Kris grew up on a farm. In a persuasive speech to classmates, she wanted to prove

that dangers from pesticides and other chemicals had been exaggerated by fanatical
environmentalists.

During her research, though, she discovered that researchers' data
revealed that chemicals showed up in elevated levels in the blood and urine of persons
living near the fields where chemicals were used. She learned, furthermore, that the
chemicals were linked to various physical ailments and diseases. In light of these
findings, how should Kris proceed?
A) Abandon the topic since she can no longer effectively argue her original view
B) Continue searching for material that supports her view, and ignore all other
C) Discount the findings in her speech, noting how she is living proof they're wrong
D) Continue researching, open to the possibility she may need to change her position

D