<p>Darth, are you taking about the SA one?</p>
<p>@Flickor- Commercialization</p>
<p>a1rplanes on that question where an answer choice was major scientific implications, was the right answer something about the other authors views of primates as inferior or not as intellectual as humans. I’m pretty sure that’s what I got.</p>
<p>I think it was scientific implications b/c it said if other animals were capable of language and perceiving like humans, that would radically change the way the scientific community thought.</p>
<p>Yeah the SA one</p>
<p>it was behavorial evidence used by both
and it was major implications since the last paragraph argued how no sci. wants to believe apes are mad smart because it would mean the idea that humans are smarter would be disproven
that’s o.d. scientific implications</p>
<p>I agree with rajrajrja</p>
<p>I still can’t figure out which section of mine was experimental</p>
<p>It was not “major;” it was “significant.” Her claim was that apes’ ability to understand grammatical conventions challenges the widely held scientific belief that human minds are unique. Thus, it had significant scientific implications.</p>
<p>for the dinomania one did you say he regarded his research with scholarly enthusiasm.</p>
<p>just an update for you rough riders
plz try to remember the first few writing questions LOL</p>
<p>^^ Yes, that was my answer.</p>
<p>@StudiousMaximus what were the answer choices to that question? I think I was thinking of a different question about the apes</p>
<p>significant scientific implications - sorry that was the wording</p>
<p>^ I might’ve said optimism. I forget my answer to that question</p>
<p>I put cheerful optimism because I thought he was hopeful that his scientific studies were the reason people were started to get interested in dinosaurs, but it was all about marketing in the end.</p>
<p>For the “what changed from 1950 to 1951” in the yo-yo passage, wasn’t there an option that simply said there was a surge in people buying yo-yo’s?</p>
<p>it was cheerful optimism or scholarly enthusiasm
- don’t they mean the sam thing?</p>
<p>For the dinomania thing, what was the answer to…
That question… Omg i forgot…</p>
<p>It was like something about a line in the passage that the author said “I would love to…”</p>
<p>I don’t think it was cheerful optimism, as the reason he brings up the research is o underscore the fact that he is amazed why people weren’t interested in dinos before, hardly an optimstic tone.</p>
<p>and can someone please tell me for the “what changed from 1950 to 1951” in the yo-yo passage, wasn’t there an option that simply said there was a surge in people buying yo-yo’s?</p>