<p>The fortuitous one, what’s the qn? What are other options?</p>
<p>Hey, another question left out!
What is the thing both passages AGREE?</p>
<p>ya i don’t remember the fortuitious one. anybody remember?
i think both pasages agree on the popuation migration or something like that. something about population changing.</p>
<p>Population location changes? I think it’s that one</p>
<p>I remember another quesion
“morning” sun, why quotation mark</p>
<p>here is what i remember from mine</p>
<p>wenner is against her theory of migration because it suggests that migration is INTENTIONAL - i’m pretty sure about this one, since he compared butterfly migration to human migration, and said that they’re not the same thing
wenner’s attitude is dismissive
open field = unobstructed
‘mapping out the course’ - painstaking nature of the endeavor
all encompassing skepticism for one of them, don’t remember the question
‘vanishing bearings’ - statistical data is flawed (not sure if that’s right, could have been the other wind one, but i feel since she said they were trying to fly against the wind, then that still suggests they don’t follow wind patterns…so statistical data made more sense)
if wenner criticizes the other person (cant remember her name…), then she would say the pattern was observational
following the ‘morning’ sun - in the perspective of the clock-body altered butterflies</p>
<p>Dual link</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/sat-preparation/1028081-nov-sat-international-wifes-aunts-passage.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/sat-preparation/1028081-nov-sat-international-wifes-aunts-passage.html</a></p>
<p>Listen, you, guys. Perhaps, my only and major problem in the SAT is the CR, but this passage was more than easy, even the one with the man talking about his visit to his consort’s grandmother and aunt was pretty ludicrous! </p>
<p>One more thing, Wenner said that the butterflies’ direction of flight was something innate, where they have no control over it and which contradicts Passage 1’s point of view. He also said they were omnipresent and not ONLY FOUND in the white mountains. He said that people thought so, because they never searched.</p>
<p>And, by the way W was soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo niceeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!
And, Math was easier than W.</p>
<p>Don’t take my word. Though I find the exam easy, I might have screwed up!!!</p>
<p>And, by the way, the experimental section is usually the most stupid section, where solving it is easier than spelling your own name!!!</p>
<p>I put fortuitous circumstances because since Wenner’s argument was that migration was NOT what the butterflies were doing (they were merely being blown away by wind by chance, not intent), some other factor was causing them to change location. Reiteration: they were CHANGING LOCATION, not MIGRATING. So, what caused their change of location? The southward wind, a fortuitous circumstance.<br>
“fortuitous: happening by accident or chance, rather by design”</p>
<p>You guys are getting the whole question wrong. The question asked: What does migration imply, according to Wenner’s theory?
He implies that migration is a conscious movement - deliberate action
I know he said the butterflies move by instinctive or fortuitous whatever
but the question is a trap!! The question is asking what he thinks solely about migration!!</p>
<p>^^this is what i thought hahaha</p>
<p>^ I thought the question was asking about what Wenner implied as the reason for the Monarch migration?</p>
<p>i put instinctive…</p>
<p>no that was the trap the question wasn’t asking THAT</p>
<p>what the question asked was: wenner disapproves with the other person’s theory of migration because it implies that migration occurs because of ___________
and then wenner’s own theory is that its all by chance and its not intentional at all
but the question was asking wat wenner disapproved about the other person’s theory, but what his own theory was :S
OH WELL, what’s done is done</p>
<p>^ could you rephrase that without the two buts, i didn’t get that</p>
<p>i was in a caffeine haze while i was doing the test, so i cant really rmb the questions lol :(</p>
<p>haha, sure</p>
<p>basically, i remember the question to be about why wenner didn’t agree with the other person’s theory of migration
some of the other CCers think its about wenner’s own theory</p>
<p>i read it as wenner’s own theory, but i’m going ahead to count that as a mistake on my part. thats -3 for CR already :(</p>
<p>was adaptive capacity, fortuitous circumstance and instinctive behaviour part of the same question?</p>
<p>Hey, another question
How will author of passage 1 reply to the criticism
“putting cart before horse” mentioned in passage 2?</p>
<p>I remember putting E, something about observational data? Though I did mark this as one to go back and check on!</p>
<p>@timmychoo</p>
<p>maybe you are the one who fell in the trap here.
It’s definitely not adaptive capacity so that leaves us with instinctive behaviour & fortuitous circumstance. Wenner went on to
say that birds do not migrate, the strong wind just forces them
to go in that direction. There is nothing
to do with instinct. The wind has caused the birds to migrate. And wenner believed that birds do not want to migrate, there is
no intent. </p>
<p>Fortuitous: Happening by chance; coming or occuring unexpectedly, or without any known cause; chance; as, the fortuitous concourse of atoms.
Happening independently of human will or means of foresight; resulting from unavoidable physical causes.</p>
<p>The circumstances (wind) made the butterflys migrate.</p>