<p>Anyways, this is the difference between -2 and -4 for me. In other words an 800 vs. a 770. And I know I aced both M and W so I’m hoping with all my might for a 2400…</p>
<p>^Prospectiveappli, its really easy to disprove qualify a claim. To Qualify means to limit, the passage does not limit the claim that people like blogging</p>
<p>Prospective, i am 100% sure it was explain a phenomenon.</p>
<p>I read it as the first sentence of the passage claimed that blogging didn’t have much worth to most people followed by a quotation that discussed the worth of blogging. Is there any validity there?</p>
<p>At any rate, if I’m wrong, as it appears to be, then I’m really, really pulling for “vehement”.</p>
<p>I remember putting hackneyed. Is that the one that had recondite as the answer?</p>
<p>Looking at
-3 or 4 CR
-1 W
-3 M… FFFFF… I got perfect on PSAT but have done not so well on sat.</p>
<p>nobody is 100% certain what an answer is haha. I put qualify a claim as well. While the consensus is usually correct, people arent perfect.</p>
<p>Oh trust me, I’m definitely hoping it’s vehement. The only reason I took the SAT again was to pull up my CR score.</p>
<p>Guess that was an exercise in futility :/</p>
<p>^^zippyzo: you scored a perfect 240 on the PSAT as a sophomore? :O</p>
<p>^I think he meant the Math portion of the PSAT.</p>
<p>The author asked a rhetorical question about why people would blog if it’s annoying. Then the quote said people blogged because they had something to say. The quote was “accounting for the phenomenon” of people undertaking an annoying task - it provided a reason for people to do something that can be frustrating.</p>
<p>I think the answer is caustic. Someone dug up the passage and there is nothing vehement (forceful or passionate) about the paragraph the question was referring to, but it was somewhat ironic and bitter. But we’ll know for sure in 2 weeks.</p>
<p>Yes, I was talking about the math section…</p>
<p>I also put vehement, and I’m pretty sure about it.</p>
<p>Yep, I don’t see any irony in the passage. The author says exactly what he intends. Irony is saying the opposite of what you are insinuating, a rhetorical device unapparent in the passage.</p>
<p>
This is irony. Irony juxtaposes what people think is true with what is actually true in order to emphasize the difference - in this case, that people think coal is the cleaner and safer source of energy, when it really isn’t.</p>
<p>I doubt that is the extent that College Board expected people to go (that’s an inference, I admit), but phrases like “The consequences aren’t pretty,” “On top of of that,” and “Believe it or not,” are all more bitterly (because they are demonstrating a negative opinion) witty than forcefully passionate (which they aren’t at all). </p>
<p>This question was an unfortunate coincidence of people not knowing what vehemence and irony are. There is absolutely nothing forceful or passionate about the passage, and there is irony.</p>
<p>Hey did anyone get a passage with 12 vocab questions…was that experimental???</p>
<p>^^^^ experimental.</p>
<p>also, does anyone know approximately what a -4 to a -6 will end up being?</p>
<p>mid 700s ^</p>
<p>Wait… someone actually found the passage? Can someone please link me to it?</p>
<p>Can anyone please answer my question?</p>
<p>[Wired</a> 13.02: Nuclear Now!](<a href=“http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.02/nuclear.html]Wired”>http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/13.02/nuclear.html)</p>
<p>The caustic/vehement tone question referred to the 3rd paragraph.</p>
<p>Now I feel like the answer is Caustic, even though I put vehement.</p>
<p>It’s vehement. Caustic just doesn’t fit.</p>