The expansion of the runways at the Bay City Airport will allow larger planes to use the airport. These new planes will create a large amount of noise, a nuisance for residents who live near the airport. However, many of the residents in this neighborhood

This argument concludes that extending of runways at the Bay City Airport might allow bigger aircrafts to use the airport and this will incline quality of life for the local people. This conclusion, based solely on the one evidence, is doubtful. Are you sure that residents in that neighborhood work for that local company which has won the contract? If do not, how they can improve the quality of their life? Why are you confident that the company will fulfill her obligations?

First of all, it is assumed in the argument that "many of the residents" take part in that project. But how this data was obtained? Was there a statistic questioning? What is the sample? Is this sample conform with laws of statistic? Thus, this fact is untrustworthy and has the flaw as there is no possibility to understand his reliability.

Secondly, as for improving the quality of neighborhood life, in what condition is it now? Were made measurements of the current situation? These conclusions are not supported by anything and also have a fallacy.

Finally, people are not able to see the future, consequently, nobody could be certain that the local company will finish the project as there are a lot of factors which can influence on stages of the expansion of the runways at the Bay City Airport such as staff turnover, national currency devaluation or crisis.

To sum up, the argument and his conclusion are unwarranted because they do not support by statistics and risks were not determined and counted.