b/c it says that the scientists took the fact that protein SIMPLY coiled for granted...meaning they didn't think it could be that simple, so they exagerated it's intricacy.
No, underestimated/complexity is definitely right. Intricacy means it's complicated, if they exaggerated the intricacy they would have overcomplicated it, when in fact they were oversymplifying it.
'^ they were overcomplicating it...because they took the simpleness of it for granted.
i'm pretty sure on this one.'
^They underestimated the complexity. They didn't realize how complicated it was; they thought that it simply folded and that was the end of it.
I'm sure on this too.
the sentence says (paraprhased): the scientists took the fact that the protein is simply folded for granted.
*to take for granted means to underestimate the value of.
so, they were underestimating that the protein in simply folded. Which means they were underestimating the simpleness of it, and thus exagerrating it's intricacy.
so, they were underestimating that the protein in simply folded. Which means they were underestimating the simpleness of it, and thus exagerrating it's intricacy.
^Those are two opposite things. If I exaggerate the intricacy of something, i make it seem more complicated, not less. Underestimate/complexity makes much more sense.
Looks like I got 19/19. Hooray! And I'm pretty sure it is underestimated is right.
