<p>Ahh, I didn’t get it. Oh well. I’m still uncertain about that choice because it isn’t even a full sentence. Although I did put it so I hope it’s right… How do you feel about our chances for the traffic analogy and what did you put for the caldwell “possibility” question?</p>
<p>Well it is a full sentence because many came right after of which; also, you can just flip the words and it can be many of which ergo COMPLETE SENTENCE! And I chose the former about initial reaction, and our chances seem low, but I thought for sure it was it. Cause it was like a science government guy became a science teacher right?</p>
<p>I believe it was someone who worked with energy in the government, deciding to become a science teacher.</p>
<p>Huh… -2 to -7 would be in the 720-780 range, right?</p>
<p>Yeah I thought a small level town was learning how to act whereas the whole nation was learning traffic and he was good at it. Very similar but it depends on the other choices if u remember them</p>
<p>Well the other choice that a majority of CCers put was a recycling man going to other states to hold recycling workshops or something along those lines.</p>
<p>I find it too vague. Remember that it says that he was a social engineer in this small Town as well, however in a figurative sense, but that was the line referenced. But I guess our chances are low. The writing question is so right though. What’s your thought on humbuggery and quackery? And the as legend is believed question? I’m pretty sure that methodology was right in that other question cuz there was no resolution</p>
<p>I’m sorry I mean the second passage acted it out, not explained in detail. I was combining two questions there. But what about the other two?</p>
<p>I believe it’s:
- methodology and carrying it out
- quackery and forestall
- qualify a statement</p>
<p>I’m still doubtful on the writing question. Also, did you put rationality or heartless detachment?</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure I missed 5 in total. What does that equal? What would a 60, 61, & 62 raw score be?</p>
<p>I got methodology I’m pretty sure. I missed other two (I erased quackery and put humbuggery)</p>
<p>Well obviously it depends on the curve but anywhere the curves on that erik website cover 700-790 for 60-62.</p>
<p>Wow. Haha. I know I’m gonna be in that range if this list was right. I am a little confused why the founded in 1919 one was explain the finding I thought it was the other debated one. I think it provided scientific evidence of its presence or whatever it is. Because it was talking about scientific stuff. What do you think?</p>
<p>I’m not sure what question you are referring to? If you add a little more detail I’m sure I could remember.</p>
<p>It was the internal clocks passage it was saying something about how it was founded in 1919: check the list the guy said it was something about its finding but I’m almost positive it is something about providing scientific evidence.</p>
<p>I don’t really remember the question, nor do I really remember what I put… It wasn’t one I really thought about that much. The main ones that I am concerned about at this point are the traffic analogy, the “possibility”, rationality/heartless detachment, quackery/humbuggery.</p>
<p>I checked over math and it doesn’t seem like I have anything wrong but some I don’t remember so I just have to hope for the best.</p>
<p>In terms of grammar, I’m not too sure how many I got wrong either but I did say the same you did for the Madagascar question and I highly doubt that is right.</p>
<p>Believe me. Im great at writing, that’s right. I only missed questions on math because of stupid omissions (3-4) and 2 dumb mistakes. So I am looking at a 700, 720, and a 750 with a 11 essay (maybe 12 outside of 10). But l am also worried about heartless detachment.</p>
<p>What did you say personally?</p>
<p>Heartless detachment. Cause that’s what in cold blood means not the rest</p>
<p>Well literally it does, but when in the context of the passage, I don’t think it really means heartless detachment.</p>