You’ll be here soon too my friend hang in there

I asked that a year ago brother I’m in law school now

I can assure you you’ll never need this in law school

bro I did the exact same thing. I thought to myself "damn this is good but it's the same critics saying this so this can't be right since we already know the critics all believe the same thing"... Stupid apostrophes...

glad i wasn't the only one that got tripped up by that one... overthinking to the nth degree haha

We don't know that the popularity is greater, just that they sell more memorabilia. We don't know if selling more memorabilia makes them more popular.

However, if it does, we still don't know if it gives them the right to say they have "popular appeal" because that isn't really defined. If we know that the comparable concerts are popular then that makes the claim that more memorabilia sales -> popular appeal slight more palatable

I'm surprised this is only 3 star difficulty. That is a very sneaky assumption.

brug

How do you do this in your head within 1.5 minutes? Any recommendations?

#help (added by Admin)

Aren't the educators and the author advocating for the same thing in this scenario?

I always mess up "if true" questions because I look at the answers and think "Well that's not true"... damn it

Nevermind, I understand now. IF expertise is the primary prereq, then of course that would strengthen it. I understand now. It's all predicated on the "if valid". Oops.

But how can we determine that it's the primary prerequisite? From my understanding, all we know is that it is a prerequisate, not that there is any ranking of said perquisites. Why are we able to assume that it's the primary one?

What confused me is that the analysis said "WILL bring about" rather than "COULD bring about". Oh well.

Why the heck do we need to assume that they have to plant later when they use moon phases? What if they plant earlier or also during? The stim doesn't say what effect moon phases have other than "it's better"... so what if they planted later? What does that actually tell us? I don't understand. #help #help

what the hell is this hahaha

Just keep drilling. Get really good at conditionals (Go watch the videos in the LR section) and then come back to LG and drill drill drill. LG is all about being able to isolate and understand the rules and apply them to various scenarios. Becoming fluent in conditionality and lawgic will help immensely.

I feel it also assumes that 1000 sample size is enough to make the determination that something influences a "great number" of something else. The "great number" immediately raised suspicion on the sample size for me because it doesn't tell us how many readers there are. We have to assume there are enough to justify that conclusion. Great trap answer, I guess...

fr

down