PT91.S4.Q8 (P2) & Q22(P3)

Qiran_catran

For Q8, I have difficulty deciding between B and C. I have some disagreement with some words in both of B and C, which makes it even harder to pick.
Based on my notes, I wrote down the MP of Passage A as "Intro to market and advocate for its abilities to forecast and efficiency to learn."
Mp of Passage B as "against to think market as too different from other polls. Fallible."
However, it does not help much to answer Q8.

(B) what can be learn from studying the movement of stock markets?
(C) Can markets be used to elicit reliable information?

For B, I understand that both passages discuss markets in general instead of stock markets. However, we do know the authors of both passages are mainly concern about what the movement of markets represent. For author A, the movement of a market forecasts, learns from collective wisdom. For author B, the movement of a market, the movement represents the populace opinion of a certain time period. But the main problem remains that they are not talking about stock markets, but markets in general.
For C, the question is about markets in general, which is a correct description of both passages. And I am confident that author A agrees and mainly focuses on illustrating the fact that market can be use to elicit reliable information. However, I am not quite confident about what author B thinks. Author B says that market is more of a reflection of people's opinion of the time, which means that it can either be right or wrong. And she also says that market is fallible. But I would not say author B argues that markets can't be used to elicit reliable information? It is too strong for passage B in my opinion. But it did come out to be the correct answer choice. Please help me out with this.

For Q22, I was completely lost after finishing reading the answer choices. I was attracted to D. Please help me with E!

Thank you for reading my post and discuss the questions with me. These are the only two questions I got wrong in the section, so if you have any questions about the section, I am glad to help! Good luck!

emmorens

@Qiran_catran hey I know this is late but maybe it could help someone else!

I was confused about 22 as well...here's my take!

The question is asking us to strengthen the claim that the increasing number of species would probably increase the number needing protection.

On first glance I'm sort of wondering, why would they need protection?

A) I picked this one initially but now that I am looking at it again I don't think it does anything. I don't think we've yet clarified that these species are endangered? Or that an increasing number of species would be? So why would a difficulty in enacting international agreements for protecting these types of species strengthen the authors claim.

B - C) I really had no idea what either of these did, they just seemed sort of random.

D) Alright so if advanced in techniques like DNA-DNA hybrid probably FAVOUR the efforts of splitters, perhaps we have more species? But does this mean they will need protection? Not really sure.

E) Proponents of the phylogenetic species concept (aka the splitters) are less likely to contest an est. species classification (and what is the established species classification? Well according to P1 it's lumping), if none of the biological populations involved is endangered.

Alright so taking the contrapositive:
if splitters are more or equally likely to oppose lumping (the current practice), then SOME of the populations involved are endangered!

This is what made it click for me. I think the key issue is that we really didn't know if these species need protection...so if they increased, what would make it so that they do need protection? AC E tells us that at least some will be endangered.

Someone jump in if they think I've analyzed anything wrong!