16. In paragraph 5 the author states that opponents of wave technology 'claim that deploying ocean wave devices could also disrupt the relationships that people have with the oceans...' To what extent is this claim supported?
Answer: A
It is unsupported because the author follows the claim with subjective information.
The claim that deploying ocean wave devices could disrupt the relationships that people have with the oceans is unsupported as the author follows it with subjective information that does not provide factual evidence to substantiate the claim.
A) It is unsupported because the author follows the claim with subjective information.
This option is correct because the author indeed provides subjective observations regarding people's relationships with the ocean, rather than presenting objective data or concrete examples that would support the claim. The mention of ruined views of the seaside is based on personal perceptions rather than empirical evidence.
B) It is unsupported because the author follows the claim with a counterexample that disproves it.
This option is incorrect because the author does not provide a counterexample that disproves the claim. Instead, the author discusses subjective views about disrupted relationships without presenting evidence to negate the opponents' argument.
C) It is well supported because the author follows it with facts and objective evidence.
This option is incorrect because the author does not provide facts or objective evidence to support the claim regarding disrupted relationships with the ocean. The information that follows is subjective and lacks empirical backing.
D) It is well supported because the author follows it with scientific data that furthers the claim.
This option is incorrect because there is no scientific data presented following the claim. The discussion remains in the realm of subjective opinion rather than scientific evidence, thus failing to substantiate the claim adequately.
Conclusion
The claim regarding the disruption of relationships with the ocean is deemed unsupported because the subsequent information is subjective rather than factual. The absence of objective evidence to back up the claim highlights the weakness in the opponents' argument, establishing that the assertion lacks the necessary support to be considered valid. All other options fail to accurately reflect the nature of the author's follow-up to the claim.