I feel like this kind of thinking is why some people say lawyers are unfun to be around lol

Any sane human not taking the LSAT would intuitively go with B, as it makes the most practical sense if it were true.

But, in order to succeed on LSAT, you gotta put on your snarky semantics analyzing hat.

And as JY rightfully points out, offset =/= cause reduction.

But beyond that, leave it to the lawyers to argue semantics for the definition of "urban pollution" lmfao.

I see it... but... what the was that lol

For the record on why E doesnt work, the argument form requires a specific relationship between items (X ) and (Y)

Answer E starts off with a conclusion regarding adults reading less (X) and the existence of many other things to do (Y).

But then, the premise goes and talks about how the more time adults spend on other things, the less they read. BUT THIS IS NOT THE SAME THING as (Y).

In order for answer choice E to be correct, the premises that follow would have to give you a correlation between the existence of... more things to do, and idk a tendency for adults to stop reading as much.

One reason why the later practice test LR's mess with your head is for questions like these. The "IF" that appears in sentence 2 is not a conditional statement! It's poor english that makes me question how we manage to decode such sentences in everyday life, but if you take a step back, say the sentence in your head, you'll know that the intended meaning of sentence 2 is that "accepted theories say the best explanation for the phenomenon is that the ring is 49km from the black hole".

i know this dude is probably done with his lsat journey but yeah, this is absolutely necessary.

I was stuck b/c it all seemed conditional to me, until i realized that the question was already telling u that the ring had 49k

I'd like to point out that JY's explanation for D is a little bit sus.

I think the main reason D is eliminated is because of the inclusion of the word "rapidly".

If the answer were to simply be that fish did not recover from physiological changes that resulted from the hormonal imbalance, this could be a perfectly valid reason why they have reproductive abnormalities.

Inclusion of the word rapidly completely changes the meaning of the answer choice, from whether or not the event happens to whether or not the event happened "rapidly". Who cares if it didn't happen rapidly? If they eventually recovered, it wont matter.

Question tests if you're a speed reader. Guess I'm a speed reader.

Sadge

Yup. No where in the stimulus does it connect partial healing to specifically brain hemoraging and drying blood.

Sure the crack could have caused a vein rupture, and left blood to dry and then it could have partially healed before he died.

But it could very well be the case that theres partial healing of the fracture and then no vein rupture ever occured. no bleeding occured.

The only thing that it can really show... is that Mozart was alive when the crack was formed.

i mean yeah you can do that. You would get the following diagram:

(ULB->D)

Therefore, /exist.

So the missing link would be (ULB->D) -> /exist

Contrapose that, you get exist -> /(ULB ->D)

and /(ULB ->D) can be interpreted as ULB ->still exist, which is exactly answer choice A

You're right. Answer choice D would be a correct answer if not for the presence of "sometimes".

Without the sometimes, you would have

Serious threat -> Moderates put aside dif.

Contrapose that, /put aside dif -> /serious threat.

And theres a firm train of logic.

Unfortunately, sometimes is in the answer, and since the conclusion reached is a firm one, answer D will not suffice.

The conclusion reached is a firm one. Answers involving sometimes, and maybe

This is a good way to save time.

Damn they really did me like that.

We were never told in the question whether or not forwarding Sara's number is wrong. What if Sara is a domestic terrorist? Would it still be laudible to help her? (yes)

This is why B is irrelevant (we cant judge laudability because we were never told whether or not the action of passing on sara's number is "wrong")

Same reason why AC (C) is also irrelevant. It gives us an extra conclusion (it's not wrong to give sara's number off) which is never mentioned in the premise.

Such a lame question. But it's right to catch you. As future lawyers who are expected to question every detail, we'd all get fired if we mistakenly assumed flash pastuerization and intensive pasteurization to be the same thing.

interested, dm me

This is indeed a ruse. And I chose A.

I've been gotted once again.

tsm! TSM! TSM!

yeh the "example" instantly led me to B and, in the struggle to save as much time as possible, I read past the word "tone"

#help

For Question 6, I crossed out answer E because it thought it was a typical LSAT trap question.

Just because the New Urbanist neighborhood requires community venues within walking distance of houses, doesnt mean you need more community venues to serve the houses. Cant you just move the houses to fit more of them within walking distance of the venues?

Cant you, say... stack the houses vertically? or idk whatever Tetris them, squish them all up MC Escher style. Unironically, what if you have like houses built ontop of eachother by some magic construction material in the future.... these will be communities with all the requirements set out by those new urbanists no? And this is all done without increasing the per capita grocery stores?

Also, I'm not doing this b/c i disagree with the answer (actually well now that I think about it... with my current mindset i kinda do), I'm doing this because JY advocates this kind of thinking regarding trap answers. How do I stop myself from making this mistake?

To add to what Jy says about Q1 answer C being tempting, the answer follows the typical sentence structure of what a summarizing sentence would sound like just to fk with you.

"Despite X , insert outcome here". However, the outcome that was actually in the answer C is so narrow, it's not representative of the whole passage.

Also for Q1 answer C, no where in the passage does it mention the "EQUIPMENT" used being replicated. Just the production processes (techniques).

I think it's good to be able to eliminate answers based on these tiny mistakes.

Man the "passage suggests" and "most likely" is such a cop out from the writers.

I'm amazed that so many test takers got this question correct. It takes so much mental gymnastics to come to D.

But then again, nothing else was remotely referred to in the passage, so I'm assuming that most takers just selected D and moved on, potentially taking the L with a shady answer choice.

thanks for the tip! will try on my next rc and hopefully it works.

ever since i started speed reading to not go overtime when hit with a hard passage, ive been missing mainpoint questions more often.

If anyone is confused, review the main point and conclusion section of the course.

Should be a freebie and a time saver once the concept clicks.