2009进军美利坚作文小组8.26作业machi730

machi730UID: 2672537

120 practice3

终于能卡着时间写完了 不容易。。。我自己改过一些了 发现爱写大长句子不是个好习惯 哎

The speaker disagrees whith the reading passage's assertion that the broadly accepted giant-impact theory, which refers to the formation of Moon, is actually indefensible. He provides several reasons to disprove the passage's argument as follows.

In the first place, the fact that no trace was found on the surface of earth does not necessarily mean that the moon was not a part of earth. It is possible that the trace of the collision was erased long ago by the movements of rock plates. This assumption weakens the evidence provided by the passage effectively.

In the second place, the absence of water in the rocks of Moon is explainable and cannot disprove the giant-impact theory. It is definitely possible that the water which was contained in the rocks of Moon had been vaporized into space owing to the
high temperature after the collision.

Lastly, the fact that the density of Moon is much lower than that of Earth is also reasonable. Because Moon was once a part of the surface, not the high-density core, of Earth. Actually, the density of Moon is consistent with the surface of Earth. This fact can strengthen the giant-impact theory instead of weakening it as the passage suggests.

To sum up, the speaker uses three reasons to prove that the evidence provided by the passge is not convincing enough. Thus, he takes his side with the giant-impact theory.

leedxUID: 2684711

欣赏中

我是chineseladyUID: 2662783

The speaker disagrees whith the reading passage's assertion that 这个从句很容易让人以为是passage's assertion的the broadly accepted giant-impact theory, which refers to the formation of Moon, is actually indefensible. He provides several reasons to disprove the passage's argument as follows.开头简洁明了好啊

In the first place, the fact that no trace was found on the surface of earth does not necessarily mean that the moon was not a part of earth. It is possible that the trace of the collision was erased long ago by the movements of rock plates. 还有几个billions的, 没说This assumption weakens这个好,学了! the evidence provided by the passage effectively.% U1 D, D* W' r( h6 y+ f8 i

In the second place, the absence of water in the rocks of Moon is explainable and cannot disprove the giant-impact theory. It is definitely possible that the water which was contained in the rocks of Moon had been vaporized我想写这个一着急忘了怎么拼写 into space owing to the high temperature after the collision.

ly, the fact that the density of Moon is much lower than that of Earth is also reasonable. Because Moon was once a part of the surface, not the high-density core, of Earth. Actually, the density of Moon is consistent with the surface of Earth. This fact can strengthen the giant-impact theory instead of weakening it as the passage suggests.

m up, the speaker uses three reasons to prove that the evidence provided by the passge is not convincing enough. Thus, he takes his side with the giant-impact theory.我想是时间原因吧,没个点说的不是100%的到位i.不过基本都讲明白的. 我也是有这个毛病, 上次有个点记下来了, 就是没写作文里. 我感觉小作文没你的大作文写的精彩.

machi730UID: 2672537

3# 我是chineselady
谢谢点评！ 是啊 我写作文喜欢慢慢写 一有时间限制就特仓促 还是得多练啊

fancywwUID: 2583671

在前面同学的基础上改，相同意见就不提了，不同意见还可以探讨一下，不是fancy懒哈~呵呵，fancy改的是蓝色

The speaker disagrees whith the reading passage's assertion that 这个从句很容易让人以为是passage's assertion的the broadly accepted giant-impact theory, which refers to the formation of Moon（这句有点多余）, is actually indefensible. He provides several reasons to disprove the passage's argument as follows.开头简洁明了好啊 开头焕然一新，不错

the first place, the fact that no trace was found on the surface of earth does not necessarily mean that the moon was not a part of earth. It is possible that the trace of the collision was erased long ago by the movements of rock plates. 还有几个billions的, 没说This assumption （assumption是假设，这里用possibility更好 我觉得）weakens这个好,学了! the evidence provided by the passage effectively.% U1 D, D* W' r( h6 y+ f8 i+ y  o! b& s4 g  P3 I

In the second place, the absence of water in the rocks of Moon is explainable and cannot disprove the giant-impact theory. It is definitely possible that the water which was contained in the rocks of Moon had been vaporized我想写这个一着急忘了怎么拼写 into space owing to the high temperature after the collision.

Thirdly, the fact that the density of Moon is much lower than that of Earth is also reasonable. Because Moon was once a part of the surface, not the high-density core, of Earth. Actually, the density of Moon is consistent with the surface of Earth. This fact can strengthen the giant-impact theory instead of weakening it as the passage suggests.% r+ t& r- k# v. C  D; E6 e

Fm up, the speaker uses three reasons to prove that the evidence provided by the passge is not convincing enough. Thus, he takes his side with the giant-impact theory.我想是时间原因吧,没个点说的不是100%的到位i.不过基本都讲明白的. 我也是有这个毛病, 上次有个点记下来了, 就是没写作文里. 我感觉小作文没你的大作文写的精彩.

句子没上次那么长了，不错，不知道字数多少，如果没到225可以再丰富一点，把一些过程性的叙述出来，而不是一句带过，如“owing to the high temperature after the collision”，这句就可以用叙述性的句子扩展。

注意，the Moon，the Earth，都有定冠词的。文章中好像都没有。

总之点都听到写到了，句子也很通畅，不错。加油。