argument59 交作业，互拍留链接

ldc792001UID：2134601

ＡＲＧＵＭＥＮＴ
59The following appeared in an article in the health section of a newspaper.

"According to the available medical records, the six worst worldwide flu epidemics during the past 300 years occurred in 1729, 1830, 1918, 1957, 1968, and 1977. These were all years with heavy sunspot activity—that is, years when the Earth received significantly more solar energy than in normal years. People at particular risk for the flu should therefore avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun."

[翻译]
根据现有的医疗记录，过去300年中最严重的六次世界范围的流感大流行分别发生于1729，1830，1918，1957和1977。这些都是太阳黑子活动剧烈的年份，即：地球所接收的太阳能比平常年份多的多的年份。因此，那些特别易患流感的人群应该避免长时间暴露于日光下。

1、        有的医疗记录并不局限于近300年。
2、        太阳黑子活动剧烈未必是流感发作的原因，还存在其他原因。
3、        特别易感人群是如何限定的，多长时间暴露阳光下为好，这些在文中都没有详细信息。
In the argument, the author claims that people at particular risk for the flu should avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun. To support the conclusion, the arguer cites six worst worldwide flu epidemics occurred in history medical records. In addition, it was reported that the flu epidemics were with heavy sunspot activities at the same time. At the first glance, the argument seems reasonable. However, after the second thought, some fallacies hidden will be disclosed after careful examination and care scrutiny.

To begin with, the available six medical records during past 300 years do not provide persuasive support to the conclusion. Common sense tells us that medical records have been found more than two thousands of years ago. Maybe, there are other possible flu epidemics records that have not cited by the author. Even though they are not much worst flu epidemics than six records in history, there should not be excluded since they must be conduce to the research of flu. Without other possible flu epidemics in history, it is hard or impossible to convince us to accept the conclusion.

In addition, the arguer fails to rule out other possibilities that account for the spread of flu epidemics. It is possible that certain bacteria infect certain city people and spread off rapidly to the worldwide extent while it was coincidence that sunspot activities spur heavily at that year. Even if it is the result of sunspot activities, it is maybe that the intense changing of whole sphere atmosphere caused by the sunspot activities accounts for the adventure of flu epidemics. Therefore, if the arguer does not rule out these ratiocinations above, then the conclusion in the argument will be greatly weakened.

Finally, the arguer does not provide detailed information of the conclusion. We have no concept how long People at particular risk for the flu should expose to the sun and how the arguer defines the impressionable people. The time exposure to the sun may be long or short. Commons tell us that apt sunshine will conduce to the health of human beings and overlong in the sunshine will be hurt by the rays of the sun. In addition, when it comes to those people at particular risk for the flu, we should be provided detailed health status including it should be prohibited under some sickness for example cancer patient. In a word, without specific definition, the conclusion in the argument gives us little constructive effect to avoid the flu epidemics.

To sum up, based what has discussed above, it is obvious that the conclusion in the argument is invalid and unreliable. To make it more persuasive, the arguer should provide more information about precious medical records in history and possible cause of flu epidemics, as well as the more detailed and precise definition to the conclusion in order to avoid the appearance of flu epidemics again.

abobibbyUID：2174676

晚上修改，呵呵。今天gter一直上不来