Question

historian a: the american revolution was caused by the american colonists greedy desire for more money. they were simply tired of paying their fair share of taxes to the british government even though british troops protected the colonies during the french and indian war! furthermore, their claims to be fighting for freedom and liberty are totally wrong. many of the colonists still owned slaves at the time of the revolution! the traitorous american colonists simply wanted to steal land that was already claimed by great britain. historian b: the american revolution was completely justified due to great britains repeated abuse of the colonists. the british passed enormous taxes on goods in the colonies, even though the americans had no say in the british government. british soldiers were also allowed to live in american houses and eat common peoples food without paying. during the boston massacre, british soldiers even fired their muskets into a crowd of civilians! under such oppressive conditions, its no wonder that the patriotic colonists would want to fight for the freedom and liberty of all people! which statement best describes a similarity between the two historians arguments? a. neither can be considered a credible source because they did not experience the american revolution. b. both try to confuse the reader with unrelated details rather than making any strong claims. c. neither uses any historical evidence to support his claims about the american revolution. d. both try to persuade the reader by only including details that support their arguments.

Explanation:

Historian A selects details like colonists' greed and slave - ownership to condemn them. Historian B picks details of British abuse to justify the colonists' fight. Both focus only on details that back their positions.

Answer:

D. Both try to persuade the reader by only including details that support their arguments.