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?
<!--[if !supportLists]-->A.
<!--[endif]-->Challenging an assumption that certain desirable outcome can derive from only one set of circumstances
<!--[if !supportLists]-->B.
<!--[endif]-->Challenging an assumption that certain desirable outcome is outweighed by negative
aspects associated with producing that outcom
<!--[if !supportLists]-->C.
<!--[endif]-->Maintaining that the benefit that the spokesperson desires could be achieved
in greater degree by a different means
<!--[if !supportLists]-->D. <!--[endif]-->Claiming that the spokesperson is deliberately misrepresenting the environmentalist’s
position in order to be better able to attack it
<!--[if !supportLists]-->E. <!--[endif]-->Denying that an effect that the spokesperson presents as having benefited a certain group of people actually benefited those people
网上答案选E,但据我看应该选B:
Challenging an assumption thatcertain desirable outcome is outweighed by negative
aspects associated with producing that outcome
环境学家们并没有否认雪上汽车会吸引来很多-many-游客从而给当地居民带来经济利益，
但他们指出“a great many"-非常多,比前面的many多--的滑雪爱好者因为雪上汽车带来的问题现在不来了。
因此，他们指出前面的收入很可能会被随之而产生的负效应---后者而抵消甚至盖过。
E的错误在于环境学家们并未直接反对雪上汽车会actually吸引客人过来。 | 
