my thoughts exactly, if it had used the phrasing "prevent the rise" or "impact" this would be way easier

(one might almost say obvious) is such a mean addition

Am i crazy for thinking that C is comparing bacteria without phenazines in optimal conditions with bacteria containing phenazines in sub-optimal conditions. Like "look, it requires these shitty bacteria to be literally buried in nutrients to even match the growth rate of those with the phezanines

There is nothing to suggest that the comparison group is subjected to the same conditions,

this may be super duper late but negation is a really useful tool, imagine if the techniques were not in use EVER, that would collapse the argument completely, meanwhile if this is common knowledge it would help give very strong support for it. This is essentially whats reccomended for more difficult questions

ngl if i saw this on the actual test i would have a hard time not laughing

i thought that if the Cro-Magnons followed their prey as they moved, that meant that the gazelles couldn't have been present in the area year-round. I understand in hindsight that the language isnt very strong but I cannot see how C is correct. There is no causal mechanism presented for how the archeologists discovery could be interpreted as something other than them being hunted year round?

#help thing that tripped me up is that answer B essentially ignores the author's argument. i know there are traps that the LSAT doesnt use, would this be one of them? In other words should I dial back my cautiousness/improve the skills needed for logic here or just rule out by default any hesitancy about an answer being irrelevant?

the thig that did it for me is that for A to be correct you'd have to assume. that people that thought medieval glass flowed down did so because they even knew what chrystalline structure meant, and obviously because these people are stupid they wouldnt. Like a kid who thought that wouldnt be like "oh this clearly happened because of the chrystalline structure of the glass"

Vines + shallow dip is unbeatable

shallow dip prevents me from overthinking the answer and second guessing myself

kazakhstan mentioned 🇰🇿🇰🇿🇰🇿🇰🇿🇰🇿

"Streets ahead" ahh answer

"it is false that..." is so fucking helpful holy shitttt

@jwmiller238 commenting to save this for later

HELP

i just cannot imagine how ruling out the possibility of bringing teachers in is REQUIRED. i understand how leaving the shortage unadressed is the issue with all other answers but i genuinley do not understand how the correct answer in an NC question is something defined so narrowly.

Can the shortage not be fixed by training the underqualified teachers to be better teachers? What about the opposite of he main point of E, where a certain number of students move out of the region to bring class sizes back down? All of these immediatley came to mind when i was looking at E and made me think "JY would tear me a new one if i selected it", even if the rest of the options looked funky.

I want to be clear that this isnt regular whining about "oh i didnt get this one correct this is clearly some bullshit and actually LSAC is wrong", I am genuineley looking for an answer.

smuggled in a gigantic assumption because that is not how any of this works in real life, which royally screwed me

after getting violated by the last question and having to take a break to cool off i refuse to believe this is also a 4/5

POE working oike a charm because trying to apply the rest makes me feel like im having a stroke

throwing us into the deep end huh?

person who wrote the correct answer for this one:

ngl the logic for strengthens and weakens is so intuitive to me that i just applied it to this question with little to no trouble

MOREOVER, D also does the oldest trick in the book, by commenting on the conclusion rather than the argument itself. JY mentions that E focuses on the premises in the argument (the analogy) rather than how the conclusion is wrong.

i really like the way this was snuck into the RRE module because i was really strugging with MSS questions before and now boom! Tested my underlying logic without even realizing and now both make so much more sense

This one was fun in a very silly way