<p>Here is the excerpt for the inevitable/undesirable question:
<code>In the coming century, we will decide, by default or design, on the extent to which humanity tolerates other species and thus the future of biodiversity. The default scenario will surely include ever more landscapes dominated by pests and weeds, the global extinction of more large vertebrates, and a continuing struggle to slow the loss of biodiversity.</code></p>
<p>But if we sent Collegeboard letters showing them the ambiguity of that one probably/troy question…:D</p>
<p>Ahhh you’re probably right. They won’t change their answer for a few whiners. :(</p>
<p>I don’t remember any about a basset hound… not sure! But I’m almost positive Alice was experimental. She was in the same section as the two-passage football fandom one which was pretty hard to interpret. </p>
<p>The true ones were
Trojan
Jump ropes
Environment
(I know I am forgetting some, but I’m pretty sure those 3 were in 3 separate non-experiment sections)</p>
<p>I hope Alice was experimental! I’m screwed otherwise! That’d knock me down to a 740 or so before even getting into the other two!</p>
<p>this isn’t class where you can argue for points </p>
<p>^ if it was, you can bet I’d offer a pretty good argument, several paragraphs long, that NO ITS STIMULANT NOT ANTIDOTE. And on math, its 1/180 not 1/56. Sadly, I can’t.</p>
<p>You know I still don’t remember the wasted question… don’t remember anything about a spaceship.</p>
<p>
The irony here is too much to handle. You realize the same can be said about you, right?</p>
<p>For football, do you mean where p1 was a psychological article about the nature of sports fandom and p2 was a recount of a person talking about how being a Giants fan changed his life?</p>
<p>danggg my memory’s going, I was convinced that was on the practice test.</p>
<p>btw is there an essay discussion thread on this forum? (I’m new).</p>
<p>
This was experimental.</p>
<p>Which ambiguous troy one? Sorry, I haven’t read through the last few pages and I don’t really want to 
</p>
<p>Also, the vocab wasn’t hard, but I made some stupid mistakes. I over thought prolific as well, I think I got 2 other ones wrong too. For another I put “Diffident… Aversion towards” because diffident is nearly the same as self-effacing. I guess I didn’t think that one through all that well. I think I’ll be fine though… CR will definitely be my lowest score, but that’s nothing new. Plus, I did well on the last CR so I can superscore it if I really screwed up this time.</p>
<p>After rereading that portion of the passage, i dont’ see how inevitable can be the answer.</p>
<p>Any thoughts on a finalized grading scale?</p>
<p>Which ambiguous troy one? Sorry, I haven’t read through the last few pages and I don’t really want to </p>
<p>^ very last question. "From reading the passage would you say that the Troy War:
probably did happen because there is no evidence against it OR the other one is:
probably did not happen because there is no documentation that it did happen (or something to that rate)</p>
<p>Actually, does anyone remember exactly how the probably did not answer was worded? Because that might give us a hint. Now that I think about it, there might have been something in it that was a little weird, which was also why I leaned towards probably.</p>
<p>I’m not being pretentious at all. Hell, for all I know it could be inevitable. I’m just saying why I think its undesirable. It’s not a matter of reading the author’s mind, simply reading between the lines. Props to you if it inevitable, but be civil about it at least…</p>
<p>800
800
800
770</p>
<p>I /hope/ that’s it. Then I’ll be either 800 or 770 unless I really screwed up and forgot about it haha.</p>
<p>so archaeology/homer is settled in favor of homer, then.</p>
<p>Oh yeah, I put probably did happen because of the lack of evidence to the contrary. It was very ambiguous, but my reasoning was that the majority of the passage was talking about how people (philosopher’s name that I don’t want to butcher by trying to spell it) were trying to prove it without concrete evidence. All of the evidence offered was in favor that it existed, almost arguing for it, instead of questioning the plausibility.
But agreed, that question was horrible. Between 3 friends and I, there were 3 different arguments which each could provide valid arguments for.</p>
<p>@jerseykid55, i’m not sure, but i hope it’s not as harsh as the march '10 one (-1 =800, -2=780, -3=730)</p>
<p>i think they base their curves on how well people did on previous experimental sections, so it is pretty randomized and doesn’t depend on how hard the actual test was.</p>
<p>Props to you if it inevitable, but be civil about it at least…
^I second this.</p>
<p>& yeah archaeology/homer is for sure homer. A lot of people must have not seen how the sentence started which was like, “From Homer, Thucydides created the most plausible…” etc. I didn’t see it at first either, but when the rest of the sentence did not indicate homer or archaeology, I reread and saw the Homer part in the beginning.</p>
<p>Yeah, I didn’t catch that it was Homer until the last second. I had archaeology but I changed it to Homer. </p>
<p>At the start of that paragraph it says “Using Homer’s epic…” or something along those lines. I hadn’t picked up on that before, and was focused to much on reading the direct quote.</p>
<p>wait for the critic you said her writing style is colloquial? a qote was included that specificaly said that no human ever talked like that! and it was undesirable, i am almost positibe. is there anyone that has an argument against it?</p>
<p>And actually, the end of the preceding paragraph supported the homer answer 100%</p>