Question

why is the authors response to potential objections inadequate? 1 it answers the traffic concern with a flippant rhetorical question rather than meaningfully addressing the issue. 2 it does not sufficiently emphasize the environmental benefits of the plan to build underground storm - water storage tanks. 3 in favoring the environment, the response betrays the authors bias against the communitys use of automobiles.

Explanation:

All three points identify flaws in the author's response: it dismisses a concern without meaningful engagement, fails to highlight key environmental benefits of the plan, and shows a biased stance against the community's needs rather than addressing objections fairly.

Answer:

1. It answers the traffic concern with a flippant rhetorical question rather than meaningfully addressing the issue.
2. It does not sufficiently emphasize the environmental benefits of the plan to build underground storm-water storage tanks.
3. In favoring the environment, the response betrays the author's bias against the community's use of automobiles.