<p>Yes I agree with classiclays…reserved is much better than agreeable</p>
<p>and also I agree with smooch</p>
<p>agree with panmit (tho i didnt mark 29 darn) And I’m starting to see a general consensus for it.</p>
<p>my mom said reserved… god dammit</p>
<p>Apparently in this context if means “even though.”</p>
<p>… they were gracious, even though they were reserved.</p>
<p>I thought it was like:</p>
<p>… they were gracious, or even pleasant</p>
<p>Its definitely reserved; the “if” signifies a contrast to gracious, which eliminates agreeable.</p>
<p>^Yea I didn’t know that if signaled contrast</p>
<p>Agree with cool meaning reserved. It’s akin to saying the father was a little cold (as in lacking in passion or emotion) or didn’t warm up to the fiancee. It’s a whole temperature thing ;)</p>
<p>Does anyone have the passage for the techtonic plates so I can ask her that question too?</p>
<p>someone posted the tectonic passage before, but the one that we read was not exactly the same…</p>
<p>I posted it: [The</a> canon: a whirligig tour of the … - Natalie Angier - Google Books](<a href=“The Canon: A Whirligig Tour of the Beautiful Basics of Science - Natalie Angier - Google Books”>The Canon: A Whirligig Tour of the Beautiful Basics of Science - Natalie Angier - Google Books) page 222</p>
<p>Can you ask your mom (assuming she’s good at reading?) about peregrination? Does it mean movement or exploration?</p>
<p>My argument for exploration is that it is talking about the guy’s continental peregrination (hypothesis). It is his “exploration” into the hypothesis rather than his “movement”.</p>
<p>It has to be exploration because the continental peregrinations were actions performed by the person; he did not move, he explored.</p>
<p>These are the no errors I got for writing:</p>
<p>Jane Goodall, and her striking similarities between humans and apes.
The lexicographer, who started a word list from age 8.
The artist (question 29) and her paintings.</p>
<p>For the reading:
The parents were nice enough, but a little bit formal. This means they were a touch reserved, although pleasant enough. The “if” signals a contrast.
Can anyone agree that Matt’s engravings were “complex and intricate”?</p>
<p>@strom Even though I put exploration, I also feel like it can be “movement”.
It says something along the lines of “…a possible mechanism for his continental peregrination.” If you plug it in directly, it won’t work but if you assume that hypothesis is added on to say “…a possible mechanism for his continental movement hypothesis”, it would fit well too.</p>
<p>@ame, do you remember the other answer choices?</p>
<p>Alright, I’m going to settle this peregrination question right here. The reason they say “Wegener’s continental peregrinations” is because they were proposed by him. It’s similar to saying “Einstein’s particle speeds”. They’re saying that not because “speeds” has a secondary meaning, but rather that this is a special way to say “the peregrinations of continents that was proposed by and coined by Wegener”. See?</p>
<p>Now I have a question 
For the one about his “visionary” hypothesis, was it visionary because it pulled together evidence from various different fields? That’s what I put.</p>
<p>@classiclays I know one other answer choice was transformations.</p>
<p>EDIT: nevermind this</p>
<p>@ameyazing: for visionary i also put compiled evidence from multiple fields
it talked about soil deposits, glaciers and other stuff at the beginning of a paragraph</p>
<p>@ameyazing Are you saying it’s movement?</p>
<p>I got the evidence from different fields too.</p>
<p>I agree that number 29 and the lexico artist(?) was no error
and I had one more no error in the second page …was like 17~20 forgot which qs it was </p>
<p>Can anyone confirm if these are all the three no errors?</p>
<p>i think peregrination stands for movement
even reading the passage, it only makes me think it s’more</p>
<p>what were the choices for visionary?</p>
<p>for the last critical reading passage, about the political leaders and the negative tv ads, did you guys get that the cited quotes was skeptical of the commentator of passage 2.</p>