would go for C. A)out of scope. we do not know how threshold can be lowered. B)contradicts the information in the passage D)out of scope. no mention about non-dietary modifications in the passage E)contradicts the information in the passage. below the threshold, serum cholesterol is proportional to ...

no, you cannot divide the sum of the means by 2 to get the overall average, as we do not know the proportion/weights of the sedans and the coupes. you could do that if you knew you had equal number of sedans and coupes

16) If the range is 0, then the SD must also be 0 => good as is

piyushdabomb, your dataset:{-7 1 4 7} has range 14 and not 0

if range =0, the highest and the lowest numbers are the same which implies all numbers in between are also the same in an ordered set. so SD has to be 0.

C is good.

"likely" is the keyword here. Choi just states a likelihood or a possibility/chance. Hart's argument gives actual data on people who have already earned their doctorate. Choi makes no claim on people who have already earned their doctorate. both their claims are hold.

would go with B. conclusion: all historical wrongs cannot be compensated for in monetary reparations. B directly weakens the above by saying: not all historical wrongs can be compensated, some however can be. A. present wrongs out of scope C. out of scope. talks about wrongs in general instead of hi...

would go with D, as the sweet scent of fresh milk would be distinguishable from smell from rotten milk, the new machine can be would then effectively sense this smell to differentiate between fresh and rotten milk.
the other choices are out of scope

would go with D. Antonio's position: will is useless as division of property as per intestacy laws not very different from division as per will. assumption: division of property is the ony purpose of a will Beatrice's position: division of property is not the only use of a will, it is also a documen...