In recent years, historians have struggled to differentiate between

In recent years, historians have struggled to differentiate between historical revisionism, which seeks to reinterpret orthodox views by considering new evidence and tones, and historical negationism, an illegitimate movement that, in an attempt to support a particular ideology, seeks to deny the existence of historical facts. On behalf of the American Historical Association, historians such as Pulitzer Prize-winner James McPherson argued that widely accepted views of history are fraught with their own biases and must not be considered immutable truths. Rather, McPherson argued, they should be understood as part of a "continuing dialogue between the present and the past."

Contemporary historians Deborah Libstadt and Alex Grobman are correct to distinguish between this sort of legitimate revisionism and outright negationism by pointing out the fact that legitimate revisionism acknowledges and respects a "certain body of irrefutable evidence" with regards to the occurrence of historical events, whereas negationists "reject the entire foundation of historical evidence." Therefore, a scholar who argues against the racial biases of the Dunning School's view of post-civil war reconstruction in light of newly unearthed primary source evidence should be considered a legitimate revisionist, while a scholar who denies that plantation slavery was ever widespread in the United States should be considered a negationist—and, thus, an illegitimate historian.

Based on the passage above, the author would most likely agree with which of the following statements?
(A) Historical orthodoxies should always be considered true until new evidence arises to call them into question.
(B) Historical revisionists are primarily motivated by ideology rather than academic curiosity.
(C) The Dunning School is an example of a group of scholars engaging in legitimate historical revisionism.
(D) While he or she can question orthodoxies, a revisionist historian must accept certain facts in order to be considered legitimate.
(E) Contemporary historians have become increasingly tolerant of negationist theories in light of recent historical discoveries.