the part of the paragraph about what Kingston believes, that very same sentence talks about how the stories can be frozen in time in writing, but will continue to evolve. This is directly tied to what she believes.

This describes me. This section is such a challenge because some answers will be so close to others in the wording. I've determined that I will NOT be going for speed on these questions in particular.

I hated this book in high school, so I was curious to see if my perspective had changed to a significant degree.

Nope.

It may be a classic, but I just cannot stand the storyline.

This is me. I'm keeping myself going with snacks.

For 17, I got confused, assuming "fungal components" meant "components of a fungus" rather than "the fungal portions of the symbiotic lichen". This makes a lot more sense now!

Let's limit the scope here to just comparing Mars' craters from 4 billion years ago (BYA) and today. Since we know the LHB happened during a short time period around 4 BYA, Mars should NO LONGER be experiencing cratering to that degree. Even if they had consistent cratering for that longer time period of, say, 6 BYA to 2 BYA, it would still be a period of increased bombardment compared to today, and the answer fits in that scope.

One thing that hints at this being the correct answer is actually the fact that one of the hypotheses was that the LHB was actually just the last stage of a long period of bombardment. (As a side note, this is likely referring to the fact that this period happened shortly after planets were formed by accumulating material, which would have decreased over time until the last evidence of this could be seen in the LHB.) If that hypothesis is correct, Mars would have experienced heightened cratering from its formation until the end of the LHB. Even if it experienced more cratering before, those craters would be erased during the LHB.

A is correct because, if it proves there was not a significant amount of cratering during this time as compared to today, it means the LHB did not affect the other inner planets.

In order to limit LHB to JUST the earth and the moon, we'd have to find evidence that the other inner planets (Mercury, Venus, and Mars) were NOT involved.

B, C, and E only address the earth and moon, so they're irrelevant, because that doesn't tell us anything about the other planets being involved or not.

A and D are both helpful, but A would disprove thousands of craters of potential evidence by those simply not existing, while D only disproves ONE rock. Even if that rock is found to be from just earth, that doesn't mean that Mars DIDN'T experience LHB.

C is pretty strongly implied by the term "heavy bombardment" as well as the fact that this time period created the MAJOR craters on the moon. Assuming this means all of the biggest craters, you can assume that these craters must be 4 billion years old and that they have not been wiped out by other cratering.

I definitely got confused by the wording and assumed it was asking his opinion on the rock itself rather than arguments about it.

I think this is one of those cases where it doesn't "prove" so much as it suggests this as a possibility. If it was a younger rock, it wouldn't be classified as from that time period. It is a bit of a weakness in the author's argument, though.

Just out of curiosity, though, I did go digging, and the one meteorite from Mars that was about that age appears to have come from a later impact dislodging it about 1.5 billion years ago, so your thoughts are definitely sound.

As someone who studied science with a minor in astronomy, thank you for walking me through all the other things in the entire 7Sage curriculum that my studies didn't cover! It's a bit of a treat to get a passage that I'm more familiar with.

For some fast learning, I'd recommend SciShow on youtube.

I think that's good reasoning.

I've been using careful highlights as a low res summary, but otherwise keep it in my head.

high priority=missed questions

low priority=correct questions

I've taken the LSAT once before at a proctored location. We were provided pencils and scratch paper, and the Law Hub exam setup had digital highlighters, but that was it.

One trick I've heard is to find a way to get invested in each passage you read.

Since I'm not well versed in a lot of ancient classics, I had a pretty unorthodox method of keeping interested--by connecting it to a story I am familiar with.

The story of Deathnote surprisingly has the setup of a Greek tragedy. Thankfully, it applies really well to this passage, as the story involves both free will and some interference of gods. In reading each of the responses, I've been applying it to the story of the anime, (or, where it doesn't apply, imagining an alternate universe where that is the case for the story,) and using that to keep track of the meaning.

According to google, some other storylines that fit the bill are Scarface, The Godfather, and The Kite Runner. Shakespearian tragedies are also rather similar, so even if you are familiar with Macbeth or Hamlet, you might use these to your advantage.