<p>i wrote undesirable, not inevitable. o.o because it’s saying that the situation could happen, but it’s not saying for sure that it’s definitely going to happen.</p>
<ol>
<li>Last part of passage 2 - suggesting alternatives.
Anyone know the question for it?</li>
</ol>
<p>@ gadgor, kimbh777777 - I think the question asked about the types of people who could see through the trite plots of the movies. I remember three of the choices: “no one,” “no one except her,” and “discerning moviegoers.”</p>
<p>By the way - the Kael “guy” was a woman. 
Can’t say I blame you though. That excerpt bored me to tears.</p>
<p>it offends discerning moviegoers if you call them virtually noone.</p>
<p>What was the answer to the oscar wilde question?</p>
<p>@ antonioray</p>
<p>It seems it is more to disagreeing than to objectivity</p>
<p>biological conservation question deals with how conventional effort only focus of slowing down extinction. and answer was something like trying to cope with problem with out actually fixing it. </p>
<p>I think that works pretty well.</p>
<p>I got objectivity.</p>
<p>i think the author said it will happen and ppl need to take some disadvantages for greater benefits. </p>
<p>this is nervebreaking. wonder how the curve is gonna be like!</p>
<p>it’s not objectivity. I don’t think anything about objectiveness was mentioned in the passage, and it was a bit extreme.</p>
<p>@RADtomato</p>
<p>i put the artistic biography with factual errors
analogous to an artful musical performance with less-than-perfect technique</p>
<p>whoops, read subsequent post</p>
<p>The answer containing the word “comparison” was left out of the consolidated list.</p>
<p>
Because it’s not consolidated. The answer is indeed.</p>
<p>on the test, the answer choice did not say that “artful” biography w/ factual errors, right?
was it interesting instead?? Just wondering if it explicitly said artful how i could have missed it… i’d feel very dumb.</p>
<p>Also we need to add that “distinct” most nearly mean different.</p>
<p>I have something to say on the one about whether or not the trojan war actually happened: isn’t saying probably because there’s no evidence to the contrary just wrong logically? I mean how is that any different than saying there’s probably a giant spaghetti monster because we can’t disprove it? At what point do we throw out the passage and just use logic? The SAT does test logic after all (at least to an extent), I don’t think it would make an answer that goes against basic logic.</p>
<p>@boston I’m talking about an answer in the passage about jump ropes. Lol</p>
<p>Sentence Completion: The answer is benign (found in two lists).
can anyone please refresh my memory as to what the question was?</p>
<p>@hotpotato-- Effing agreed. I said that earlier in this thread. Complete logic fail… even though the logic fail is the correct answer.</p>
<p>@user-- Sawwwry. =/</p>
<p>on the list #1 and 9 are the same. they are both decorum</p>