2009作文小组 进军美利坚我是翠花 8.31

我是chineseladyUID: 2662783

In the passage, the author argues that the prescribed fire is not available to adopt to protect lives and people. There are three demonstrations in the reading passage showing the doubts on this point. However, the speaker refutes this viewpoint with more details and evidence in the following article.

To begin with, the author acclaims that prescribed fire will lead to air pollution and other effect on the climate. But the speaker allocates that prescribed fire could bring active influence on both plant and the earth. It will warm the field and stimulate the seed to grow. The plant would not be ash under the prescribed fire.

Secondly, the article argues that people do not comprehend what kind of consequence the prescribed fire would bring. So people feel it may be dangerous. The lecture refutes it that those who are participated in that group are already trained and know the details concerning the result. Additionally, prescribed fire has been utilized for a long time. Hence, prescribed fire is safe enough for humans to protect themselves.

Finally, the author considers that it is pretty expensive to
use prescribe fire, however, the lecture cast it in doubt that it will cost more to fight with a fire and, comparing with the whole property of people have, the expense from prescribed fire is cheap. It is a reasonable price.

In the end, the speaker totally refutes the view from the reading passage with stronger evidence.

penergyUID: 2667830

In the passage, the author argues that the prescribed fire is not

available to adopt to protect lives and people. There are three

demonstrations in the reading passage showing the doubts on this point.

However, the speaker refutes this viewpoint with more details and

evidence in the following article.

To begin with, the author acclaims that prescribed fire will lead to

air pollution and other effect（effects） on the climate. But the

speaker allocates that prescribed fire could bring active influence on

both plant and the earth. It will warm the field and stimulate the seed

to grow. The plant would（will） not be ash under the prescribed fire.

Secondly, the article argues that people do not comprehend what kind of

consequence the prescribed fire would bring. So people feel it may be

dangerous. The lecture refutes it that those who are participated in

that group are already trained and know the details concerning the

result. Additionally, prescribed fire has been utilized for a long

time. Hence, prescribed fire is safe enough for humans to protect

themselves.
  
Finally, the author considers that it is pretty expensive touse（这个词

好像没啥用） prescribe fire, however, the lecture cast（casts） it in

doubt that it will cost more to fight with a fire and, comparing with

the whole property of people have, the expense from prescribed fire is

cheap. It is a reasonable price.

In the end, the speaker totally refutes the view from the reading

passage with stronger evidence.

总评，整体机构完整，美中不足就是人称单复数。