HI There, why E is wrong? I kinda think "all" is the problematic word here. Could anyone share a more mechanic solution to adress it? E looks like to provide an alternative cause. In another word, if we change the answer choice to "the airplanes scheduled for the canceled flights are ...

Could anyone clarify what E is saying and why E is out? Perhaps share an example that is true of "a conclusion is logically equivalent to its premise"? Thanks a lot!

Could there be any real reasons in eliminating E? E sounds like to provide an alternative reasoning and if we plugged it back into the gap, it works just peacefully with all the other parts in the promise, such as the average length of stays without quality changes (E says "generally"), bo...

Thanks for providing those thoughts... Following the upstairs... Explanation 1: "E) Is the contrapositive of the last statement. CORRECT AC." 2 genes -> E how could its contrapositive become as "C emerges as result of e"? and Explanaton 2: "Remember that this is a "m...

I have an additional question between D and E, if anyone could care addressing. Line 28: CRITICS might respond, .... e.g then was given. Question was asked what the author's purpose of the example is? Option 1: be honest to the "LOCAL's purpose" - which is after critics and demonstrate why...

Thank you so much for such a degree of depth and width on the topic and its related! Well, I can tell you must be pretty good at Inference questions, because you expertly defined why the others are wrong (and you're appropriately paranoid about trusting an answer with "should" when nothing...

Could any LSAT Geek weigh in on this question from an overall perspective? Some tempting questions include but not limited to 1) why in such a NA question, the weak answer like C "at least one" lost to B (likely, "most") that seems stronger worded? 2) besides negation, is there a...

Why C is not right? Line 17-18 says " 'mg' align with ...", C says "most of them align with"... can "all" safely infer to "most"? ( if all X, then most of all must be X... Could anyone give an example that fails it? ) And similarly, if "all" is given...

Still have a bit issue with A. Does A say as "confuse on what's promising for small scale can be inferred to large scale"? A says "confuse", which seems to cover a board of nuances - including becaue confused, so it couldn't tell how it IS good for small scale projects vs. big on...