[a习作temp] Argument47 [复制链接]

renyun1314
UID: 2494792

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 250
注册时间: 2008-5-16
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2008-7-18 20:34:06 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

TOPIC: ARGUMENT47 - Scientists studying historical weather patterns have discovered that in the mid-sixth century, Earth suddenly became significantly cooler. Although few historical records survive from that time, some accounts found both in Asia and Europe mention a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperatures. Either a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding with Earth could have created a large dust cloud throughout Earth's atmosphere that would have been capable of blocking enough sunlight to lower global temperatures significantly. A large meteorite collision, however, would probably create a sudden bright flash of light, and no extant historical records of the time mention such a flash. Some surviving Asian historical records of the time, however, mention a loud boom that would be consistent with a volcanic eruption. Therefore, the cooling was probably caused by a volcanic eruption.
WORDS: 340 TIME: 00:30:00 DATE: 2008-7-18 19:51:09

The arguer attends to convince us that the sudden cooling in mid-sixth century is caused by a volcanic eruption. To substantiate this assertion, he or she analyzes the two possibilities that could cause the cooling, besides, some facts are cited. However, this assumption is untenable for several critical flaws.

The most severe problem is that, the arguer actually assumes that there is only one reason could lead to the cooling, which is the large dust cloud throughout Earth's atmosphere that would have been capable of blocking enough sunlight to lower global temperatures significantly. Then he or she goes further to reason that either a meteorite collision or an eruption is able to result in the sudden cooling. As we know, if the sun goes into a period during which it diffuses much less energy, it could lead to an obvious lower temperature on Earth. Nevertheless, the arguer fails to take those outside factors into consideration. Thus his or her conclusion is unconvincing.

Another flaw worth pointing out is that the arguer claim there is no meteorite collision during that time based on the mere fact that there is no record to prove its existence. As there is little records survive, it's entirely possible that the mere record about a collision happened that time perished, or a meteorite collision actually took place without anyone recording it. Then the possibility remains that a meteorite collision helps the lower of temperature.

Turning to the volcanic eruption, a similar problem remains that no strong evidence lends support to its existence. As the arguer mentioned, only some surviving Asian historical records of the time suggest a loud boom that would be consistent with a volcanic eruption, it goes to further to ensure a real volcanic eruption before more evidence being found to complete its credibility. The mere record of a boom does not indicate it came from a volcanic eruption.

The fact that some accounts found both in Asia and Europe mention a dimming of the sun and extremely low temperatures might refutes the arguer himself or herself. Since no information about other areas are provide, it’s possible other areas did not experience such change, which means there is no such a volcanic eruption that lowered Earth’s temperature, otherwise the every parts would feel it without exception.

In sum, other factors might contribute to the cooling of the earth, and it is in short of evidence to rule out the existence of the meteorite collision and make sure the existence of a volcanic eruption. Even if the eruption is true during that time, whether it is extensive to cause the cooling is open to doubt. Accordingly, I'm not convinced by the arguer.

又是分钟写了不到350，又是failure。一定要加速了！！！！！！！！

0 0

使用道具举报

lvxiao123
UID: 2351325

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 258
注册时间: 2007-6-18
精华: 0
帖子: 0

沙发

发表于 2008-7-18 23:33:56 |只看该作者

The arguer attends to convince us that the sudden cooling in mid-sixth century is caused by a volcanic eruption. To substantiate this assertion, he or she analyzes the two possibilities that could cause the cooling, besides, some facts are cited. However, this assumption is untenable for several critical flaws.

The most severe problem is that, the arguer actually assumes that there is only one reason could lead to the cooling, which is the large dust cloud throughout Earth's atmosphere that would have been capable of blocking enough sunlight to lower global temperatures significantly. Then he or she goes further to reason that either a meteorite collision or an eruption is able to result in the sudden cooling. As we know, if the sun goes into a period during which it diffuses much less energy, it could lead to an obvious lower temperature on Earth. Nevertheless, the arguer fails to take those outside factors into consideration. Thus his or her conclusion is unconvincing.

Another flaw worth pointing out is that the arguer claim there is no meteorite collision during that time based on the mere fact that there is no record to prove its existence. As there is little records survive, it's entirely possible that the mere record about a collision happened that time perished, or a meteorite collision actually took place without anyone recording it. Then the possibility remains that a meteorite collision helps the lower of temperature.

Turning to the volcanic eruption, a similar problem remains that no strong evidence lends support to its existence. As the arguer mentioned, only some surviving Asian historical records of the time suggest a loud boom that would be consistent with a volcanic eruption, it goes to further to ensure a real volcanic eruption before more evidence being found to complete its credibility. The mere record of a boom does not indicate it came from a volcanic eruption.

The fact that some accounts found both in Asia and Europe mention a dimming of the sun and extremely low temperatures might refutes the arguer himself or herself. Since no information about other areas are provide, it’s possible other areas did not experience such change, which means there is no such a volcanic eruption that lowered Earth’s temperature, otherwise the every parts would feel it without exception.

In sum, other factors might contribute to the cooling of the earth, and it is in short of evidence to rule out the existence of the meteorite collision and make sure the existence of a volcanic eruption. Even if the eruption is true during that time, whether it is extensive to cause the cooling is open to doubt. Accordingly, I'm not convinced by the arguer.
整篇文章：
1.语言连贯，表达丰富
2.基本攻击点都找到了，逻辑清晰
说实话挑不出什么问题了，可能时间太少，如果每段能展开一点就更好了

使用道具举报