So this was a tough question because it is a MSS (Most Strongly Supported) question, but I was not able to really think of how the one right answer (C) must be true based on the information provided. Some tutors think that this question ...
So on this question I was stuck between C and D (because each of these answer choices only talked about one of the two things: beetles or plants, but not how they compared to one another). However, the right answer happened to be E ( ...
So I got this question wrong because I chose D, and I thought that D was right because, from lines 1-7, I thought that it was heavily implying (if not outright asserting) that researchers previously emphasized that gonadal hormones' ...
So the correct answer here was B. According to JY, B is right because the argument requires an assumption: that in order for direct mail advertising to not be bad for the environment, it needs to replace those who would normally buy ...
Can I infer some are -P from the statement that most people are P? I think saying most people are mortal does not mean some people are immortal, but the correct AC of this question seems to suggest the otherwise. Is this a bad LR question?
With question 14, after I fulfill the condition of T testing G on the second day, why can't T test H on the second day as well? The rules tell us I can't have both Ts testing G (done). It doesn't say anything about a rider not testing on the 2nd day twice ...
The question stem for this question asks us to pick an answer choice that shows that the explanation we were given in the stimulus is only a "partial one." I was doing this question as part of my weakening problem set. I read through the stimulus and was ...
I really think E is the answer. But B turned out to be the correct one. Can someone please elaborate on why B would be the correct one and not E? thanks in advance
Gosh, this question was hard.
Can anyone explain why B is not a weakener?
I thought B weakened because, if most people in the painting did resemble real people from history, then if we follow the author's logic, this would mean that any of ...
Congenial guests and plentiful supply (food and drinks) will ensure a successful dinner party. Sylvia has prepared more than enough to eat and drink and her guests are congenial therefore her party is certain to be a success.
I understand the conclusion is saying that the airlines should remove seats that impede the exit because many fatalities are due to the cabin design of the seats. Here is my issue, many = some.. so when I look at it this way maybe 1 collision is like this ...