Question

consider this claim:
scuba diving is better than snorkeling for experiencing the undersea world.
now consider how someone might argue against this. which sentence presents the strongest and most reasonable counterclaim to the above claim?
snorkeling is better because it gives people a taste of what they could see if they were ever to go scuba diving.
scuba divers can become dizzy if they surface too quickly, so scuba diving is not a good way to enjoy nature.
scuba diving produces loud bubbles that scare fish away, but snorkeling is silent, so you can get closer to the fish.

Explanation:

The strongest counterclaim directly addresses the core of the original claim (experiencing the undersea world) by highlighting a specific, practical advantage of snorkeling that enhances this experience. The first option frames snorkeling as a preview, not a superior experience. The second focuses on a safety risk, not the quality of the undersea experience. The third contrasts the two activities by showing snorkeling allows closer, less disruptive interaction with marine life, which directly improves the undersea experience.

Answer:

Scuba diving produces loud bubbles that scare fish away, but snorkeling is silent, so you can get closer to the fish.