Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
CrispyCritter
About
- Username
- CrispyCritter
- Joined
- Visits
- 836
- Last Active
- Roles
- Member
Comments
-
@"surfy surf" said: That's so awesome you truly self-studied! Did you have a lot of extracurriculars on your resume like school clubs/volunteer work/internships or is your resume mostly work experience? My resume was about equally balanc…
-
@demiiisodaaa said: I also don't have connections to the legal community. Having said that, I'm wondering if you were able to have someone read over your personal statement and give you advice. I am assuming that you didn't spend money on cons…
-
@"surfy surf" said: How long did you study? Did you work full or part time while studying? How many times did you take the LSAT? When did you apply? Also, congrats on kicking ass at life. @Emily2122 said: Congrats on Harvard! What …
-
I think the significance of the employment gap between top schools and more middle tier schools is overstated. The reason for this is that it is not like we are seeing identical students go to Yale and Miami. If this were the case, then we could co…
-
(D) is correct b/c it shows a clear positive correlation between the establishment of mammals (which we are told follow colonization) and an increase in the rate of island plant extinction, exactly as the biologists theory would predict! (C) actual…
-
The argument is that the slogan presented is not informative or scientifically useful b/c it is a tautology. We can negate (D) and the argument still holds. As long as the scientific claim in question is not a tautology, it very well could use terms…
-
I disagree that the question you posed cannot be answered based on the passage. The author attacks Rohwer's conclusion that plumage variation in sparrows supports the SSH b/c it cannot does not explain status variation among Individuals, saying it t…
-
The problem with (E) is that the argument goes beyond saying it is likely that the tourist industry would never knowingly damage the environment: it outright says they would NEVER do it, so the language used in (E) does not match the stimulus
-
Yes, you are right. The argument is discussing ratios rather than a set number of planets. The flaw is that there is no justification for presuming that 1/9th of planets in other solar systems will have life, because other solar systems might be not…