<p>no, because it talked about "what if the trajectory of the rocket depended on the mood of the astronauts?", or something like that. it was saying how odd it would be if science was more subjective. it was saying how staying subjective has benefits.</p>
<p>edit, i meant staying objective, not staying subjective.</p>
<p>what was that one about the boy who tried to climb the wall to find ghosts? The question asked to evaluate its significance. I was vacillating between "it represents his disdain for his outside world" and his "love of exploring" (something close to that). I think i picked his love of exploring.</p>
<p>btw... it was not "oracle" In the last sentence, the author clearly portrayed the fortuneteller as charlatans, quacks, because he said that if they were real, they would be making money in the stock market, not act as a phone fortuneteller.</p>
<p>
[quote]
what was that one about the boy who tried to climb the wall to find ghosts? The question asked to evaluate its significance. I was vacillating between "it represents his disdain for his outside world" and his "love of exploring" (something close to that). I think i picked his love of exploring.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>i think that was experimental?</p>
<p>"no, because it talked about "what if the trajectory of the rocket depended on the mood of the astronauts?", or something like that. it was saying how odd it would be if science was more subjective. it was saying how staying subjective has benefits.</p>
<p>edit, i meant staying objective, not staying subjective."</p>
<p>i was very unsure of my answer, but i eliminated yours based mostly on the fact that subjectivity and objectivity were nowhere mentioned in the rest of the piece. the surrounding evidence was strongly in support of combining elements of science into one purpose - in fact, the paragraph that sentence was in introduced that idea. regardless, i'm nut sure how to say you're directly wrong. thats definitely a way of looking at it, i just dont know if thats the point the author was getting at.</p>
<p>plus, it being dependent on the mood of the scientists doesnt necessarily make it subjective. if it were subjective, it would have had more to do with differing opinions on where the moon might be, not a correlation based on a subjective emotion like mood.</p>
<p>
[quote]
i was very unsure of my answer, but i eliminated yours based mostly on the fact that subjectivity and objectivity were nowhere mentioned in the rest of the piece.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>but thats what the whole passage is about. it constantly talks about how science is objective, and about how the scientist is depersonified as a result. it talks about how experiments are repeatable, and how it doesnt matter who did them originally, because they can just be done again. the guy who wrote it talks about how some japanese scientists solved a problem, and got the same answer as he did. he includes a quote from einstein saying that even if newton was never born, there would still be calculus, but if beethoven was never born, there wouldnt be ___(i cant remember) symphony. and do you remember the plum thing? he says that scientific truths are like plums, just waiting to be picked. if scientist x doesnt pick the plum (make the scientific discovery), then scientist y will. because science is objective. all of this stuff shows how the author feels that the arts are subjective, and the person who is doing the art matters, but that science is objective, the actual identity of the scientist who does it is irrelevant.</p>
<p>i disagree. nuff said. no way to tell who's right at this point.</p>
<p>okay. can you defend your answer, though? about each author contributing to something as a whole? if you can, i will add it to the answer list as a disputed answer.</p>
<p>of course i can.</p>
<p>without the specific, itemized knowledge of knowing the formulas for satellites' rotation, i think the author was implying that guessing is as good as it being affected by someone's mood. that specific, key scientific fact was used for the greater purpose of landing astronauts on the moon. i dont think the idea of mood affecting it had anything to do with it.</p>
<p>more and more i'm being swayed by you, though.</p>
<p>edit: hey andreaaaa go online and IM me SeanKid02</p>
<p>what was the baffled question about? which passage was it on? i dont remember seeing it.</p>
<p>the psychic one. he was either sardonic or baffled.</p>
<p>oooo right! haha i thought i skipped one or something. it was sardonic right? that seems to be the consensus.</p>
<p>thanks btw! haha i can't believe its 1:49 am and i'm still on CC...</p>
<p>i got sardonic. but some people say baffled.</p>
<p>did anyone get "fear of the men" for sea question?</p>
<p>leedj23, i got something like the men were paralyzzed of fear or soemthing....</p>
<p>I got fear of the men also</p>
<p>nah... I put power of sea.
Again, at this point there is no way to know for sure.</p>
<p>I put mysterious and adventurous for the Aunt Sylvie one because it was referring to darkness(mystery) and sunk ship cabins with mermaids(adventurous). Unfortunately for me, the outdoors answer is starting to make more sense T_T</p>
<p>Also, the answer to the "crush" one was overabundance. I believe that the test makers had stampede as an answer choice to represent the stomping meaning of the word crush.</p>
<p>Crud... I don't remember putting extreme adults or w/e for the photography one... please - can anyone recall the other answer choices? I just need to make sure.</p>
<p>ok...for the dual history passages...</p>
<p>ther was a question that said "what was the purpose of passage 1" </p>
<p>it sounds easy but im starting to worry i got it wrong. were "it shows the benefit of history" or "it shows the importance of history" two seperate answers or am i jsut being a bit paranoid. if they were, i think those are very similar, seeing as the author talked about how important history was, but also called them "indispensable guides"</p>
<p>I put power of the sea. I guess it could be fear of men, but it talked more about the sea than the men. meh</p>