'Were going to need to split this game board up'
I believe the old majors are falling and new ones are rising, it’ll be an Iceland v Russia finish, with Putin coming down on a helicopter forcing the game into penalties but then Thor interrupts the decisive kick giving Iceland the game.
Same here.
Seems like a pseudo sufficient assumption type question, or necessary/sufficient rather than basing itself off conditional statements, you'd want to question the relationship between taxes and good leadership. b) Being opposed to high taxes isn't sufficient for good leadership
Displays this relationship, and perhaps the pseudo sufficient is that, opposed to higher taxes is 'necessary' as in it will 'do'. Check out JY's explanation on the CC of this Q type.
Can't wait!
My fav band atm is JY and the 7 Sagers
Executive: ESTJ, -A/-T just like Judge Judy
For you guys who aren't keen on personality profiles, try taking the test with an open mind and try to answer reflexively instead of reactively. Sometimes if we take too long to answer the question, cognitive dissonance can cloud the accuracy of the results.
Doing pretty well hammered down on LR the past few months now I'm working on mastering LG, and you?
'well this is turning out creepier than I imagined' I lol'd
'false belief' caught me off-guard so I went with C. Thought it was a big assumption to make. But I get it does make the 'never' in C questionable as well.
I love how weakens except is really just strengthen, or 'does nothing at all'.
In A we're directly attacking the conclusion (minor impact on food supply...), instead of the connection between the premises and conclusion.
For example, if the diseases were so strong in the past, wouldn't that make them stronger in the future as a result? It doesn't weaken, but calls the whole argument into question, you madman.
In E we contradict the premises by adding in bugs and weeds and ignoring disease.
We must take the QS as true in weaken.
This leaves us with B as the strongest of the 3 ACs. It doesn't contradict the QS and adds new information that is still relevant and subtly questions its connections.
Hope this helps.
I really like how JY held off on choosing B as the right answer for this explanation, because it simulates what most of us would do until we arrived E and were forced to eliminate one.
Hey guys, I've been studying on my own for a while but it would be interesting to hear someone else's take on the Q's and the test, I'm looking forward to hearing from some of you who may be in the Miami area and are looking to study LSAT as well. Cheers!
During section 2 I get a bit of a crick in my neck, I previously asked the proctor how high can I raise my test booklet off the table and she said she'd 'just let me know' big mistake! During section 3 I had it raised off the desk and she stood in front of me during a LG question and started waving her hands, startling and distracting me from this already difficult task. Luckily I'm certain it was an experimental section. Anyone have a similar issue with this test?
I'm listening to the 89 pt increase! And will join the pep rally, this is just what I needed!
Don't eat the money, go ahead take it, and cancel if need be, but at least its good practice and don't show up again until you're scoring consistently in the PTs
All that anxiety and whatever is your brains way of telling you that you will feel even worse on test day, if you don't study hard enough. So use it as a motivator.