<p>sardonic, it wasn’t baffling because the speaker knew what he was saying. he really wasn’t confused why they don’t work on Wall Street</p>
<p>lmao so was it double meaning or a contrary character? I honestly think it can mean both. she is weird</p>
<p>did you go with double meaning or contrary personality?</p>
<p>in all honesty, i think its double meaning. because the passage says in the next line she likes how smooth it is, that makes it even-ing. i legitemately think that question should be thrown out though. contrary personalities is more than acceptable, and it should have indicated how to pronounce evening (like putting even-ing in parenthesis). i personally missed that and thought ev-en-ing.</p>
<p>i put contrary character. After thinking about it, i guess the passage directly supported double meaning. but it is implying she has a contrary personality. i agree, that question is stupid. No i take that back, that whole passage is stupid.</p>
<p>Anybody remember the last question of the history passage?</p>
<p>no clue. but have we come to a consensus between overabundance and stampede yet?</p>
<p>overabundance</p>
<p>HA yes! i knew we didnt have to go that indepth and worry about connotations or w/e lol.</p>
<p>I put overabundance, but if I could I would choose stampede. Oh well.</p>
<p>geez i hate this test</p>
<p>kevinscool, i put contrary character too. i didnt notice the stupid even-ing thing. god damn it.</p>
<p>i want the evening question thrown out. they tell us how to pronounce remember (re-member) but not evening??!?!</p>
<p>im 99% sure its overabundance. stampede is a stretch. those simple definition questions are never meant to be difficult, only if there are vocabulary words in the answer choices is it supposed to be hard.</p>
<p>they never tell us it was even ing. infact it wasnt. she pronounced it in 3 syllables remember? thats all they tell us.</p>
<p>from dictionary.com:
eve·ning
thats how it is normally pronounced.with three syllables it would be ev-en-ing
therefore, “even” would be pronounced and it talked about smoothing over. so thats why the double meaning makes sense to me</p>
<p>Does anybody know the answer to the question asking wat the purpsoe of the moon passage was?? Because I got the answer that said how the scientists contributed to the whole but it could’ve been objectivity and the benefits of practicalness?</p>
<p>wat the eff mate?</p>
<p>objectivity and benefits of practicalness (E)</p>
<p>the reason is because it asked why the author used that quote or somehting, and the one that said “scientists make individual contributions to the whole” also includes a specific reference to “astronomy.” Astronomy was not the purpose of the passage, but more of an example of why the objectivity of science is benefical and practical.</p>
<p>uh i guess ur right. i wish i had said ev en ing out loud. i still think it could be showing how weird she is tho</p>
<p>theSATmaster, wasn’t that entire paragraph that the moon quote was located in, however, dedicated to describing how scientists in general contributed to science as a whole? Directly after talking about how astronomers and scientists contributed to the whole picture of lifting off a spaceship, the author talks about the moon, so i thought that the reason he was stating that was to show an example of how astronomers contribute to the whole?</p>
<p>i think it was the subjectivity one or w/e. Remember, he quoted it to show an example of what it would be like if astronomers didnt FEEL like going to the moon</p>
<p>evening is double meaning. bad question, but its true. i wasnt 100% sure on the objective benefits/ indiviudal contributions questions. anyone with good qualifications (aka good CR scores) to make a ruling on this?</p>