Issue 121 球拍！！ 有拍必回！

panpancxUID: 2762057

有拍必回！  谢谢谢谢！！
TOPIC: ISSUE121 - "At various times in the geological past, many species have become extinct as a result of natural, rather than human, processes. Thus, there is no justification for society to make extraordinary efforts, especially at a great cost in money and jobs, to save endangered species."


The arguer claims that there is no necessity to save endangered species, especially when it cost huge amounts of money and human resources’, because past extinctions were caused by nature instead of human processes. However, I find the statement illogic, for the possibility that past results do not show the current situation; and we should take our efforts to save the endangered animals.

In the past geological times, without developed science and technologies, human beings do not play such large part of role in the environment as nowadays. Human neither relied heavily on the nature nor polluted the environment before. Unfortunately, with the industrial improvement and larger demands of natural resources, natural condition for animals go worse and combine "human selection" together with natural selection. We can easily see from the graduating decreasing area of forests where thousands kinds of animals live, the Amazon Forest as an example; and the enlarging
acres of deserts where few species survive. What's more, we know from the fact that some kinds of species have been disappeared resulting from exceeding hunter, and many are just at the edge of extinction like the Tibetan antelopes in China. It is too hasty to draw the conclusion that human processes do not have significance influence on the extinctions.

As human's activity is a factor of the extinction stated above, it is necessary for we human to take measures to prevent the situation continuing. We human being live on the earth, but not only we human being do so. And every specie has its own role in the food chain and the circle of eco-system. If one gets lost in the circle, perhaps disasters would come to us. Take the frogs as an example: imagining that frogs have been disappeared on the earth. Frogs eat on insects, such as mosquitoes, flying, and other kinds live on the crops. There may be a huge emergement of these insects, which lead the result of decreasing amount of crops and maybe also diseases. It could be a huge lost just of only a species of frogs. What would it be as many species are disappeared? Hardly could we visualize the catastrophe. So it is needed to save the disappearing animals and it is our human's responsibility.

However, the arguer suggests that it is not reasonable to save them at great cost in money and jobs. I agree with this point because it is too absolute to assert saving at any cost. There may be many species disappearing now, and it would possibly that a huge sum of money and jobs are needed to protect them. Moreover, the worse result maybe many kinds of animals still extinct with the saving processes. We should have a cost and benefit analysis before doing the salvage. Since there are many other problems in societies of human world currently, such as the savage of the poor and the territory crisis, it would be unwise to save the animals at any cost.

In sum, human should take measures to save the disappearing animal species in order to both help them and ourselves. However, it is unjustifiable to do so at any cost.

flearUID: 2533174

落落这两天不在，我替她改了。

TOPIC: ISSUE121 - "At various times in the geological past, many species have become extinct as a result of natural, rather than human, processes. Thus, there is no justification for society to make extraordinary efforts, especially at a great cost in money and jobs, to save endangered species."


The arguer claims that there is no necessity to save endangered species, especially when it cost huge amounts of money and human resources’, because past extinctions were caused by nature instead of human processes. However, I find the statement illogic, for the possibility that past results do not show the current situation; and we should take our efforts（take efforts固定词组 删掉our） to save the endangered animals（why?statement illogic所以我们should save the environment? 来的太突兀 而前面则是很危险的阿狗写法）.

In the past geological times, without developed science and technologies, human beings do not play such large part of role（part=role，重复，such a large role即可） in the environment( in protecting the environment) as nowadays. Human neither(neither did humanbeings) relied(rely) heavily on the nature nor polluted(pollute) the environment before. Unfortunately, with the industrial improvement and larger demands of natural resources,(这个关系你必须讲出来 这里跨度太大了 工业进步为何就nature conditions get worse?  why？讲出来。) natural condition for animals go worse and (combine的主语是？显然不是natural condition吧？无法驾驭长句的话还是分开来吧)combine "human selection" together with natural selection. We can easily see （see what？这句缺宾语！加一that即可）from the graduating（graduate毕业。。gradually渐渐地） decreasing area of forests where thousands kinds of animals live, the Amazon Forest as an example; and the enlarging
acres of deserts where few species （can）survive. What's more, we know from the fact that some kinds of species have been disappeared resulting from exceeding hunter（hunting 而不是hunter，注意区别）, and many are just at the edge of extinction like the Tibetan antelopes in China. It is too hasty to draw the conclusion that human processes do not have significance influence on the extinctions. 到这里我终于看到了一句疑似ts

