Dear Friends,

I was having problems in answering the following question.

Environmentalist: The use of snowmobiles in the vast park north of Milville creates
unacceptable levels of air pollution and should be banned.
Milville business spokesperson: Snowmobiling brings many out-of-towners to Milville in
winter months, to the great financial benefit of many local residents. So, economics dictate
that we put up with the pollution.
Environmentalist: I disagree: A great many cross-country skiers are now kept from visiting
Milville by the noise and pollution that snowmobiles generate.
Environmentalist responds to the business spokesperson by doing which of the
following?
A. Challenging an assumption that certain desirable outcome can derive from only one set of
circumstances
B. Challenging an assumption that certain desirable outcome is outweighed by negative aspects
associated with producing that outcome
C. Maintaining that the benefit that the spokesperson desires could be achieved in greater degree
by a different means
D. Claiming that the spokesperson is deliberately misrepresenting the environmentalist's position
in order to be better able to attack it
E. Denying that an effect that the spokesperson presents as having benefited a certain group of
people actually benefited those people


Please help.

OA after some discussions.

My choice was option E

Regards
Deano.