Answer choice (B) takes into account that first line of the stimulus.
"The number of aircraft collisions on the ground is increasing because of the substantial increase in the number of flights operated by the airlines."
So, if the airlines increase the number of flights to make up for lost seats, then the collisions will increase and fatalities may increase as well. If the number of flights remain the same, however, removing the seats should reduce fatalities according to the premises.
shunheJanuary 5, 2021
Hi @MP97,
Thanks for the question! So this question is essentially a strengthen question. We have a causal argument here with a number of causes and an effect. And we want to reduce the total number of fatalities. (B) says we can do this by not allowing the airlines to increase the number of flights to offset the decrease in the number of seats on each aircraft. Well, recall the first sentence of the stimulus. We’re told that there are more aircraft collisions because there are more flights. So if there’d be less flights, there’d be less collisions, and so less fatalities. That’s how (B) helps reduce fatalities. So basically what @liwenong28 said, good job!
Hope this helps! Feel free to ask any other questions that you might have.
