<p>Yep. 1 disputed it, 2 disputed it but said that it had no effect, 3 said it’s fine.</p>
<p>After reading this, I feel very good about the science. From reading other threads, I take it that this was a less common form.</p>
<p>^^Agreed. I felt this science test was either really easy (comparatively speaking), or I completely missed the boat (which I doubt). I actually had a few minutes leftover at the end, and that never, ever happens.</p>
<p>Yeah, I had like 5 minutes to check answers… Every other time I’ve taken it (I took the ACT in June and like 5 practice tests) I’ve been rushed just to finish.</p>
<p>@jattkc It was definitely vL, the passage described it as almost exactly the same.</p>
<p>I think my brain just wasn’t all there or something. It was probably fried, because I got a 31 on the Sept 2013 ACT Science and guessed on 4 there. This time you guys claim it was easier, but I guessed on 9. >.> Stupid tired brain.</p>
<p>Anyone remember questions from the soil or Flower heterozygote passage, those were the only ones i had trouble with</p>
<p>For the heterozygous passage, was one of the answer “no it couldnt block it because it would be white regardless” something like that…</p>
<p>I put yes it could block because if it had two w alleles, then it is automatically white no matter what the other alleles were.</p>
<p>TeachMeHowto34,</p>
<p>I felt September’s Science was much easier as well. It was easy to get info from the graphs alone on nearly all questions in 3 of the passages. This time I rushed through the last 3 passages because the teacher didn’t put the time we started on the board so I had no way to keep track since I didn’t notice that she never put it up, and I was forced to guess on the last 5. ._.</p>
<p>I had to guess on 23-27 and just put B and G does anyone remember putting them down as an answer for the science? :/</p>
<p>Epistasis was occurring because the identity of I didn’t seem to matter as long as there was a W allele…</p>