Need to find an AC choice that connects" Did not take success for granted" and keep a good perspective on the world. (We don't necessarily need an ac that speaks to struggle early in life since everyone who does keeps a good perspective on the world. AC B and E are the closest, however E is backwards. Given that B is our correct AC.

Need an AC that speaks to the two new elements mentioned in the MC: Alpha and S4. AC c is the only ac that does this.

#help Isn't AC E Premise 1 though?

missed the part in the stem about the assumption, rushing through the question. smh

B & D: Weaken

A: Not relevant

E: Not Relevant

C: This AC gives us actual reporting of tornados and remaining constant since the 1950s(What A and E failed to do) Correct Answer

I found this one tough just have to cancel out the wrong answers then look at the subtle details.

A: This AC meets the causation requirements we need to strengthen the argument, stop the spread of influenza by taking an action and acknowledge the decline.

B:No decrease

C:Missing information, needs to mention influenza

D: Doesn’t help the argument

E:out of sequence, its before the period, doesn’t help the argument

A: This AC provides additional support for the conclusion, the most will be useful if this is true and thus don’t need to be countered (Correct)

B: So what, this doesn’t support the conclusion

C: Didn't like the "usually" in this AC

D: This AC just restates the conclusion

E: But even if this was true, the conclusion speaks against a counter measure

A:Yea, but what if Kelly has better graphics and tells a better story?

B: If they both give unfavorable reviews, how is he better?

C: Stimuli gives a principle about what movie reviews should help readers do, this AC says Sartore does this. (Correct)

D: Missing the part about realization

E:out of scope

A: Can't Prove that

B: Doesn’t speak to morale specifically

C:The stimuli says otherwise

D: To strong

E: Good AC, general, restates key points made in the stimuli

Overlooked who's opinion we had to strengthen

A: We just know it was a copy but don't know that the quality to be an indistinguishable one

B: Mention of technology equipment puts this out of scope

C:The stimuli states that the copyist made a replica and the likelihood of it being different was low so close to his death, given that AC C is accurate (Correct)

D: Out of scope

E: Trap answer, this looks attractive but we can't prove what his intent was based on the given information

A: Stimuli states that JSC have been very successful at reducing occupational injuries . Given that, it's safe to assume if this action was taken it would result in a reduction of occupational injuries (Correct)

B. Im always cautious of MSS ACs that say anything about being "More Effective"

C: Can't prove this

D: Can't prove this

E: Maybe, but we cant prove this based on the given information

A: They knew the function of the rolling pins for the ones they used, so this is not entirely true

B: This is true for all the boys knew there was only one rolling pin in the entire pile (The one they played with)

C: The stimuli does not state that they do

D: Speaks to utensils but not rolling pins

E: Similar to AC B, in order for this to be valid you have to recognize AC B first.

whats the so what in AC D #HELP?

omg missed the not in AC -B

#help when I saw the word set I thought the comparisons were apart of two different sets(Butterflies and food pellets) which caused me to not select the correct AC. 1) how is set defined here?

same!

Thanks for sharing, you transferred from Georgetown during 3L?

I liked A over B. Didn't get the correlation between valued training and veteran reporters?

#help how is this a weakening question?

@claremont525 said:

There is no conclusion. It's a premise set with information that doesn't contradict. You can be fairly confident when you read stimuli such as this that it's going to ask you to make an inference about the information given.

AC A: The stimulus tells us nothing about what scientists originally thought about the relationship between pandas and red pandas. It's not supported.

AC D : This is the correct answer. It's supported by the premises:

"Scientists theorize that the more genetically similar two species are to each other, the more recently they diverged from a common ancestor"

+

"...scientists concluded that bears and raccoons diverged 30 to 50 million years ago."

+

"...10 million years before giant pandas diverged from the other bears"

thanks

glad to see other chose A!

only saw restore once didn't think it was important and thought that the critic's argument was more geared toward who did it.