Search found 101 matches


I got question 14 and 16 wrong.
About Q14, I don't understand why "ambivalence" is correct here. I chose E.
Could anyone explain?

by Spring2009

Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:01 pm
Forum: Reading Comprehension
Topic: I totally bombed this whole reading
Replies: 8
Views: 2414

Re: help!

kiennguyen wrote:i did 3 & 4 wrong!
someone clarify those for me please!
(4) In the passage, the author claims that the doctors make decisions for patients, hospitals, insurance companies. Therefore, it is possible that doctors will control medical costs.

by Spring2009

Mon Oct 26, 2009 8:04 am
Forum: Reading Comprehension
Topic: Health Care
Replies: 2
Views: 3996

In the first paragraph, it mentions: "While this program enabled many minority entrepreneurs to form new businesses, the results were disappointing , since managerial inexperience, unfavorable locations, and capital shortages led to high failure rates " Because the SBA program was expected...

by Spring2009

Thu Sep 24, 2009 9:12 pm
Forum: Reading Comprehension
Topic: 1000 RC Passage 12 #4
Replies: 3
Views: 1832

It can't be C because: "Moreover, the Puerto Rican twig species closely resembles the twig species of Cuba, Hispaniola, and Jamaica in morphology, habitat use , and behavior" This sentence states that the similar species in two ilands resemble in habitat use, while C says that they differ ...

by Spring2009

Thu Sep 24, 2009 8:49 pm
Forum: Reading Comprehension
Topic: tough CR! help me!
Replies: 4
Views: 2149

Let me present an analogy.. After I turned 10, I started playing hockey.. So can u say that playing hockey was implication of me turning 10?? I don't think this statement is an analogy. It's not an implication, but it isn't a support either. Can you say that "playing hockey" supported tha...

by Spring2009

Fri Sep 18, 2009 8:03 pm
Forum: Reading Comprehension
Topic: RC - Animal Treatment
Replies: 10
Views: 2109

How to attack a whole underlying sentence ?

All of us know that before picking up an answer choice, we need to find out the differences among the answer choices. With a whole underlying sentence, I usually have to read very carefully and slowly each choice to figure out the differences, and this takes me about 2-3 mins. Could anyone suggest a...

by Spring2009

Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:39 pm
Forum: Sentence Correction
Topic: How to attack a whole underlying sentence ?
Replies: 1
Views: 1149
by Spring2009

Thu Sep 03, 2009 8:17 pm
Forum: Critical Reasoning
Topic: mountain sickness
Replies: 9
Views: 2651

A is the OA. isn't the idiom "to allow for something", not "to allow something"? The OA is unbelievable. What is the source? A)2005 and then to stabilize at six billion cubic feet a day, which will allow such an extraction rate at least for "Which" can't modify "a...

by Spring2009

Thu Sep 03, 2009 7:16 pm
Forum: Sentence Correction
Topic: Natural gas
Replies: 11
Views: 6360
by Spring2009

Sun Aug 16, 2009 7:34 pm
Forum: Critical Reasoning
Topic: energy
Replies: 23
Views: 6904

B is reasonable, because the supernova actually did damage ozone layer but at a moderate rate that did not harm our ancestors, but since then natural events have continued to damage ozone layer more and more. This weakens the arguement that the chemicals don't harm human at all. However, I don't se...

by Spring2009

Sun Aug 16, 2009 7:27 pm
Forum: Critical Reasoning
Topic: LSAT CR 3
Replies: 13
Views: 2347
by Spring2009

Sun Aug 16, 2009 7:07 pm
Forum: Critical Reasoning
Topic: Orthodox medicine
Replies: 17
Views: 6107
by Spring2009

Sun Aug 16, 2009 7:01 pm
Forum: Critical Reasoning
Topic: Inflation rates
Replies: 10
Views: 1883

A is very clear! "A" says that the cost can minimize, and you know that when costs reduce, the profit will increase (if revenue is unchanged). This explains why the profits double.

by Spring2009

Sun Aug 16, 2009 6:53 pm
Forum: Critical Reasoning
Topic: Harvest
Replies: 13
Views: 3110

B is reasonable, because the supernova actually did damage ozone layer but at a moderate rate that did not harm our ancestors, but since then natural events have continued to damage ozone layer more and more. This weakens the arguement that the chemicals don't harm human at all. However, I don't see...

by Spring2009

Sun Aug 16, 2009 6:45 pm
Forum: Critical Reasoning
Topic: LSAT CR 3
Replies: 13
Views: 2347