PT 16 sec 2 #1 Forum
-
lakers3peat
- Posts: 464
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:10 pm
PT 16 sec 2 #1
Lol, will someone please explain to me the paradox in this raccoon question. I got the right answer but it took me like 3 minutes to figure out the very first question and I still don't really understand exactly whats going on with these rabid racoons.
-
KevinP
- Posts: 1322
- Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2009 8:56 pm
Re: PT 16 sec 2 #1
WARNING! For those taking the test, answer is below.
@OP: The LR questions differ noticeably in older PTs from newer PTs so be aware of that.
The stimulus states:
2 years ago: Less than 25% of raccoons have rabies. 32 cases confirmed.
Past 12 months: 50% of raccoons have rabies. 18 cases confirmed.
In other words, a smaller proportion of raccoons had rabies but a larger number also had rabies two years ago. If raccoons with rabies died that means the proportion could increase but the total number decrease because there are less raccoons around.
@OP: The LR questions differ noticeably in older PTs from newer PTs so be aware of that.
The stimulus states:
2 years ago: Less than 25% of raccoons have rabies. 32 cases confirmed.
Past 12 months: 50% of raccoons have rabies. 18 cases confirmed.
In other words, a smaller proportion of raccoons had rabies but a larger number also had rabies two years ago. If raccoons with rabies died that means the proportion could increase but the total number decrease because there are less raccoons around.
-
lakers3peat
- Posts: 464
- Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 7:10 pm
Re: PT 16 sec 2 #1
Thanks Kevin. That's what I thought was going on when they said "succumbed to rabies." For some reason, i had a problem wrapping my finger around getting rabies vs. getting rabies and dieing
