Explanation: The first sentence introduces Thomas Townsend Brown. Sentence D mentions his family background and talks about his early experiments. This is followed by statement C which talks about his University years. Sentence E mentions an odd thing he noticed which is further described in sentence B. The paragraph ends with statement F.

Explanation: The first sentence talks about a skein running through the Athens games, sentence D goes on to mention specifically what is to be expected this time. Sentence C talks about the ambiguity in the situation and sentence E uses the instance of the tennis players to corroborate this point. Sentence B ends by stating the verdict on Greg’s case. This makes choice (b) correct.

Explanation: Out of the options presented, besides choice (e), it is obvious that the rest are building up on sentences. So, it should be the first sentence, sentence (b) then talks more about this “man’s judgment in the wider sense of the word” and sentence (d) goes back to Mr Hutton’s case and looks at the fact that his prejudices have been clear for long. Sentence (c) then mentions “these” as being foremost in his mind, which makes it the next sentence. Sentence (a) talks about the Kelly report again and mentions a certain fact that merited a lot of media attention. This “fact” could only be “the most obvious fact” as mentioned in sentence (d).