ARGUMENT150~望大家指点~感激不尽！

xiemeng2370UID: 2749773

TOPIC: ARGUMENT150 - The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine.

"The decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide clearly indicates the global pollution of water and air. Two studies of amphibians in Yosemite National Park in California confirm my conclusion. In 1915 there were seven species of amphibians in the park, and there were abundant numbers of each species. However, in 1992 there were only four species of amphibians observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. The decline in Yosemite has been blamed on the introduction of trout into the park's waters, which began in 1920 (trout are known to eat amphibian eggs). But the introduction of trout cannot be the real reason for the Yosemite decline because it does not explain the worldwide decline."
WORDS: 476
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010-1-18 15:31:17

This letter concludes that the decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide clearly indicates the global pollution of water and air. To support this conclusion the author cites two studies of amphibians in Yosemite National Park. The author bases this recommendation on two facts: the numbers of amphibian species are drastically reduced in 1992; the reason why the decline are not blamed on the introduction of trout into the park's waters. As discussed below, the argument suffers from a series of critical flaws and logical problems, and is therefore wholly unpersuasive.

To begin with, a careful analysis of the study reveals several problems with the author's argument. First of all, the study only research in one park in California and then concludes that the worldwide geography area. However, common sense informs me that this assumption is a poor one for the reason that the situation of one single park cannot represent the whole globe, let alone the result of this study is still unwarranted. Secondly, the argument unfairly claims that there were only four species of amphibians observed in the park is the result of the decline in the numbers of amphibians. Perhaps there still have other species in the water but they didn't discover.

Also, the letter cites the fact that the introduction of trout cannot be the real reason for the Yosemite decline because it does not explain the worldwide decline alone lends no support to the recommendation. It's possible, for instance, that the introduction of trout is the true reason for the Yosemite decline and the decline of the worldwide may rely on some other factors such as the climate change, the decline of the food and the increase of the competitors. So, the author must eliminate these possibilities in order to rely justifiably on this evidence for the recommendation.

Yet another problem with the argument involves even though we assume that the study could conclusion the decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide. We cannot simply concludes that it indicates the global pollution of water and air rather than some other reasons, such as the worldwide catch amphibians, the greenhouse effect and even probably the collective suicide like whale. Thus, lacking evidence of the decline in the numbers of amphibians are typical in terms of the global pollution of water and air, the author cannot convince me the conclusion of this letter.

In conclusion, the argument cannot be taken seriously as it stands except the definition of worldwide is as narrow as Yosemite National Park in California and the pollution of water and air in there is gravely terrible. To better evaluate the argument, we would need to know the numbers of amphibians in other geography areas are whether decline or not and it must also show that the decline is caused by the reason of the global pollution of water and air.

PS：不要被前面的时间误导，我是写了两回~也就是1个小时才写完的= =|要是我能半个小时就写完，我现在就去玩了~哈哈~

本来今天的计划是看arg提纲和写issue的~可是对issue就是没有爱~arg提纲看完就有种想写全文的冲动。

So，看完第一个提纲我就写出来了。。。。。。

       向大家请教一下，题库里的400多道题的提纲真的每一个都要看么？可我只有20天了~真的来不及了~一天看20多道提纲我会疯掉的~而且也记不住啊~

       望高人指点~感激不尽！