<p>didn’t they say that scientist are often mislead by their own beliefs, however scientific logic draws them back to the right path. so that’s objectivity since they’re looking for something that’s observable and not something on opinion alone.</p>
<p>no… i dont remember that… im certain that they referred back to the metaphor of the experiments being “the ultimate referees”… am i mistaken?</p>
<p>@MichaelGSCarn exactly</p>
<p>because they weren’t expansive, there wasn’t much to talk about, hence laconic would be the best answer had the transitional phrase “on the contrary” not been there . . . but it was :/</p>
<p>and yea i felt like histrionic was a strange word to describe a report . . . but nothing else meant something the opposite of “hardly expansive”</p>
<p>objectivity: judgment based on observable phenomena and uninfluenced by emotions or personal prejudices.
the experiments are the only things that can settle the scientists’ ideas with actual data</p>
<p>anybody know about the firefly question? i chose located on cause i thought it should be located in instead</p>
<p>damn i think i put settle conflicts or something…</p>
<p>@hockeyshark315 i think that one was no error.</p>
<p>I think it was objectivity. The experiments act as non biased ‘referees’ that can always prove or disprove ones point. Its probably objectivity because experiments can be classified as non biased…then again i could be wrong :/</p>
<p>For the one before that, did anyone say that the scientists are all things except ‘inherently logical’ (or something like that)?</p>
<p>are you sure because it would make more sense if the mass of cells was located in the abdomen.</p>
<p>I think it was objectivity because the experiments are quintessentially non biased tools that can prove points…then again i could be wrong :/</p>
<p>did anyone put down that scientists are everything except ‘inherently logical’ (something like that), for the question before that?</p>
<p>woops posted that twice sorry</p>
<p>umm now im not too sure… but there were only like 3 no errors and if you take out that there are like 2… thats an oddity.
@GIM795 yeah i put inherently logical…</p>
<p>for one of the space passage q’s, was the man’s image of the solar system compared to traditional view: order/rigidity or ___/variety and change
and
the author of passage 2 believes texting would restore the old ways of using language or increase critical thinking?</p>
<p>i put the variety and change one… but the texting i put follow traditional discourse</p>
<p>i ruled out everything except for the traditional one… and the critical thinking… but it only said stuff about reading and noticing nuances… so it didnt make that much sense to me… anyone confirm this?</p>
<p>did anyone else have a reading section about a sloth? I hope it isn’t experimental, since that is the one I think I did best on</p>
<p>^Duude same. I love sloths. I actually wrecked that section, but I think it was experimental.</p>
<p>does anyone remember other confusing questions?</p>
<p>@snihamin you have to set them both equal to py and them make them equal to each other, plug in a number for m and then solve for x, i think i got x=4 or x=2 i dont remember</p>
<p>What was the three no errors on the writing? One says that one of them is , about fireflies, i dont recall this question at all T.T can someone tell me how the question goes. lol</p>