This was a little tricky for, but I think I have it down now. The premise in our core essentially says that for every 100 pieces of clean luggage we send through the scanner, we will get 1 erroneous alert. (the scanner will alert us that there is an explosive, when in reality there isn't one). The a...

Can someone attempt another explanation with this one, I'm not seeing the connection from the above responses. I believe the core of the argument to be: Soc. Med more broadly accessible than Private + Countries w/social meds have lower infant mortality rates than do private --> So, Soc. Med more ...

Why are we so quick to dismiss A as out of scope here? One of the premises is that if the knives were not around, the deaths would not happen. A seems to COMPLETELY destroy this premise. "Knives not around? Fine people will use guns instead" I think the issue with A is not that it is out o...

How does this "overlook" the possibility that the universities/businesses could work togerther? It seems to consider this, then reject it.

"and no business or university wants to invest in a part of a network..."

"Often tested patterns of reasoning" is a very nice way of thinking about these questions!! If Manhattan were to come up with a supplemental LR guide with this info, I think it would have many fans. The current LR guide may already reference these, but I don't remember seeing much on this....

Could the issue (A) be that it is sufficient, but not necessary? Meaning that if A were true then our conclusion would hold, but we don't NEED it to hold for our conclusion to hold? This is the first thing that struck me as a red flag when reviewing If it's true that only the high quality day care ...

so (B) should say something like "...are more error prone in hot surroundings than the temp they are USED TO." I can't see why it would need to say "used to." As you pointed out, when the retina is hotter, there's more error. (B) says their bodies match surroundings. So, when su...

Could the issue (A) be that it is sufficient, but not necessary?

Meaning that if A were true then our conclusion would hold, but we don't NEED it to hold for our conclusion to hold?

This is the first thing that struck me as a red flag when reviewing

For assumption questions, we need to be extremely CRITICAL! What are we being asked to do? They want us to find the assumption that is required to substantiate the ARGUMENT (not the BACKGROUND INFO!!!) Ironically, I think most of us may have gotten this correct had we skipped the BI (background info...

Like the OP I too had this down to B and D, ultimately siding with B more so because I thought D was wrong than anything.

based on Noah's explanation, am I correct in saying that B is incorrect because there isn't ANY example provided at all? Rather just an explanation?

~HL>(some) PT we can infer that some who have part time jobs do not go home for lunch. "Some" statements are reversible. You should either put a double-headed arrow on your some statements or shouldn't put any arrow on them. That way you can read the "some statement in reverse ~HL...

My approach (helps that 18 was a similar question, no surprise I got them both wrong): what are the 2 flaws of the stimulus: 1. Because D's test is MORE difficult than C's the test MUST be difficult. (Well not really, what if my chem test is more difficult than my calc test, but couldnt they both st...

Just adding my 2 cents here. this was already well discussed it seems, but for my own sake, here's an explanation of why (D) is incorrect. 1. (D) as someone has said is not necessary to substantiate our core. We are told that "furthermore extremists have only won when mods were fighting each ot...

I understand the idea of motion being directly proportional, but what's frustrating to me is that the passage never says that the MORE molecular motion we have, the MORE prone to errors. Rather it just says normal molecular motion is a contributing factor to errors. I guess my question is why isn't ...

I've seen a few good reasons why D is wrong, just wanted to add one more quickly. Our entire stimulus revolves around a specific case, and we only know our conclusion to be true for that particular case. The case we are given is "When a mother is the primary caregiver of her newborn" One o...

Is the key to this question the idea that "such taxation forces the laborer to work, IN PART , for another's purpose." Thus establishing a difference between two uses of "forced to work for another's purpose?" I'm assuming this is due to the fact that individuals that pay taxes b...

Great explanation, but not a fan of this question. The wording is very misleading. I know that is the goal of the test writers, but, this use of the word "eliminate" is a completely different type of trickery .

Glad I stumbled across it before the test.

I think I have this down: (A) says treats a correlation within individual categories as thereby holding across (other?) categories as well. The first part, the correlation within individual categories, is: 1. the longer pretzels in contact with teeth, the better chance of producing cavities. And... ...

I came here because I was looking for an explanation as to why (B) was correct, and after reading all the explanations, still couldn't figure it out (I selected (E) as correct). After reading (B) again, I think the reason it is correct is very simple: (B) says E. Geometry is " uniquely capable....

Does this question imply that "paying off loans at an accelerated rate" is essentially another way of saving? It seems to me that the correct answer should have someting to do with those who still have jobs are not saving elsewhere. If paying off loans = savings then this makes sense. If n...