<p>i had it and a math experimental so i’d assume yes, the ebooks passage was real</p>
<p>I got e-book and working out</p>
<p>guys section 8 was the experimental section…</p>
<p>@jtscholar I thought it may have been the explore one to but the choice was said like a puzzling exploration (or a word similar to puzzling) which made me not choose it.</p>
<p>Okay, let’s keep this about CR.</p>
<p>What was the pernicious question? And have we reached a consensus that this was indeed correct?</p>
<p>when you draw the line you find the not obvious non integer answers (the smart thing to do) and you can clearly see by drawing a line with a slope of 1 that there are two points of intersection</p>
<p>Soporific was right</p>
<p>Also what about the short passage questions?</p>
<p>Pernicious was a sentence relating to sound, for which I put soporific. In hindsight, pernicious is right because it says that there are now sound-proof walls. </p>
<p>I have two questions:</p>
<p>What was the answer to the math question regarding boxes and three black tape? That one was confusing.</p>
<p>Also, ants. Ants of one species are about forty times larger than ants of other species. What was that?</p>
<p>SOPORIFIC WAS RIGHT? ARE YOU SURE? IF IT IS I AM GOING TO BE JUMPING UP AND DOWN!!!</p>
<p>Sorry just a little excited if that is the correct answer 'cause that is what I put.</p>
<p>Also, I am going to begin compiling a list of answers.</p>
<p>Edit: I’m pretty sure ants was no error.</p>
<p>For the ant question I got no error. I always get worried when I put no error though. I don’t remember the numbers for the box one but I remember how to do it.</p>
<p>Box-did you get 39, 45, or 60?</p>
<p>I think the box one was 39.</p>
<p>It was 39 since the tape overlaps by three inches and there were 3 tapes so it was 30 + 9 after you did the length of the tape</p>
<p>There is one in nepotism asking in what condition passage 2 say about nepotism is acceptable. Is it family members who desire to be leaders</p>
<p>I put that if there is no obvious nepotism… because obviously if they want a job they desire to lead the company but that doesnt mean they are qualified to do so. I felt the author made it clear only in instances where the person has gone through training, is qualified etc can it be okay thus there really isnt this sense of nepotism since the person is qualified. Idk that was my logic</p>
<p>Are u guys sure that the question didn’t say that it took 300 birds to eat 40%, which would leave 60% left rather than vice versa? If so, the answer would be 450…if not, then u guys are right</p>
<p>in that nepotism passage was that the one where it said it was ok as long as the person was given the tools to succeed?</p>
<p>Also, has anyone found the Creole passage???</p>
<p>pernicious was right. sound was detrimental to the patient’s health in that hospital.</p>
<p>do we have a consolidate list of answers anywhere?!</p>