Environmentalist: The use of snowmobiles in the vast park north of

Milville create sun acceptable 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

答案是E

我的问题是E中指的 a certain of people 应该是指文中的local

residents. 但是按照E 讲的deny the effect that...actually benefited

those people （those people = local residents)

文中并没有讲到对local residents的benefit否啊 只是说许多skier are

now kept from visiting by the noise and pollution that snowmobiles

generate.

麻烦NN帮我分析 多谢!!!

spokesperson讲的话中不就是说snowmobiles招徕大量游客,使本地居民从经济上受益吗? 而environmentalist反驳说因为噪音大游客都不来了,本地居民当然就没法象以前设想的那样受益啦.

原来如此啊 恍然大悟！

多谢