吕男改verydarkA7

huashiyiqikeUID: 2674177

The letter's author recommends that the residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green rather than Frank Braun, for the reason of Ann Green's identity of Good Earth Coalition(把原因一起罗列出来，这个原因和后面本质上是一回事，不要分开).To support his argument, the editor cites that the number of factories of Clearview has doubled, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. （加连接词）This argument is logically flawed in several critical respects.
To begin with, the argument unfairly assumes that Frank Braun is not protecting environment. Even though the current members are not protecting the environment is true, the author cannot asserts that Frank Braun is negative in protecting environment. Perhaps Frank Braun is entirely interested in protecting environment, despite the major of the town council are opposite. The editor provides no evidence to substantiate these assumptions. Lacking such evidence it quite possible that Frank Braun, the candidate of Clearview town council, is eager in improving environment. Similarly, the author also wrongly asserts Ann Green a protector of environment because he is a member of Good Earth Coalition. Maybe the creed of this coalition is preventing pollution; the author gives no evidences show that Ann Green will do something to improve the environment of Clearview.
The argument also assumes unfairly that the doubled factories and 25 percents more patients with respiratory illnesses treated in local hospitals in Clearview is attributed to the Clearview town council, even Frank Braun. It is entirely possible that the increasing number of factories is resulted in the fast development of this area, and the development benefits all the residents in Clearview. It is also possible that
（句式变化）these factories are eco-friendly, making little pollution but great benefit. The editor fails to prove the relation between the increasing number of factories and respiratory patients and the Clearview town council(?这里没看懂), and what harm have the new factories done to their purlieu.
Moreover, the author fails to provide any strongly evidence that the increasing patients with respiratory illnesses are suffered from the polluted environment. It’s strongly possible that the increment of patients is causal in time, having nothing related to the pollution. Perhaps their illness is caused by natural reasons, maybe by some climate changes. Having pondered these possibilities, if the editor cannot substantiate the relationship between the increment of patients with respiratory illnesses and the pollution indulged by the Clearview’s town council, this argument is still unable to convince me.个人觉得这个论点比较弱 25%已经很能说明问题了
To sum up, the editor’s recommendation is not persuasive. To bolster it he must provide clear evidence that Ann Green is more eager（仅仅是eager恐怕不够吧） to protect the environment than Frank Braun. He still needs to give evidence that the increment of factories have led to worse environment of Clearview, and the increasing patients with respiratory illnesses are actually suffered from the pollution. What is more, he should provide clear truth that all the pollution is related to （because of） the town council, including Frank Braun, one of the candidates.


没看出这个是早期作品啊！汗。
结构问题不大。
论证重点突出，除了有一处较牵强
语言重复较明显，句式变化不足。
缺少亮点，不足以打6分，但5分是没问题的。 怎么红色标记都出不来？

verydarkUID: 2765585

谢谢~受益匪浅