An energy company proposes placing 250 giant turbines into the Gulf Stream to generate electricity for North America. Some Europeans worry, however, about the potential threat to their climate. Without the warming effects of the Gulf Stream, much of Europe would be as cold as Labrador and the Yukon, areas at the same latitude that are unaffected by warming currents. However, their concern is unwarranted: the company claims that 250 turbines would slow the Gulf Stream about 1 percent, which is not enough to affect the European climate. Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the reasoning of the argument? ['The argument ignores the potential threat to marine life posed by placing turbines in the ocean.', 'The argument relies on an authority that may be biased.', 'The conclusion of the argument contradicts at least one of its premises.', 'The argument presumes, without providing justification, that latitude and temperature are linked.']