<p>I'll ask again and try to give more info </p>
<p>Mars passages</p>
<p>How would the speaker from passage 1 react to passage 2?
indifference, surprise, concurrence, and some others that I can't remember.</p>
<p>For the tv birthright one, I put more insight of the world or something.
There was also one answer choice about traveling the world, I thought he was being metaphorical >_<</p>
<p>complete agreement</p>
<p>does anyone remember the writing question (error ID ques.) that had something about not explaining something "thoroughly enough for the meticulous..." with the phrase "thoroughly enough" underlined? was thoroughly enough redundant/incorrect, or correct?</p>
<p>What was the hiking club one again?</p>
<p>use it as information because more carbonates supportes oceans more than just vapor</p>
<p>what did you guys put for the birthright one?</p>
<p>i think i put E for throughly enough-i think i just missed that then.</p>
<p>keep rolling I said Not carefully watching was an error and it said meticulously prepared as it was suppose to be on the test, error was that it should be supposed</p>
<p>@neot: agreed for the birthright one. but what viewpoint one are you talking about? what was the passage subject?</p>
<p>yeah birthright..what was the answer?</p>
<p>@ concept- i put surprised. I was debating between that and the grudging acceptance(or something).
@ 12love- i don't think people nowadays have money (at least not mentioned in the passage). </p>
<p>i think by having tv, people are more worldly or something.</p>
<p>"suppose to be" is wrong.</p>
<p>no that put that as my answer for birthright</p>
<p>anyone know the answer</p>
<p>i put something like they are born with a worldwide perspective</p>
<p>do you guys remember an answer that was</p>
<p>"to give examples of a certain viewpoint"</p>
<p>and throughly enough that might actually not be redudant because enough is telling how throughly</p>
<p>the birthright one had something to do with opportunity</p>
<p>the hiking club one was a logic question. it involved if people have to be in outdoors club to be in hiking club. something like that.</p>
<p>fluffy: did you also mark not carefully watching because the second clause's subject was time rather than the teacher so it made it look like time wasn't carefully watching</p>
<p>neo: I think i chose the one with inheritance something</p>
<p>no i dont think it was opportunity because the opportunity was talking about in comparision to people today when the tv birthright was talkinga b out in comparision to the people in 16th century, that people now have more worldwide view.</p>
<p>How can you determine whether or not Sally is in club b, if she is not in club a?</p>
<p>"If someone is not in club a, then he or she is not in club b"</p>
<p>You can determine that Sally (or w/e) was not in either club from that answer.</p>
<p>@fluffy - affluence doesn't have to mean having an abundance of money.. it could be an abundance of material goods</p>
<p>strangeindianfoo - about the worldly sophistication?</p>
<p>I missed that one: I put indifferent.</p>
<p>As for the birthright: it was more like "they have ability to do (insert something that has to do with having access)"</p>
<p>hiking club - i put if one is not in the outdoors club then he is not in the hiking club</p>
<p>What did you guys get for the one where it was like "If x -5 = 2, then what is 3x - 5?"?</p>