Question

Which of the following most logically completes the argument below?

Although the number of large artificial satellites orbiting the Earth is small compared to the number of small pieces of debris in orbit, the large satellites interfere more seriously with telescope observations because of the strong reflections they produce. Because many of those large satellites have ceased to function, the proposal has recently been made to eliminate interference from nonfunctioning satellites by exploding them in space. This proposal, however, is ill conceived, since _______.

(A) many nonfunctioning satellites remain in orbit for years
(B) for satellites that have ceased to function, repairing them while they are in orbit would be prohibitively expensive
(C) there are no known previous instances of satellites’ having been exploded on purpose
(D) the only way to make telescope observations without any interference from debris in orbit is to use telescopes launched into extremely high orbits around the Earth
(E) a greatly increased number of small particles in Earth’s orbit would result in a blanket of reflections that would make certain valuable telescope observations impossible

Answer 1

(E) a greatly increased number of small particles in Earth’s orbit would result in a blanket of reflections that would make certain valuable telescope observations impossible

Step-by-step explanation:

The trade is one strong reflection for many weak reflections (and more dangerous near-Earth space travel).

None of the answer choices except the last one has anything to do with the effect of exploding a satellite. When you are arguing that exploding a satellite is ill conceived, you need to address specifically the effects of exploding the satellite.