<p>YES, i dint ptut that he was a genius, but that little was known about him</p>
<p>which quote shows WRY humor?</p>
<p>did anyone get nonchalant as a vocab answer?</p>
<p>some of these vocab words were in pairs</p>
<p>nonchalant wasnt an answer</p>
<p>this forum is quick, a page a second</p>
<p>perhaps…jakezhang…let’s hope we got it right!</p>
<p>jakez: That was my reasoning behind it too.</p>
<p>Nice job Dark Knight. I agree with your answers. Here’s what I remember:</p>
<p>Irreverent - author of passage 2 had an irreverent tone
Paired Passage - hypothetical scenario was an answer
Nuance was the answer to the 8th sentence completion
Norton was Magnanimous and the Eskimos or Northwest Indians were
Munificent
Arts and Crafts and Industrial Revolution - affordable products</p>
<p>it couldnt have been little was known about him because that answer said “periods of his life”
neither passage mentioned anything about periods, rather his life overall</p>
<p>NO WAY…i’ll be screwed. how do u determine?</p>
<p>no where, no where does it say he was a “major” part of the book industry. thats off topic not mentioned. the point of the 1st passage was that so little is known about him and the writer was usually excited when new books came out b/c it was such an interesting topic. my 2 cents.</p>
<p>jake i dont get your point ^</p>
<p>LOL
brown you seem to be doing well
what are ur score predictions</p>
<p>ok is there realy a chatroom?</p>
<p>crcowboyfan - I had 3 CR sections. I definitely had the one about the family that moved from China to Ontario, Canada. Daughter adjusted while mother did not. This passage definitely counted!</p>
<p>hoping for an 800 on writing, 750 on reading, 620 on math…math was bad for me today…</p>
<p>ok first, did anyone have a writing section where the improving paragraph part was about an aunt and a tour guide in hawaii?</p>
<p>second, on the math question w/ the 2 squares, which two angles were equal?</p>
<p>third, does anyone remember what they put for the double passage about cars… the question was about passage 2 being more ______. it was between a more balanced consideration of the phenomenon and arguing against the point of passage 1.</p>
<p>what was the answer for the question about the guy ignoring faults then?</p>
<p>is there a chat room for this, this thread could be closed any second</p>
<p>that would be easier…</p>