Law School Discussion

Nine Years of Discussion
;

Author Topic: LR: Pangaea  (Read 2675 times)

bagdanoj

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 30
    • View Profile
Re: LR: Pangaea
« Reply #40 on: February 15, 2005, 01:39:15 AM »
does anyone remember where this question was in the test?  was it on the last page of the last section?

I'm thinking it was on the third to last page. Like maybe #19 or #20? I say that because I thought it was on the far right-hand side of the test booklet, but I know it wasn't the last question.

Emolee

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 428
  • I believe there is a distance I have wandered
    • View Profile
Re: LR: Pangaea
« Reply #41 on: February 15, 2005, 01:43:28 AM »
I think it was the second to last question, as you said, on the right.
wrestling over tiny matters: UCLA vs. Columbia

LSAT 173!  Thank you, God!

http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?user=emolee

vivarin

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 308
    • View Profile
Re: LR: Pangaea
« Reply #42 on: February 15, 2005, 09:39:17 AM »
Didn't one of the answers have something to do with tranferrence of heat, etc etc?  I seem to remember that as an answer choice, and I can't remember if I chose it...although I remember leaning towards it.  Did the transferrence of heat have anything to do with the computer models, or am I confusing other questions here?

withj

  • Guest
Re: LR: Pangaea
« Reply #43 on: February 15, 2005, 10:38:25 AM »
Computer models about the transference of heat from the mantle to the crust were at the center of the argument. I chose the answer about incomplete computer models, because it seemed most relevant to how the question stem hinged on the argument passage, but this is another q, like the SQUIDS one we've been obsessing over, that I'm really not sure about.

Happy_Weasel

  • LSD Obsessed
  • *****
  • Posts: 5547
  • Me and Gir, the happy weasel.
    • MSN Messenger - ominusdemon2@msn.com
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: LR: Pangaea
« Reply #44 on: February 15, 2005, 03:06:20 PM »
Well, It could have been that they continue today and still do not break up the continents....(my answer)

What if plumes happened under the sea? They say nothing about how they broke up pangea....but if they were occuring today, then we do know that they didn't break up pangea if they are sawn not to have a consequence.

nmprisons

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 64
  • avatar, schmavatar
    • View Profile
    • LSN
Re: LR: Pangaea
« Reply #45 on: February 15, 2005, 06:50:16 PM »
There was only one computer model choice, not two.  The one choice said that there was additional and pertinent information that was not included in the computer model that likely would change the model.  This is the one that I chose, but, other than the f-ing china/ukraine one, it is the one that I am most unsure of. 

The argument stated that the only evidence for pangea breaking up in the fasion presented was the computer model in question.

I wish that someone could produce the wording of the "pangea broke itself up" answer choice.  I think that it could have been the appropriate answer, but only if it precluded pangea breaking up because of the plumes/lava/whatever
NCAA:  UPenn, Columbia, UChicago
On The Bubble:  Harvard
NIT:
On the Bench:  Yale

http://lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?user=nmprisons

Emolee

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 428
  • I believe there is a distance I have wandered
    • View Profile
Re: LR: Pangaea
« Reply #46 on: February 15, 2005, 06:58:48 PM »
nm,
as well, pangaea & mummies are where I am still unsure... and we can't seem to get a consensus on either

can anyone re-state the argument on either of these?  I did them so quickly that I don't remember.
wrestling over tiny matters: UCLA vs. Columbia

LSAT 173!  Thank you, God!

http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?user=emolee

metropolitans

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 239
    • View Profile
Re: LR: Pangaea
« Reply #47 on: February 15, 2005, 06:59:12 PM »
for pangea, I chose the pangea broke itself up b/c i am almost certain that it said "pangea by itself" meaning that no other cause could have broken it up...somebody else chose this because of this wording.

Emolee

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 428
  • I believe there is a distance I have wandered
    • View Profile
Re: LR: Pangaea
« Reply #48 on: February 15, 2005, 07:05:06 PM »
what was the conclusion?
wrestling over tiny matters: UCLA vs. Columbia

LSAT 173!  Thank you, God!

http://www.lawschoolnumbers.com/display.php?user=emolee

metropolitans

  • Sr. Citizen
  • ****
  • Posts: 239
    • View Profile
Re: LR: Pangaea
« Reply #49 on: February 15, 2005, 07:13:41 PM »
I think the conclusion was plumes caused the breakup of pangea.  The controversy of this thread is something about one of the premises.  Something about computer models suggest that plumes cased the breakup of pangea.