<p>so what was the answer to the blogs question?? smt along the lines of “good description of blog readers”…?</p>
<p>oh like i have a big issue right now…i don’t seem to even have a slight memory on that question, i might have just omitted that one and miss-bubbled everything after that. so can someone tell me more about that sentence. thanks!
Edit: on the meticulous and abberant question</p>
<p>@ lovenerds it was a SC question about a speaker deciding to cover all the details of a presentation, even the results that werent expected.</p>
<p>*scientist deciding to cover all the details of an experiment</p>
<p>Did anyone else get “Describe details of a finding” for the one about science?</p>
<p>Why didn’t they share land with neighbors?</p>
<p>And why was the traffic engineer not analogous to the government official working for energy efficiency?</p>
<p>EDIT: was either of these experimental; I also had the section with the fossils/greek names and a passage about disneyland.</p>
<p>The distinctive characteristic of the traffic engineer is that he moves beyond his immediate environment to educate others on something that he is allegedly knowledgeable about. The answer is the recycling thing because that illustrates this char.</p>
<p>But the government official is obviously educated about energy and travelled to other countries to help them…?</p>
<p>Still stuck on the question about the relationship between the two photography passages. One of the answer choices had “methodology”, another had “philosophy”. It looks like most of the people on this thread picked the philosophy one. </p>
<p>Does anyone remember the full answers for these choices or can explain why philosophy is right and methodology wrong?</p>
<p>@Conn: I believe this thread is split on that, and I don’t see it going anywhere.
Personally, I picked methodology.</p>
<p>I was under the impression that the consensus was that methodology was RIGHT…</p>
<p>Was that scientist SC the one that ended with “rather than make ___ a top priority?”</p>
<p>I remember “comprehensive… drudgery” and “libelous… discriminating” were answer choices.</p>
<p>@ARobins: Depends which part of the thread you look at, but yeah, methodology might be “winning” as of the last discussion.</p>
<p>IMO the hardest two questions were the analogy of the engineer and the sharing land with neighbors. Thats if you exclude the question in the writing section about speed of sound…</p>
<p>Does anyone remember describe details of a finding?</p>
<p>thanks those who helped me! ha i remember that question now, i guess i can go sleep without worrying now!</p>
<p>@Lappith
quackery was the answer to that question. forget what the second word was, but it dealt with relieving or eliminating wrinkles</p>
<p>@Angel
Oh…awesome! I went with methodology too!</p>
<p>@ARobins
Both of those two are correct. And I think I spent 20 of the 25 minutes of the writing section ruminating (heh heh. only one I’ve missed so far) about the speed of sound. I think it was no error</p>
<p>Darn, I was pretty sure at the time it was redundant - see writing section thread for more info, but oh well. So which were experimental:?</p>
<p>Nixon
Disneyland
Farmers who traded or shared land
Fossils and Dinosaurs (writing section)
Poet on gravestone / Alexanders
??</p>
<p>Conniptition, are you sure we’re talking about the same question?</p>
<p>Can someone explain why the village farming one is trading? </p>
<p>The implication was basically “they lived far from their crops, in a marshy wetland. They farmed far away in a drier area.” </p>
<p>So doesn’t (E), “the wood they used deteriorated in a wet environment” refute this implication because it says how they couldn’t live in such a wetland because the wood wouldn’t hold up? I just haven’t heard an explanation for trading.</p>