<p>Why is the skeptical the answer for the Chaplin question? I put sadness because he “lost faith in his dad and chaplin that day.” I thought it wasn’t skeptical because he couldn’t ignore the fact that his dad could be lying or that chaplin really filmed a scene that many times, so he knew one had to be true = not skeptical? idk.</p>
<p>@KBronx17</p>
<p>One last post before I fall asleep. For some reason I keep coming back here. Bah humBUG.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The etymology of the term “to hold court” suggests an air of regality. I do not think that regal was the answer choice. I believe, if anything, sinister fits it the best. Dark seemed to only serve as basic imagery while Gleaming (i know some misunderstood this term as staring intimidatingly) only means reflective or shimmering, also serving to aid basic imagery.</p>
<p>I keep coming back here with definitions. Hope they’re helping you guys.</p>
<p>he was skeptical because he thought that his dad may have been lying to him about Chaplin filming the same scene 132 times</p>
<p>i think it’s fairly obvious that sinister was the word that did NOT describe the chest. look:</p>
<p>vital: Of, relating to, or characteristic of life</p>
<p>to use that definition, I think the chest, particularly the contents inside, was vital</p>
<p>Skepticism fits the best. The author never stated anything about being sad.</p>
<p>And what was the SC with polar in it? The only thing that was polar that I can remember is “polemical” for a paragraph tone question.</p>
<p>So the answer can either be:</p>
<p>Regal - “Held court” In the past, a king or queen held court when they talked to the people who gave them advice – May still be the answer because the idiom also means To get a lot of attention from a group of people by talking in a way that is entertaining, especially on social occasions; The brass fixtures definitely do not make it regal
Sinister - This looks to be the best answer
Imposing - “Dark and gleaming […] tenaciously”
Vital - “There is everything in this trunk”
Familiar - “Still stands in the living room”</p>
<p>Anyone have a SC about stifling/covetous?</p>
<p>I just remembered, did anyone put fortuitous for one of the SC?</p>
<p>YES, I had fortuitous as well</p>
<p>Totally forgot about that one</p>
<p>Same, fortuitous was the answer to the being at the right place at the right time question.</p>
<p>Yeah fortuitous was one of them.</p>
<p>does anybody remember the question/answer choices for the fortuitous one?? i can’t remember if i chose that</p>
<p>Experimental, I didn’t have that.</p>
<p>beekeeper/emily/stamp girl were all experimental </p>
<p>I also had CR experimental it was about ecologists experimenting with fisheries in mexico.</p>
<p>@bruceparklee</p>
<p>I didn’t have that one… so is that section of yours the section that doesn’t count? Do you remember what section it was?</p>
<p>For questions I am unsure of, I write a X in the bubbles that may be the answer. For one of the questions the X would not erase fully and I realized that it was the wrong answer. The answer I selected had the bubble completely filled in and darkened. Should I be worrying about possible errors?</p>
<p>For the Chaplin question, why are people saying skeptical? Wouldn’t it have been outraged??</p>
<p>@gazoz, i put outraged as well. but for some oddball reason, i thought skeptical = cynical. but skeptical just simply means having doubts. thus, skeptical is the better answer.</p>
<p>for the electorate passage,</p>
<p>does anyone remember answer: to more rigorously analyze the possible disadvantages of other alternatives?</p>
<p>@satcrazyguy</p>
<p>I remember that answer and placed that as well. Essentially, the author of passage 1 was arguing that advocates of reform need to step back and provide a feasible alternative instead of just criticizing the current system. The authors believes that all systems have flaws, and so while the electoral college is flawed, it can’t be completely overturned without a less flawed alternative. The problem is that advocates of reform do not provide such alternatives. Therefore, they need to more rigourously analyze the alternatives that are available before they completely argue doing away with the electoral college.</p>
<p>can anyone sum up the four neatness questions?</p>
<p>I thought that the dinosaur skeleton was prototypical… and I was confident about it until lots of people seem to have a consensus on anomalous. (Anomalous: Deviating from what is standard, normal, or expected.) and the dinosaur’s skull was like many of the others… Any help?</p>