【草莓酱拌饭组】Argument112 by 智勇

智勇双全。瀚UID: 2632607

Argument112
The following proposal was raised at a meeting of the Franklin City Council.
"Franklin Airport, which is on a bay, is notorious for flight delays. The airport management wants to build new runways to increase capacity but can only do so by filling in 900 acres of the bay. The Bay Coalition organization objects that filling in the bay will disrupt tidal patterns and harm wildlife. But the airport says that if it is permitted to build its new runways, it will fund the restoration of 1,000 acres of wetlands in areas of the bay that have previously been damaged by industrialization. This plan should be adopted, for it is necessary to reduce the flight delays, and the wetlands restoration part of the plan ensures that the bay's environment will actually be helped rather than hurt."
位于海湾的Franklin机场因其航班的晚点而臭名昭著。机场管理者想建一些新跑道来增加机场容量，但这只能通过填埋900亩海湾来实现。Bay Coalition组织反对说填埋将会扰乱潮汐规律并对生物造成破坏。但机场方面声称如果修建新跑道的计划被批准，他们将会出资重整海湾以前因工业化而被破坏的地区的湿地。这一计划应该被采纳，因为减少航班误点是必须的，而且计划中重整湿地的部分将会保证海湾的环境将会得到改善而不是被破坏。



    In this argument, the author concludes that building new runways by filling in the bay should be passed to reduce the flight delays. First, the author reasons the flight delays are due to the short of capacity. He further suggests that we can only solve the airport capacity problem by increasing the runways. For another, the author believes that the wetlands restoration plan will help the bay's environment becoming better. But the argument contains several facets that are questionable.

    First of all, the author blames the short of capacity for the flight delays without inquiry. Very likely but not necessarily, other factors, such as bad weather and the location of Franklin airport are ignored possible causes for the flight delays. Or it's not a problem about the defects in landing or takeoff. The trouble is that they need more airport lounges or more departure gates. Without eliminating these possibilities, the author cannot rely on his assumption to conclude that the Franklin Airport' flight delays are caused by the lack of runways.

    Secondly, even though the short capacity is due to the flight delays, the author failed to consider other methods to solve the problem which may be better. However, The author doesn't provide conclusive evidence to prove that we can only build new runways to increase the airport capacity. According to the experience of Shanghai, Tokyo or the other big cities around the world, perhaps they can build another airport to solve this problem. Since the author has failed to consider and rule out the other methods, the assertion that the building plan should be adopted to reduce the flight delays cannot be taken seriously.

    Thirdly, even if the building plan is practical, there is no guarantee that the wetlands restoration plan will absolutely help the bays environment becoming better. On the one hand, as cites in the argument, filling in the bay will change tidal patterns and damage the live condition of wildlife. That means the plan poses a threat to the biodiversity and some species may extinct. On the other hand, there is no accurate evidence to convince us that the benefits of repairing the wetlands is able to contract the harms of filling-bay -- the filling-bay and repairing-wetlands plan is really good for Franklin's environment. We cannot to make decision by the scarce information from the author's words.

    In conclusion, this argument is unpersuasive. It could be substantiated by providing more solid evidence that the fight delays of Franklin Airport were caused by the lack of runways or building more runways to improve the awful condition of this airport is necessary. In addition, the author should provide enough evidence to prove that filling in the bay and the wetlands restoration plan will ensure the better condition of ecosystem and environment. Accordingly, only with more logical reasoning could this argument turn out to be more than just an emotional appeal.