I chose E and was very confident about it on both timed run and BR. My reasoning was, the first premise is talking about "legislation," and the conclusion is about a "trade agreement." I thought it was super vague whether a trade agreement should be ...
I've been using the negation test as I go through the answer choices. I've been able to pinpoint why E is correct and why most of the other answer choices are wrong, except for answer choice C. I don't understand what I'm missing, ...
I had a total deer in the headlights moment with this question. I just didn’t even know what to think after reading the stimulus aside from why noncompliance would have been ok at the local but not national level and the solution JY has seems to have come ...
How can we assume that answer choice B assumes an ice age period? I agree that: given we are in an ice age the concentration of oxygen 18 is increased but I switched my answer because that explicitness is not present and we know only in an ice age period ...
I don't get how this is the right answer. I'm aware the color red usually means stop and the color yellow usually means yield but why should I need to assume outside information like that to get this answer correct?
This Friday, we got the man, the myth, the legend, Daniel aka @canihazJD himself who's agreed to bestow his INFINITE LSAT wisdom exclusively to 7Sage community members.
Very interesting question. Chose C like a moron cuz I was thinking hmmm how would irritation in the lungs and pollen has anything to do with death? No way people die to pollen allergy?
AC A is the correct one. The fact that population ...
The explanatory video glosses over this very quickly. Why is it just assumed that H and M must not be connected? Does it have something to do with the HT not-block?
Hi, could someone please help explain what exactly does the stimulus here "for how many of the individuals can it be exactly determined **where his or her team places**" really ask?
I though it asked those individuals whose specific teams ...
Struggling with this one. The negation of E wrecks the argument and is what I picked, but I am having a really difficult time eliminating A. Any thoughts on how to justify getting rid of it? Thanks!
The question itself is rather easy - (D) is pretty clearly something the argument is assuming, and necessarily so. Negating it makes a mockery of the argument.
However, I did spend quite a bit of time on this one, because I've always ...
I have no idea what C is trying to say, and no clue how can C be the answer that provides an alternative explanation to why the scientists are discrediting Smith. Can someone give an explanation? Thanks
Context: Some researchers claim that people tend to gesture less when they articulate what would typically be regarded as abstract rather than physical concepts.
Can someone explain why B can't be a good answer? My logic was that everyone that reads the book agreeing that the incidents could happen, i.e. not implausible, doesn't mean that the story isn't implausible since they can well interpret it wrong.
< ...
My understanding is that in normal times, water vapor from ocean contains a heavier proportion of oxygen-18. However, if that water vapor is not retuning to the Ocean during ice ages, but getting trapped in glaciers, wouldn't that mean the ocean has _LESS_ ...
Hi everyone, wondering if i could get your help with Q23 "According to rational-choice theory, popular support"...
Would someone be able to help in explaining why D is wrong and A is right? I thought since D has "is never a complex phenomenon" ...
Can someone explain to me why Answer choice D is the best choice for PT 91 Logical Reasoning Question 17? Is it because Answer choice D is only meeting one objective whereas the answer choices are meeting more than one objective? Thank you.
My issue with this stimulus is about the term consent versus consult. If ANY of the members had said "No" to the release of this report, would that still mean the chairperson consulted them?
So I was utterly confused after reading the first sentence. I just didn't get how they were able to use the color of gazelle teeth to tell whether a group of humans were nomadic or not. I just don't understand how this "support" supports the conclusion ...