I think we can reasonably say that you had an off day my friend. Your reasoning ability probably didn't get worse, you just had an off day/weren't at your best.
An analogy that I tell myself in these situations might useful. Do you by ...
@Isabella Yes.. noticed many MSS.. heavy on correlation/causation flaws.. u notice? hopefully it wasnt just me hahaha... I think there were a total of like 2 parellel and one main point. besides that. It was tough. flaw questions were also heavy
@karina.shaw said:
Rosenberg cannot evaluate any introductory textbook until Juarez has evaluated that textbook? I would have guessed it would have been "until" so group three, so you negate sufficient so it would be R (intro book)--> J (intro ...
I have viewed quite a number of these and I recommend every single one I have watched so far but in my opinion THE most important one is the Skip It! webinar. It is vital.
Hi @strasvery !
D) "It takes for granted that the higher sales of established products are due to effective advertising"
E) "it confuses a condition necessary for increasing product sales with a condition that will ensure increased sales" < ...
Yeah, 9 is a MBT meaning that in all worlds there will be something that given our initial conditions and the specifications of the question: will hold. The trickiest things to eliminate in MBT questions in the games are CBTs that have popped up in ...
I just got an email from Barry University School of Law with the subject line, "LSAT score next week, apply today". I just read the "LSAT score..." part and got goosebumps.
I hope you do not fall into a trap I fell into last Fall:) I rushed through the curriculum because I had already studied Kaplan and Powerscore books. BIG mistake at least for me thinking that I had a thorough knowledge of the concepts. Took and wasted a ...
Here is my analysis:
this is the perfect nec assumption question if you diagram it. stick close to the stimulus and you will clearly see why the others are wrong and why a is right.
@westcoastbestcoast said:
Could you explain why "for the next year" idiomatically means that the increase in antibodies will happen starting from the current year up until the next?
I think that next "year" is what has you confused. ...