@

@ said:

Assuming I start Fall 2020, I will be 24. Is anyone looking to attend law school in Texas?

I live in Texas and am definitely aiming to stay here for school, either UT or SMU.

I second what Alex says. I work full time right now and have found that the best way for me to stay consistent is to study from 5am-7:30am. If I can't study more after work, that's OK because I got my obligatory two hours in in the morning. It's a grind sometimes but I know it will be worth it in the end. Also, if you do plan to stick to a routine like this, make sure you get enough sleep as well. It's been said 100 times before, but you will function at a much higher level when your brain is well rested.

Hope this helps.

I totally get how you feel. I work as a data engineer, so most of my days are spent either working with lots of code or in long meetings. One thing you could try to do is wake up early and study in the morning when your mind is totally fresh. It can be hard at first but your body adapts over time. Also, as others have stated, don't be afraid to take a break or push the test back. Good luck, you're gonna do great!

@ I would definitely be interested in another session but only if it's not too much trouble

@ said:

For an explanation of how LSAC calculates GPA, see https://www.lsac.org/applying-law-school/jd-application-process/cas/requesting/transcript-summarization. You have to submit records of every post-high school credit earned. If your CC credits go towards earning your undergraduate GPA, they will be treated the same way as any other college credits.

I attended a college for literally a week and then dropped out due to personal reasons, would I still need to get transcripts from this school and send it into LSAC.

Translation:

Garbage dumps /harm wildlife. Garbage dump opened on reserve and baboon pop. that eats from the dump doubled in size compared to baboon pop. that didn't

A) This could weaken it because different species may have different mating behaviors proving the comparison to be of no value

B) Yep, if life expectancy is lower of garbage baboons, then it shows how the garbage could be hurting them

C) Yep, dangerous cholesterol levels of garbage baboons could be linked to garbage. This would disprove the idea of garbage not being harmful

D) Correct because it doesn't matter about the hyena population. We would have to assume that the hyenas would be a predator of baboons, and this is more unreasonable compared to other baboons

E) Birth defects going up in garbage baboons shows that the garbage dump is harming the garbage baboon pop. and it's pretty reasonable to assume that birth defects are harmful.

Translation:

W - Researchers have not been able to find the manic depression gene. Most of them say there is /manic depression gene. So, if researchers are correct => manic depression gene is false

C - I don't disagree with evidence. However, the same researchers say that there are several genes that all together can contribute to manic depression

A) Yes because Chang is saying that there is another possibility that can contribute to the genetic predisposition of manic depression that Wirth is assuming doesn't exist

B) There is only one piece of evidence that Wirth gives so this is wrong

C) No, the experts are researchers in the field that is being discussed

D) Wirth is not blocking evidence rather he's saying that there is only one possibility which doesn't exist and proves the hypothesis incorrect

E) Wirth doesn't point to the likelihood of the manic depression gene. He's discussing the existence of it

#help

I'm struggling to see why AC A is correct. When negated (some of the coolest brown dwarves have been hot enough to destroy lithium), it doesn't really seem to weaken the AC, because we were told that no brown dwarves were hot enough to destroy lithium completely by converting it to helium. So doesn't that leave space to allow for the brown dwarves to destroy some lithium but not all of it just as negated AC A says?

@ Sorry, BDT meant basic translation drill lol. In regards to translating in my head, I think what you mentioned about reading the whole stimulus and then trying to translate is my problem. I'm not taking it part by part. I'll definitely try out this approach! Thanks!

@ Hey thanks for the invitation! I'm interested in participating in the group, could you give me more info?

Hey @, I've got a couple quick question in regards to the LSAT Loophole book and the translation drills.

I've read through the whole book and have found it pretty helpful in looking at LR in a more intuitive way but my problem arises after I try to move on from the basic translation drill (BDT). I do the drills until they seem natural and I'm able to easily translate the stim to paper, however, once I move away from BDT and go to the advanced translation drills or just untimed sections it's hard for me to easily translate the stim and hold it in my head. Obviously, my assumption is that I still need to stick with BDT but I've been doing them for a long time and I wanted to see if you faced the same thing and had any tips?

Thanks in advance!

.