0.25 of 1 percent=0.25*0.01

另外一个地方出现了这道题，那里正确答案选的是D，但那里没有A选项，这道题变体很多，不知道以哪个为准

还以为是关于需求和供给的问题，结果找不到选项。不明白其中逻辑。

同样也可以使用negation technique。把选项否命题的话，如果weaken argument，则为正确选项。
B选项的否命题：The scheduled highway projects identified as wasteful in the report WERE mostly projects in districts controlled by the president's party. 在president party的project大部分都是wasteful的。 （而原文是opposition party被cancel了更多project，则看出来unfair）weaken

https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/forums/are-is-t7280-30.html

The dominant view in recent decades has been that family hunting territories, like other forms of private landownership, were not found among Algonquians (a group of North American Indian tribes) before contact with Europeans but are the result of changes in Algonquian society brought about by the European-Algonquian fur trade
试着翻译一下，主流的观点是某种形式在A与E的接触之前是没有的，但是是EA的皮毛交易带来改变的结果。
E中是非A部落，文章中没提到，因此是错误的选项。B中不是 reciprocal 的而是like other private form, 其他没提到

比较两个东西，人类学家可行，别人批判不可行，理由是这两个东西不相似，批判这个观点。那么就是这两个东西相似咯…

选 C 而不是B 因为that 这个从句修饰了molecules

这题貌似前提和结论翻译少了几个字吧？
前提： 曾今，因为Colson's而倒闭的店面，都开了新的
结论： 因为SpendLess而倒闭的店面，也会开新的

原文中说 发现沉船时，hull断成的两截挨在一起。接着说，violent waves会让漂浮在海面上的pieces离得更远，（而现在是挨在一起的，言外之意是hull断了的时候并没有在海平面上，也就是说hull是在船沉了之后/在水里面断裂的），所以并不是因为hull的断裂导致的sinking（因为前面推理出船沉到水里后，hull才断裂的）。
原文中是果因推理，果：打捞沉船时，hull的pieces挨在一起。推出 因：不是因为hull的断裂导致的sinking。
assumption来加强果因之间的联系，即排除它因

原文中最后一句话“Attempting to make up the tax revenue lost by raising tax rates is not feasible, since higher tax rates would cause even more residents to leave.” 后半句应该是premise，即higher tax会让更多的居民leave，在must be true question中，premise一定是true的，选项中不应该再去question premise。D选项就是如此。

tough to choose between A and D. However, since question talks about no relation to tax rates of other cities therefore it could be simply that tax hikes are just like last nail in coffin and make more residents leave the city irrespective whether tax rates are lower compared to other cities.
Further, A gets more strong considering population is sharply 'declining', therefore eventually tax revenue would be low enough to cause one or more services to deteriorate.

为什么the only reminder of which 不能修饰year？

因果推理，原文中有原因：只有bicycle racers才对innovation 感兴趣并且愿意买； 结果：自行车technology的innovation就被限制在用于比赛的标准了。 assumption：寻找因果之间的联系，即close the gap, 原因：bicycle racers -- innovation 结果：innovation -- competition standards， 即将bicycle racers 和 competition standards联系起来。

我想问一下这里怎么判断decision是decide的物化结果，所以用内外来判断；又怎么不对speculation进行同样的判断，反而是使用核心词来判断……

看不懂这道题

头大了

考点是什么？

2为什么错呢？难道因为可以得出两个x，所以就错吗？即答案不唯一，就为错。

E是错的。不过解释存疑。that 不一定要紧跟先行词吧？比如有一道OG题目是：About 5 million acres in the United States have been invaded by leafy spurge, a herbaceous plant from Eurasia, with milky sap, that gives mouth sores to cattle and displaces grasses and other cattle food, rendering rangeland worthless.