【kaleidoscope】第三次作业 ARGUMENT7 by wdassfm

wdassfmUID：2542447

汗~~补作业……

7.The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview newspaper.

"In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council, because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."

I have to doubt whether the arguer is a proponent for Ann Green(AG) rather than approach the mayoral election with an uninterested position. Apparently, he seemed strongly conforming on the assertion that Clearview(C) has been polluted based on several ambiguous phenomena, and that all responsibility is owning to Frank Braun(FB).

Firstly, the examples mentioned in the letter lend scant support to that claim that the current members of C town council are not caring about the environment. The augur merely mentioned that the number of factories in C has doubled, but he did not provide what kinds are these increased factories, as well as their current environmental state. It is entirely possible the certain new style industry of C is booming thus more environmentally friendly factories is necessary to be built, which have little harm to nature. Or though the newly built ones are still old ones, but they had been equipped with facilities such as air cleaners and sewage system. In addition, the arguer has overlooked other factors that may also be contributive to the other two examples given. With the improved living conditions, the number of personally owned cars may be increasing rapidly, resulting in more air pollutions. And the phenomena that respiratory illness seem pervading might due to more people's addiction to cigarettes, caused by the press of quick pace of life. Without scrupulous thought on these things, they will not suffice to prove the environment has been more polluted.

Assume that environmental problems do appear recently in C, placing all responsibilities to the town council is too arbitrary. Maybe the natural disasters such as flood and earthquake have recently appeared in this territory, so the much of consideration of government has to move to these urgent ones. Or maybe the level of environmental problems has been increasing all the time, and the rate has been slowed down a lot because of the concern given by the town council recently. Besides, even it is true that the town council placed too little concern on the environment, it does not mean to be FB's fault, who might have been proposing this advise but been ignored by others.

What is more, admitting FB's lack of concern does not amount to the conclusion we should AG based on the mere fact he is a member of an institute aiming to protect environment. Just like discussed above, though AG is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, he may not be really working on the task. And the worry can only be eliminated when certain reports on his working records or other evidence can be given. Even he is really caring the environment, to be an effective environment protector, other administrative abilities are needed, such as the ability to make out the most proper policy and to mediate among factories to get his policy accepted and obeyed. Unless more evidence can be rendered to sustain that AG is capable of this position, I would not accepted the augurs suggestion.

In sum, though the intention to protect the C' living environment was good, whether to vote for FB or AG remains to be more clairvoyantly considered as to make the worthy decision.

azoiUID：2636348

I have to doubt whether the arguer is a proponent for Ann Green(AG) rather than approach the mayoral election with an uninterested position. Apparently, he seemed strongly conforming on the assertion that Clearview(C) has been polluted based on several ambiguous phenomena, and that all responsibility is owning to Frank Braun(FB).

Firstly, the examples mentioned in the letter lend scant support to that claim that the current members of C town council are not caring about the environment. The augur merely mentioned that the number of factories in C has doubled, but he did not provide what kinds are these increased factories, as well as their current environmental state. It is entirely possible the certain new style industry of C is booming thus more environmentally friendly factories is necessary to be built, which have little harm to nature. Or though the newly built ones are still old ones(不明确), but they had been equipped with facilities such as air cleaners and sewage system. In addition, the arguer has overlooked other factors that may also be contributive to the other two examples given. With the improved living conditions, the number of personally owned cars may be increasing rapidly, resulting in more air pollutions. And the phenomena that respiratory illness seem pervading might due to more people's addiction to cigarettes, caused by the press of quick pace of life. Without scrupulous thought on these things, they will not suffice to prove the environment has been more polluted.

Assume that environmental problems do appear recently in C, placing all responsibilities to the town council is too arbitrary. Maybe the natural disasters such as flood and earthquake have recently appeared in this territory, so the much of consideration of government has to move to these urgent ones. Or maybe the level of environmental problems has been increasing all the time, and the rate has been slowed down a lot because of the concern given by the town council recently. Besides, even it is true that the town council placed too little concern on the environment, it does not mean to be FB's fault, who might have been proposing this advise but been ignored by others.

What is more, admitting FB's lack of concern does not amount to the conclusion we should （elect）AG based on the mere fact he（我强烈怀疑叫Ann的应为female）
is a member of an institute aiming to protect environment. Just like discussed above, though AG is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, he may not be really working on the task. And the worry can only be eliminated when certain reports on his working records or other evidence can be given. Even he is really caring the environment, to be an effective environment protector, other administrative abilities are needed, such as the ability to make out the most proper policy and to mediate among factories to get his policy accepted and obeyed. Unless more evidence can be rendered to sustain that AG is capable of this position, I would not accepted the augurs suggestion.

In sum, though the intention to protect the C' living environment was good, whether to vote for FB or AG remains to be more clairvoyantly considered as to make the worthy decision.

用词很赞，每次看你的文章都能学到很多vocabulary……
另外想问一下真正机考的时候地名人名可以缩写么？

wdassfmUID：2542447

2# azoi

哈~还是你的用词强大，恩~可以的~但是以一次用要加括号

wdassfmUID：2542447

2# azoi

:dizzy: 我对你的质疑很无语……