题目：
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.
"Commuters complain that increased rush-hour traffic on Blue Highway between the suburbs and the city center has doubled their commuting time. The favored proposal of the motorists' lobby is to widen the highway， adding an additional lane of traffic. But last year's addition of a lane to the nearby Green Highway was followed by a worsening of traffic jams on it. A better alternative is to add a bicycle lane to Blue Highway. Many area residents are keen bicyclists. A bicycle lane would encourage them to use bicycles to commute， and so would reduce rush-hour traffic rather than fostering an increase."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
中文翻译：
乘客抱怨在郊区与市中心的B高速公路的更长交通高峰期使他们在路上的时间多花了一倍。 一个驾驶协会的不错建议是拓宽高速公路，修建一条附加机动车道。但去年但临近的G高速采用了相同的方法后交通状况更加恶化。一种更好的建议是在B高速上修一条自行车道。很多的当地人都是自行车爱好者。一条新的自行车道将会激励他们骑自行车外出，这样的方式照比驾驶协会的建议会减少高峰时间而不是延长。
写一篇回应，讨论还需要何种具体的证据才能更好的评估上面的论证，并解释这个证据是如何强化/削弱这篇文章的论证的。
感谢您阅读《argument27 》一文，出国留学网(liuxue86.com)编辑部希望本文能帮助到您。