Read the following context and choose the correct option to answer the question. Context: I was about 14 and lived near a large tract of undeveloped land where people would go and park to fool around. There was a dirt road through the tract, but further down, it crossed two huge concrete pipes. The dirt was washed out between them, and the deep gulch made it impossible to cross in a car. Sometimes, eight or ten of us would go looking for parked cars. If we found one or more, we would go move this incredibly heavy stump onto the road and lay a telephone pole across it. It took all of us and it was incredibly heavy. It was impossible to drive around it because of the ditches and there was no way two or three people could move it. We'd go back to the car and set off a big string of fire crackers or shake the cat and slap on it and run like crazy. We'd watch from the woods as they drove like heck and come to a screeching stop at our roadblock. The guy would get out and try to lift the pole. Never happen. Then the car would drive the other way. That wouldn't happen because of the pipes. We'd go home leaving them in there. This was before cell phones, and it was miles to a pay phone. We'd go back the next day and find the stump and pole moved. We thought it was real funny until one night we set it up and beat on the trunk of a car. A couple was inside, getting it on. We hadn't noticed a guy sitting on the hood with a bottle of booze and a pistol. As we ran, he was shooting and we could hear bullets going through the underbrush. No one was hit, thank goodness. That was the end of that stunt. Question: When was this stunt conducted? Options: A. When the boy could set off a fire cracker B. When the boy could lift heavy objects C. not enough information D. When the boy was 14
D

Read the following context and choose the correct option to answer the question. Context: Following up from my recent blog post explaining why dietary supplements offer few benefits for most people, new research has found that people who take a mineral supplement actually consume more minerals from their normal diet than non-supplement users. The notion of the 'worried well' is certainly alive and kicking. Vitamin and mineral supplements are big business. Reported figures in Australia suggest that 27% of women and 15% of men take some form of supplement with vitamin C, B complex, multivitamins, vitamin E and calcium all being popular choices. Contrary to the rationale for needing supplements in the first place, people who take supplements are more likely to be healthier than people who don't take supplements. Supplement users also tend to be leaner, smoke less, exercise more, and eat more fruit and vegetables. While it may seem obvious that people who take supplements likely consume more nutrients from their regular diet to start with, this hasn't been well studied in large population groups. Using data from a nationally representative government health survey, researchers from the United States looked at the mineral intake from food and supplements of over 8000 men and women between 2003 and 2006. The results were clear cut: people taking mineral supplements were consuming more minerals from their normal diet than those who didn't take supplements. The observation was even stronger in women than in men. The eight most popular mineral supplements taken were calcium, iron, magnesium, zinc, phosphorus, copper, potassium and selenium. Proving that it is possible to have too much of a good thing, supplement users were more likely to be exceeding the recommended upper level of intake for magnesium, zinc, iron and calcium. For someone who believes that they are reasonably healthy and are conscious of what they eat most of the time, taking a mineral supplement 'just in case' offers little to no benefit. Question: Why type of diet do supplement users eat? Options: A. unprocessed food with lots of fresh food B. fruit, vegetables, lean proteins, and whole grains C. a variety of homemade food with an treat now and then D. not enough information
D

Q: Read the following context and choose the correct option to answer the question. Context: Every so often I see a scenario play out that I find rather disappointing. It works like this: someone posts a topic to their blog that is critical or controversial. This person can either be a community member, commentator, employee or otherwise; it doesn't matter who the person is. Then what happens is a series of comments are posted to that blog entry from readers that are critical of the post, thus challenging the author on their views. The author then either deletes the blog entry or disables the comments based on the feedback. In other words, a viewpoint is shared, an invitation for comment is provided, but that invitation is then revoked when the author of the blog post is dissatisfied with the response from their readers. I have seen this happen countless times over the years and I don't like this. I believe we should all be accountable for our words. Our words have the ability to inspire, to entertain, to challenge, but to also hurt. Actions have consequences, and so do words. As such, when I see someone openly share their thoughts on their blog and invite their readers to provide comments, I see that as a wonderful demonstration of accountability and engagement; debate is a beautiful thing when executed with politeness and respect. To then close that door, seemingly because people disagree with you, is in my mind the equivalent of walking out of a room in the middle of a debate. The excuse when folks are criticized of this behavior is typically "it is my blog and I can run it how I like". This is true: it is your blog, and you can run it how you like, but the true measure of a person is not just in what they say, but also in the conversation and discourse that follows. Question: How long does it probably take the author to read a blog post? Options: A. 5 minutes B. 1 week C. several hours D. not enough information
A: A

(Q).
Read the following context and choose the correct option to answer the question. Context: The drive up to Rick's place in the hills always made me sick. Just after he bought the house with his ill gotten gains from his band's over-hyped, over-marketed, and over-bought sophomore Disc, he drove me out to see it in his beautiful but nauseating '70 Datsun 240 Z. All the smog combined with the pinball effects of winding up the hill at teeth-numbing speeds had me puking for an hour after we got there. I took the last turn at the top of the hill and watched the rising sun crest over the black blocks of the city, her angel wings soiled and cheapened with the soot of 12 million get-away drivers. Rick's house came into view out of the fog, its large glass panes sparkling like the last clean surface of an oversized ashtray. I parked between a blue hatchback and Rick's favorite toy: a 350 horsepower Impreza he had smuggled here from Japan. All his more expensive rides were in the garage, collecting dust and gaining vintage resale value. I rang the bell. I waited and watched a couple of squirrels fight over a small treasure in the bushes. The door opened. "Dingo." "Hey, Luna." Her job as Rick's assistant was to take care of his place while he was out being a rock star. She made sure all his bills were paid, his animals were fed, and that the subsequent fallout from any parties she might have in his absence didn't leave any lasting damage. She was pretty by most standards, gorgeous by others. Short with a tight schoolgirl body and raven hair that teased her avian shoulders. But by whatever standard, her beauty was like a rare and exotic bird she kept caged behind the bars of her perfect teeth. As soon as she opened her mouth it flew away. Question: Rufgt after Luna opens a door to Rick's house, the narrator Options: A. thinks she has a terrible sailor mouth B. not enough information C. hates what she says D. thinks she tries to hard to sound intelligent
(A).
C