<p>Emphatic was tone of both passages, so yeah, different q.</p>
<p>Vehement/caustic was about 1 paragraph out of the second passage.</p>
<p>pch: [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) That is the second passage. There is wittiness and cynicism and bitterness… and a lot more rationality than passion.</p>
<p>Does anyone remember which paragraph exactly? Because we have the passage now.</p>
<p>It’s the third paragraph of that article. Find me your vehemence.</p>
<p>Caustic is definitely severely critical depending on the sentence…</p>
<p>There’s definitely a lot of sarcasm, wit, and criticizing in the second paragraph of that passage…</p>
<p>Caustic = marked by incisive sarcasm (a sharp and often satirical or ironic utterance designed to cut or give pain)
Vehement = marked by forceful energy</p>
<p>If you ask me, it’s vehement. The “sarcasm” element in caustic makes it unappealing to me. IMO, there’s no sarcasm in that paragraph – the author is simply laying out the facts forcefully.</p>
<p>PS. I’m fine with people arguing points, but don’t say that your answer is DEFINITELY correct, when it likely isn’t.</p>
<p>The article is not forceful, emotional or passionate at all.</p>
<p>It’s definitely forceful. And the author is pretty passionate about nuclear power–he says that the costs far outweigh the benefits and it is the best possible energy source.</p>
<p>“Characterized by forcefulness of expression or conviction”- I can see that with the quoted paragraph, but it’s not as strong as caustic. Caustic seems to be the better choice</p>
<p>Subsidize, that was after the lined references the question asked for</p>
<p>I’ve asked this like 5 times; Wasn’t Fleece parodying (mocking, poking fun at) the narrator when he said talking out his navel and fonking on his horn… not really taunting him.</p>
<p>No, he was criticizing him, not poking fun at him. Taunting also means to mock someone. I’m 99% sure it’s taunting…</p>
<p>almost everyone agrees that it was Taunting @sheepgetkilled.</p>
<p>if he was “parodying” him, it would be more obvious because he would actually be imitating him in some way.</p>
<p>@NewYorkMets: There is some sarcasm though. “The consequences aren’t pretty”, “Believe it or not…”, “… right into the air, too, not into some carefully guarded storage site”, and “And, by the way…” all have a tone of sarcasm.</p>
<p>Yup, it’s taunt. </p>
<p>@iLiveonCC: Sarcasm is saying the opposite of what you mean. The author was genuine when he made those remarks, not sarcastic.</p>
<p>I really don’t think we’ll be able to come to any conclusion about vehement vs caustic. Anywho, only 18 days until we find out!</p>
<p>
These parts are sarcastic because they ironically argue that, contrary to the opposition which says nuclear power is dangerous, they show that coal is dangerous… They are intended to criticize. His tone is bitter (“The consequences aren’t pretty,” “coal-burning electric power plants have fouled the air”) but not passionate or emotional. He cites fact after fact in that paragraph.</p>
<p>Again, I wouldn’t be surprised if caustic is wrong, but after seeing the paragraph, the case looks like it falls much more in the direction of caustic.</p>
<p>It was definitely vehement without question. Caustic doesn’t fit at all. If I got, worst case scenario, -3 to -4 wrong, what would my score be? I think I only got -1 or -2 though.</p>
<p>Bass trumpet, a 750-790</p>
<p>@basstrumpet you’re entitled to your opinion but I just had my older brother read the exact passage (who has a PhD in English) and he said it’s obviously caustic. He mentioned that there is little to not subjectivity in the passage, therefore he cannot be assumed to be “passionate”. He is simply stating facts that happen to be very critical of coal. Also, if you look closely, there are at least 2 sentences with an obvious tone of sarcasm in them.</p>
<p>jd989898, once again I really don’t think that was the exact passage on the test…I don’t remember premature death nor chinese miners from it.</p>