<p>
[quote]
was the old commonplace things --> valued antiques of today the experimental section?
[/quote]
Nope, it was an actual part of the test.</p>
<p>thequestionmark:</p>
<p>I do believe the question referred to the specific sentence in which she talked about not being able to pronounce the name. Even if it did refer to the beginning of the passage, she talked about how she used to be in love with dinosaurs before losing interest. Now science had revised itself so much that it was almost unrecognizable.</p>
<p>I don't think she couldn't understand what she already understood before because museums had an ineffective delivery mechanism.</p>
<p>
[quote]
indian guy one:</p>
<p>after he explained black, brown, white, muslim, hindu, christian etc there was a sentence about him creating all of this in his mind. </p>
<p>?:
introduce new topic
expand on previous statements
etc etc
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Okay I said preface a later claim (can't remember the right wording)
heres why...</p>
<p>I considered the expansion answer, but the reason why I chose it is because it doesn't add anything substantial to the meaning of the earlier sentence, the statement he makes is obvious and not really essential when just looking at the black,white,indian etc sentence.</p>
<p>after his lists all the people, diversity, blah, the sentence that comes after that emphasizes the fact that they are personal and revelent to HIM, highlighting that they are creations of his mind and interpretations, etc</p>
<p>I think this introduced the claim that came in the paragraph that came after that, in which he describes how other people react to his characters, because they don't have the same mind.</p>
<p>The sentence in question worked as a transition/introduction between the two because it shifted away from merely describing the characters and instead explained their significance in the overall context of the essay.</p>
<p>....does that make any sense at all ??? lol</p>
<p>for the image of the scientific community as error-free, number-crunchers or w/e
the first 3 were just not right, i dont even remember them
D was cunningly fraudulent
E was ultimately problematic</p>
<p>i picked ultimately problematic</p>
<p>but there was a slight urge to pick another answer</p>
<p>Um, for that one question in the dinosaurs dual passage, i think it was the last question: Said something about like what is common in both the passages? I think I put that they both use questionable uses of science to please the public? Idk that one. Anybody?</p>
<p>would you guys say ultimately problematic??</p>
<p>Dinosaurs (100%) not experimental.</p>
<p>bsbd - I'm fairly certain that was the first question, if not second question for that passage (the questions are usually in order of where they appear in the text). I read the line numbers pretty carefully before putting down any response.</p>
<p>I would organize the overall passage - passage 2 like this</p>
<ol>
<li>As kids, she loved dinosarus (admiration)</li>
<li>Then it became meaningless memorization (dislike)</li>
<li>She came back, and the name of her favorite dinosaur was changed (to show how science is progressive, not that she was confused).
Passage 2</li>
<li>Museums should be presented with background</li>
<li>Specific insight of a curator</li>
<li>Should the public be allowed to see etc.</li>
</ol>
<p>And while were on the question, did anyone else put that the general public lacked an udnerstanding of science?</p>
<p>And for "recieved" did anyone else say it most closely meant "understood"?</p>
<p>i said ultimately problematic as well.</p>
<p>i said the provisional nature of science... or something like that</p>
<p>I didn't say lacked a general understanding, but i forgot what else was there.</p>
<p>I put understood too though.</p>
<p>for the question that talked about how the characters all came from the writer's mind - i said expanded on a previous point because the sentence about diversity said all the dogs, hindus, christians were HIM. the next sentence, the one the question was about, went on to say that they were all him because they were all commonly from his mind, and that they were a part of him...</p>
<p>
[quote]
3. She came back, and the name of her favorite dinosaur was changed (to show how science is progressive, not that she was confused).
[/quote]
Wait, wait, wait, I thought that showed how little she cared about it.</p>
<p>i thought it was bewilderment. whichever was the answer after the one about 'contempt for scientific classification' which was definitely wrong</p>
<ol>
<li>As kids, she loved dinosarus (admiration)</li>
</ol>
<p>They were strong strong strong, blah blah, everything we were not. I feel more contempt than admiration.</p>
<p>For what was common in both, wasn't it that they both acknowledged museums showed scientific info was provisional or something like that?</p>
<p>I had ultimately problematic and understood, but i don't think I had lack of understanding.</p>
<p>"Um, for that one question in the dinosaurs dual passage, i think it was the last question: Said something about like what is common in both the passages? I think I put that they both use questionable uses of science to please the public? Idk that one. Anybody?"</p>
<p>Anybody really fast? Need to go somewhere, and don't want this test on my mind lol.</p>
<p>Jan, it showed how much things had changed since her absence. </p>
<p>Either way, no such question regarding that was posed...</p>