综合写作练习1topic：是工作4天好还是5天好？

LRXSSUID: 2695903

The speaker does not agree with that 可去掉吧 the reasons provided by the reading passage which is to refute the theory of giant-impact by pointing out three reasons.) g% d+ \. P  O& B
这句话有点绕 呵呵  尽量明了些
To begin up 你又up 怎么说的, the speaker believes that it is true that there should be a giant-impact on the surface of the earth to prove the occurrence of this collision. However, this collision occurred about 4 billion years ago, the trace of the impact had already been eroded. As a result, it is reasonable that we can't find the trace of this impact mark on the surface of the earth.: o4 u: F0 y; m/ K; ?! p' l

3 M  q% r" X1 f6 ]1 N( p, q
还有一个理由就是大陆板块运动碰撞的原因没有说
Furthermore, the speaker casts doubt on the idea in the reading passage that rocks on the moon don't contain volatile substances such as water. The speaker argues that before we collected the material on the moon, the water in it had already gone off. With such a big collision, the temperature would be very high on the moon, so the water in the rocks will be evaporated.水被蒸发么  主动就好了吧 而且时态要注意哦  过去时

Finally, the speakers states that it is clear that the density of the surface of the earth is much lower than the density of the center of the earth .in addition这个transitional word 放在这里有点不合适  这句话是提出与上句相反的观点哈  However， the author explains  可以这样说  , when the collision took place, obviously, the part of the surface of the earth would be firstly broken down, forming the moon. Thus, the density of the moon should be the same as the density of the surface of the earth. In order to support his perspective the speaker persuades us with evidence that According to the research, some statistics can also prove the density of the moon is just similar to the surface of the earth.- w, y4 [0 A0 n' m. w

To sum up, the reasons pointed out by the reading passage to refute the theory of giant-impact cannot be convincing

半夏之北UID: 2517498

高分120综合作文4

From the listening passage, the speaker believes that the Tunguska explosion was not caused by "swamp gas" explosion, which is challenging what is stated in the reading passage. The reasons are as follows.

To begin up, the speaker thinks that the absence of traces at the impact site cannot prove that theory. As it was after 19 years that scientists went to collect the information about the explosion, the traces were probably destroyed by the forces of nature. In contrast, in Canada, scientists went to the impact site in just 2 weeks, so they can easily find the traces of the explosion. That is the first point that the speaker casts doubt on the reading passage.

Furthermore, the speaker states that if the asteroid would explode in the lower atmosphere before heating the earth as a huge fire ball, there was not a huge crater on the land. As a result, not find a huge crater was very reasonable and cannot be regarded as evidence. That is the second point which contradicts what is stated in the reading passage.

Finally, the speaker points that if this explosion was caused by the swamp gas, there would not be only a single crater on the ground. However, from the evidence, there is just only one crater, so the reasons of the explosion would be more likely to be the asteroid. That is the last reason which is disagree the statement in the reading passage.

听了三遍，后两点还是没听明白.....

guoatjituoUID: 2629146

整体感觉很流畅，思路很清晰。后两个points有点含糊，有几个grammar errors
To begin up,应该换成是To begin with
not find (finding)a huge crater was very reasonable and cannot be regarded as evidence.
the second point 大体是由于空气压力很大，the asteroid 还没来得及冲到地上就explode了
Finally貌似是swamp gas 会满布在swamp sky不会concentrate,因此会有很多fireball,因此不会只有一个creater,因此...