Argument204 8月9日 G-89 互助组作业

安卓美达UID：2101780

25分钟限时超了一分钟，有点短

Argument204:

The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a farming publication.
'With continuing publicity about the need for healthful diets, and with new research about the harmful effects of eating too much sugar, nationwide demand for sugar will no doubt decline. Therefore, farmers in our state should use the land on which they currently grow sugar cane to grow peanuts, a food that is rich in protein and low in sugar. Farmers in the neighboring country of Palin greatly increased their production of peanuts last year, and their total revenues from that crop were quite high.'

In this argument, the arguer recommends that the farmers in that state should use the land where they currently grow sugar cane to grow peanuts. To justify the claim, the arguer point outs a prevailing concern about the harmful effects of eating too much sugar among the public. Beside that, the arguer further appraises the benefit brought to the neighboring country of Palin where the production of peanut increased last year. At first glance, this argument appears to be reasonable. However, a further reflaection reveals that it omits some important concerns that should be addressed to substantiate the argument.

Firstly, the arguer cites a research about the harmful effects of eating too much sugar.  But the information provided in this program is too vague to be information. This claim does not indicate who conduct this study, where and when are how the study is conduct. Lacking information about details of this research, it is impossible to access the validity of the result.

Secondly, even if the research can to some extent be considered representative of the tendency in general. The evidence offered is still insufficient to support the claim that the nationwide demand for sugar will no doubt decline. The arguer hastily establish a causal connection between the  healithful diets population and sugar demand decline. The arguer fails to take industrial and pharmaceutic demands of the sugar into consideration.  Without evaluating the proportation of non-food sugar consumption in the national market, the arguer cannot make a convincing argument based on this study.

Thirdly, it is hightly doubttul that facts drawn from the farmers in the neighboring country of Palin are applicable to the farmers of the country in question. Difference bewteen the two countries' agricultural system and marking clealy overweigh the similarity, thus making the analogy highly suspect.

In sum, as it stands, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. Before we accept the recommendation, the arguer must present more substantial facts to prove that the nationwide demand for sugar will indefinitely decline due to the health diets related factors. To better access the argument, we still need more information concerning farming on the neighboring country.

OceanDUID：2118730

占一个

tianrushuiUID：207550

In this argument, the arguer recommends that the farmers in that state should use the land where they currently grow sugar cane to grow peanuts. To justify the claim, the arguer point outs a prevailing concern about the harmful effects of eating too much sugar among the public. Beside that, the arguer further appraises the benefit brought to the neighboring country of Palin where the production of peanut increased last year. At first glance, this argument appears to be reasonable. However, a further reflaection (reflection) reveals that it omits some important concerns that should be addressed to substantiate the argument.

Firstly, the arguer cites a research about the harmful effects of eating too much sugar.  But the information provided in this program is too vague to be information. This claim does not indicate who conduct this study, where and when are how the study is conduct. Lacking information about details of this research, it is impossible to access the validity of the result.

Secondly, even if the research can to some extent be considered representative of the tendency in general. The evidence offered is still insufficient to support the claim that the nationwide demand for sugar will no doubt decline. The arguer hastily establish a causal connection between the  healithful(healthful) diets population and sugar demand decline. The arguer fails to take industrial and pharmaceutic demands of the sugar into consideration.  Without evaluating the proportation(proportion) of non-food sugar consumption in the national market, the arguer cannot make a convincing argument based on this study.

Thirdly, it is hightly(highly) doubttu(doubtful)l that facts drawn from the farmers in the neighboring country of Palin are applicable to the farmers of the country in question. Difference(s) between the two countries' agricultural system and marking(是否应该是marketing) clealy(clearly) overweigh the similarity, thus making(应该是make吧) the analogy highly suspect.这段可以再展开一点来写啊.
In sum, as it stands, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. Before we accept the recommendation, the arguer must present more substantial facts to prove that the nationwide demand for sugar will indefinitely decline due to the health diets related factors. To better access the argument, we still need more information concerning farming on the neighboring country.
感觉有些短，第四段完全可以再展开一点来写的，还有就是有些拼写错误
帮我也改下吧
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=315264

[ Last edited by tianrushui on 2005-8-10 at 09:50 ]