Catmull: Although historians consider themselves to be social scientists, different historians never arrive at the same conclusions about specific events of the past. Thus historians never determine what actually happened; like novelists, they merely create interesting fictional stories about the many different problems that people have faced. The reasoning in Catmull's argument is flawed because the argument
A: presumes, without providing justification, that unless historians' conclusions are objectively true, they have no value whatsoever
B: bases its conclusion on premises that contradict each other
C: draws a conclusion that simply restates a claim presented in support of that conclusion
D: concludes, solely on the basis of the claim that different people have reached different conclusions about a topic, that none of these conclusions is true
Choose A, B, C or D as your solution.
D