<p>anyone extent please?</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure it wasn’t debauchery. I think the answer was temperance because the man preached against alcohol. Could be a completely different question idk.</p>
<p>@fakeperson, i remember the having that question and that choice, but dont remember the actual answer for that one…</p>
<p>@anysky I don’t remember the extent question… What was the context that it was in?</p>
<p>Does anyone remember the passage after the seahorse? I DONT REMEMBER A THING !!!</p>
<p>i think that might have been a different question… but not sure. temperance was right for that question though</p>
<p>Oh nooo I was about to put temperance but put something else… </p>
<p>What score would I get with 5 wrong on CR?</p>
<p>new insight about the outspoken condemnation/guarded skepticism: the second choice doesn’t work because guarded doesn’t fit. william’s tone was clearly one of condemnation, and because he PUBLISHED his caustic works (for all to see), outspoken condemnation makes sense.</p>
<p>Also, what did you guys do with the “Food supply for fish?” i put that as wrong cause i thought it should be “of”</p>
<p>I got extent!</p>
<p>it was the architecture passage</p>
<p>For the architecture passage, did anyone get that people make mistakes because they’re unfamiliar with the unfamiliar surrounding?</p>
<p>@diddly, i thought that too, but ended up leaving it as no error b/c i think it still works idiomatically</p>
<p>I don’t remember the extent question… </p>
<p>Anyone know what the question was?</p>
<p>extent question was about the DEGREE to which we understood something in the architecture passage…</p>
<p>@glasses, but imagine if you were thinking of food supplies of different countries. Wouldn’t it make more sense to say “the food supply of America” rather than “the food supply for America”? Idk though</p>
<p>i had an extra one too, and i believe my experimental one was about physics. it also had obscure fill in the blank questions</p>
<p>@mpgh000, can you give more context for that question?</p>
<p>“of” and “for” depends on the context of the sentence.
@glasses: The question was a line reference. I had it down to 2 choices which was it was open for interpretation and it was possible to make mistake due to unfamiliar surroundings.</p>
<p>There has been a drop in the amount of plankton, a major food supply (for/of) fish. — this was roughly the sentence context</p>
<p>@glasses, do you possibly remember what the other choices were?</p>