It suck because I knew D was wrong, I just couldn't catch why E was right. So I pick B for like no real reason...

I decided against C and went with D because C seemed to presume that positive change is sufficient in finding relief, when the stimulus just said it was necessary.

Why isn't the 1st sentence considered the main conclusion if the 2nd sentence supports it?

I didn't see the 2nd sentence as support for the 1st sentence. I'm wondering:

How is knowing how Billie Holiday uses her voice evidence for the fact that they use it "just as much" as horn players? How is how someone does something equivalent to how much that thing is done?

I'm a biologist, so I got this right. But how the heck was a normal person supposed to have that knowledge on genetics lol

The "always" in the stimulus' conclusion threw me off here.

The "most" in A made be cross it out because I was looking for "any" or "one". Tricky tricky LSAT!

I hate questions like this. Suspiciously a little too easy especially after Q10, makes me think I'm missing something :'(

My main confusion here was actually the stimulus. If it had said "...greater than that for similar sales at A comparable series." I would have picked (C), but I thought due to the way it was written it was talking about many other comparable concerts...

Oops

Also, for A (and similarly in B), for me, if they were easier to catch now, they were probably easier to catch 30 years ago also, so it wouldn't have accounted for a decrease in beak size. Smaller beak size, sure, but not a decrease.

This is a good questions because he makes a hypothesis and then tries to prove his hypothesis right away, which can throw you off of C if you're not careful.

I wanted to go with C but didn't because I thought it was a trap since I couldn't think of a specific example of how that would happen.

Now I'm genuinely curious lol

Like, could my culture affect how my schizophrenia manifests? Like if I was Malaysian it would have manifested visually but if I were American it would have manifested in an auditory manner? I understand if different cultures focus on different symptoms more, but the culture affecting how it manifests in the brain?

I don't understand by negating (A) would destroy the argument? Just because the coolest brown dwarf could have at some point be hot enough to destroy lithium, it doesn't necessarily mean that it was able to destroy its lithium "completely" or even "completely into helium"? For example, it could have been hot enough to burn lithium for like 0.01 second, burned like 1 molecule of lithium, and kept the rest of it's lithium.

Doesn't Venessa's rule contradict Jo's rule since "All programmers" would include even the most productive ones? I know I'm being nitpicky, but I'm really just wondering whether we are allowed to use Jo's exception because he speaks second, and therefore is thought of to be in dialogue with Venessa?

A is dumb. Most people that buy a hammer need a hammer. If they need a hammer, they'll check all the hammers in the store. The stuff near the entrance doesn't just disappear after 10 seconds. I get that we don't know which brand has lower quality and that's something we would have to assume. But you know how many assumptions I'd have to make before I not check a store I'm already in before I stop looking for something I'd want to buy? lol

The "less likely" threw me off here. Would the answer be wrong if they said "will not pursue" instead of "are less likely than others"?

I feel like by saying "less likely", it implies that some people still undergo personal change despite being "not dissatisfied"