<p>yeah i had writing experimental.
and it was really weird cz the first one i took was pretty hard…
and moreso, the questions were just wayy too long. and then i had another righting section liek right after…which was really easy…so i hope it’s the first one!!
:)</p>
<p>about the “plants eat rocks”.</p>
<p>I think it was "shocking truth was proved by evidence " because after that, the author discussed the reasons for his statement. If it was an obvious information and just a way to introduce another topic, sure the author would not have to spend a whole paragraph talking about why he was saying that? </p>
<p>seems to make sense to me</p>
<p>I had cr experimental!!!damn!</p>
<p>@Janny </p>
<p>You mean “Plants eat rocks”? Although there is some truth behind this statement, it serves more as an “unconventional way” than a “shocking truth.”</p>
<p>@ carson : the author was talking to his friend . I remember his sayings was sth like “don’t you realize that plants eat rocks?” . Therefore I suppose it was a truth that the friend had never considered before that –> “shocking truth” to him. Moreover, “unconventional way to introduce another topic” seems to be not fit because after that, the author did not discuss another topic. He only talked about why rocks were essensial to plants.</p>
<p>Just my opinion. It was really a tricky one =.=</p>
<p>As of the “plants eat rocks”, we have come to an impasse already. I’m with Carson, in that with was an unconventional way while Janny seems to think it was a shocking revelation – although your last two sentences don’t make much sense. We’ll just have to wait and see for this one.</p>
<p>How about we discuss the abstract question on voters? Was it a tentative hypothesis or an artificial construct?</p>
<p>Oh and guys: it seems that College Board got lazy and gave us the domestic version of March 2008 CR. Here’s the thread: <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/sat-preparation/468060-official-march-2008-sat-cr-discussion-28.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/sat-preparation/468060-official-march-2008-sat-cr-discussion-28.html</a></p>
<p>Dammit, if I had only solved this before Saturday…</p>
<p>i don’t remember the question well =.= can u specify the question , djp?</p>
<p>@djp2012</p>
<p>Wow… they got REALLY lazy.</p>
<p>oh s***. They charged us $75 and even don’t bother to think of a new test for us???</p>
<p>what the hell is it! I feel like being cheated!</p>
<p>And djp, plz don’t wish sth like that. If you, and other pp solve that before Sat, is it unfair to the many ones who know nothing about it ?</p>
<p>@carsonpwns
Yeah I know… The testing service freaks are such tools.
Everyone on the domestic forum agrees with “unconventional way” so I’m happy 
high five~</p>
<p>@janny
Uh, hmmm, mmmm, no thanks.</p>
<p>Hey, for the passage about the Mother’s Box,</p>
<p>“- direct narrative”</p>
<p>Was the question about why did the daughter use the first person, and is the answer to give a direct commentary?</p>
<p>oh, holy crap… I wish I was here in 2008 -.-</p>
<p>btw, the native seemed didnt figure out the same disputes we are having now…</p>
<p>IM SOOO SORRY GUYS
But my question is
Which writing section is experimental ?
The one with the ‘markedly increase’ question, or the one without?
Sorry again!</p>
<p>@music the one without</p>
<p>Janny, I chose shocking way as well. I didn’t choose unconventional for the same reasons as you: the narrator didn’t seem to introduce a different topic afterward, and the fact that rocks dissolve <em>would</em> be a shocking truth to Charlie, only further evidenced by the narrator’s assumption that Charlie would try to dispute it.</p>
<p>I also chose gross understatement for the question regarding the second author’s comment that “people were not philosophers”, because the author of passage 1 seemed to imply that voters exhibited a flippant behavior based and choose arbitrarily on the polls. </p>
<p>And I chose artificial construct because I think somewhere in the passage there was something about the self actually being part of the public or something like that. I am really not sure about this one, but in retrospect, I believe tentative hypothesis worked better.</p>
<p>For the math section, I just remembered one although I think this one was a very easy question.
Still…
There was one about a parallelogram in a coordinate plane and the answer was (10,4).</p>
<p>yah, (10,4) sounds right…</p>
<p>@carsonpwns: I picked direct commentary too! I was really confused between reveal the motivation of each person and direct commentary, but then thought it didn’t really reveal motivations of each of the character - just the author. Not sure though, I always sucked at CR.</p>
<p>Vitamin C question</p>
<p>excessive use was prohibited by doctor 'cos cancer was unaffected
or cancer was sensetive to
Vitamin C?</p>
<p>Also…math one about three halves of something? do you remember that?</p>