<p>I suppose Goebbels was right when he said that if you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.</p>
<p>I lied to myself as a chubby little dreamer that one day, perhaps, I could wake up one November 24th at five in the morning, rub my eyes, and witness three of that infamous number materialize on the computer screen before me. I would imagine myself staring at my web browser for hours, allowing the radiation from my monitor to tan my tear-ridden face as I paid my dues to the SAT deities who so generously permitted my hard work to come to ultimate fruition. </p>
<p>But now that vision is dead. </p>
<p>My dreams crushed and spirit withered, I am proud to have tackled this brutal, painstaking challenge only to be spit out crudely without so much of a chance. </p>
<p>My name is no_audio, and I am a survivor of the SAT.</p>
<p>i cant believe i made these errors. i ignored noitaraperp’s sage advice…i should’ve asked myself why “ambitious” was so blatantly wrong even though i didn’t know what fanciful meant. instead i used mental gymnastics and found some reason why it was correct. ugh. so madd. and #2 and 3 were easily justified using text. i feel like i would’ve made the same mistakes by working a quarter as hard as i did </p>
<p>well obviously its not that bad but idk it feels kinda disappointing when i worked kinda hard for it idk</p>
<p>I don’t think the moistened, watered is 100% yet. There seem to be several people who are still convinced it’s consumed. Let’s hope they’re right.
PS- I missed like 5 more questions than you, and -3 is still like a 790.</p>
<p>In context, I think “consumed” is too extreme. In contrast to the dry side, the other side is lush and green due to being watered by fog. Moistened makes the most sense here, because there is just enough fog to make the valley lush. “Consumed” might indicate too much fog.</p>
<p>The last time I took the SAT was March, and I got 2270 (800 W, 790 M, 680 CR). I was obviously disappointed with my reading score, so I took all the BB practice tests that I hadn’t done before. Now CR seems a lot easier, and besides one vocabulary question that I overthought, I can’t think of any mistakes I made this time.</p>
<p>Honestly, I’d be thrilled with a 750+ on CR. And more than anything, I’m quite worried that my writing score decreased significantly.</p>
<p>Hey, yo, dude. ****! Seriously, you missed a few questions – BIG DEAL! “I am a survivor of the SAT” – boo frickety hoo! Do you want a medal or a chocolate chip cookie? I wanted sharks with laser beams attached to their fricken’ heads! And all I got were ill-tempered sea bass! </p>
<p>If the SAT is really the most important thing in your life may I suggest… well ****, anything else I suppose, it really doesn’t get any more boring than the SAT.</p>
<p>I understand how not being able to reach the goals you’ve worked for so long feels. You’ll get over it, and I’m sure you’ll still get 99+ scores on all of the sections.</p>
<p>I still think consume is the right answer because moistened sounds too familiar with water and if water was all you got out of the passage you would have picked that answer instead of reading it closely and knowing that the fog “took over” the barren plots. I got a 780 on the october one, so I might be wrong…</p>
<p>Surviving SAT ??? Comparing it to Nazi camps ??? Give me a break and get a life.</p>
<p>P.S. Goebells deluded other people whereas you deluded yourself.</p>
<p>P.P.S. “Moistened” was the only credible answer on that question. It talked about greenness and well being of plants, which is a result of abundant water, not about how they were obscured (consumed) by fog.</p>
<p>why are the numbers “infamous”? They’re not bad.
And why shouldn’t people believe that they could get 2400? I’d like to see more people going into the test with a positive attitude! that’s the key to success!</p>
<p>I missed the stupid dog problem (I think, unless somehow it WAS 6 but I doubt) and a few scattered W & CR. I’m still in the air about consumed & moistened. I don’t even remember what I put so that’s why I’m not going to take a stance.</p>
<p>Consumed definitely is too extreme and can have a negative connotation (too much fog might not be a good thing). Moistened fits the context, in that the valley is emerald and lush due to being moistened by fog.</p>
<p>In fact, if the valley is consumed by fog, how would the narrator even be able to see the lushness and vibrant emerald color of the valley? I imagine that fog consuming an entire valley would make the color appear more subdued.</p>
</p>