For question 9, I felt like scorn was just too strong of a word. Aside from calling them Barbarians what did he say to imply he felt scorn? Dissapointment seemed more appropriate, and I understand dissapointment means he had some expectation of them but couldnt it be inferred that Matthew expected them to just do better?

#help (Added by Admin)

This is one of those questions where real life experience can actually hurt you. Im a journalism major and had to interview a newspaper editor last semester. I chose E because less reporters = more work per reporter = sloppier work = more mistakes. Silly me.

You gotta love how the LSAT makes you prep in one way, but that very same thought process will screw you over with another answer. I picked C for question 4 because I didn't consider "lack of evidence" to be evidence. Why? Because that is literally an argument flaw in logical reasoning.

I didnt pick A because it seemed more like a necessary assumption than a strengthening. I have to remember it doesnt have to make the argument valid or make it superman strong, just a little bit stronger is all that is needed.

I got this question wrong and its because I brought personal experience into it. I grow peppers to make hot sauce, and peppers became hot as a defense system, yet we still eat them. Which made B irrelevant to me. Dumb mistake.

I got 14 wrong because I thought A said "regionally oriented schools have been equally deficient in teaching statute law". I need to read a lot slower.

The way this question was worded, when they started mentioning the numbers of otters, was really hard for me to understand. I hate when they make things purposely difficult to read.

I got this one wrong and its because B is literally a flaw. Proving something right by saying you have no evidence against it is a flawed argument. But I failed to realize that im strengthening the argument, not validating it. So therefore it is perfectly suitable as a strengthening choice.

I still feel like A should be eliminated. If Yeung has a smaller percentage of voters elgible than Panitch, is it not a possibility that less of his voters were polled, as they only polled elgible voters, therefore making it seem like Panitch was sure to win? Is that not a possibility....

I didnt like JY's explanation of this answer choice. Im still confused as to how building a dam equates to some of the regions farmland being entirely under water, when its stated that the dam will reduce flooding. If it is going to reduce flooding, then how is any of the land going to be submerged because isnt that what flooding is basically? Maybe I dont understand how dams work, idk. But thats why I didnt pick C.

I almost chose E but the phrase "far greater" seemed too strong to me, so instead I chose A

Turning 30 this summer.

I almost picked answer A but realized, even though JY didn't state this, that A is already implied in the premise. If the classical account is confounded by new data then surely it must be inaccurate in some ways.

I did my lawgic a little different but got the same result.

MB→DP→/P→/S

therefore S→P→/DP→/MB

I missed this because i misread the question stem. read it again and figured it out in about 10 seconds uhhhh.

I read D as "Fatalities" not "Facilities" uhhhhh. Seemed too easy lol.

I chose B over D because they said global levels remained constant but in D they are saying levels are increasing in other places.

Why is this in the most strongly supported question sets? he even goes about the answer like it is a main point/conclusion problem? Was it to throw a curveball because this really threw me off.

#help (Added by Admin)