As human's activity is a factor of the（that caused） extinction stated above, it is necessary for we human to take measures to prevent the situation（+from） continuing. We human being（+s） live on the earth, but not only we human being do so.（罗嗦 We human beings are not the only specie that live on the earth ） And every specie has its own role in the food chain and the circle of eco-system. If one gets lost in the circle,(如果一个人在这圈中迷路？词不达意。If any link in the chain disappear), perhaps disasters would come to us. Take the frogs as an example: imagining that frogs have been disappeared on the earth. Frogs eat on(feed on or just eat) insects, such as mosquitoes, flying, and other kinds live on the crops.(frog只吃农作物上的害虫？别的地方的不吃？注意on the crops把一切都限定了！) There may be a huge emergement of these insects, which lead （+to）the result of decreasing amount of crops and maybe also diseases. It could be a huge lost just of only a species of frogs.(only because of the extincting of frogs?是这意思不？) What would it be as many species are disappeared（用主动）? Hardly could we visualize the catastrophe. So it is needed to save the disappearing animals and it is our human's responsibility.（怎么就是人类的责任了？要讲清楚会对人类造成危害所以人类去需要去保护 而不是你的逻辑）

However, the arguer suggests that it is not reasonable to save them at great cost in money and jobs. I agree with this point because it is too absolute to assert saving at any cost.（去学学assert用法） There may be many species disappearing now, and it would possibly（句子不完整 没有谓语） that a huge sum of money and jobs are needed to protect them. Moreover, the worse result maybe many kinds of animals still extinct with the saving processes. We should have a cost and benefit analysis before doing the salvage. Since there are many other problems in societies of human world currently, such as the savage of the poor and the territory crisis, it would be unwise to save the animals at any cost.
这段你觉得分析的有理吗？
In sum, human should take measures to save the disappearing animal species in order to both help them and ourselves. However, it is unjustifiable to do so at any cost
总之，几点问题
1、逻辑。 无论是思路上的因果逻辑， 还是成文中的段落之间的逻辑， 都存在着很大问题。这个你的思路我都给你屡不清了，你自己好好屡屡吧。
2、说理。 本文的说理过程给我的感觉是说的很没有道理。从这条论据来看Human neither(neither didhumanbeings) relied(rely) heavily on the nature nor polluted(pollute) the environment before.作为论据， 你觉得你这条是真命题吗？
                   另外， 说理过程中跳跃性太大， 导致很多地方看起来都是空穴来风
3、对句子成分把握不够，句子一长就容易丢三落四。

以上三点，点点都是致命伤。必须下狠功夫克服之。

银落UID: 2632560

TOPIC: ISSUE121 - "At various times in the geological past, many species have become extinct as a result of natural, rather than human, processes. Thus, there is no justification for society to make extraordinary efforts, especially at a great cost in money and jobs, to save endangered species."


The arguer claims that there is no necessity to save endangered species, especially when it cost huge amounts of money and human resources’, because past extinctions were caused by nature instead of human processes.
标准的北美范文式开头，好坏我也不多说，整个第一句，相当于重复了一半的题目。However, I find the statement illogic, for the possibility that 依然是北美范文的模板套用past results do not show the current situation; and we should take our efforts to save the endangered animals.

第一段过于模板化。其次，观点在最后一句里表明出来。我看来，下文应该从为什么past results do not show the current situation来入手，然后层层表明你支持的观点。

In the past geological times, without developed science and technologies, human beings do not play such large part of role in the environment as nowadays. TS Human neither relied heavily on the nature这和你ts不是矛盾嘛，既然没有developed science，那么人类就会相对多的依赖自然啊= =+ nor polluted the environment before. Unfortunately, with the industrial improvement and larger demands of natural resources, natural condition for animals go worse没有说明白为什么industrial improvement发展了，自然环境的境况就糟糕了。不要思维跳跃，不要以为自己明白其中的因果，读者和考官就懂了，一定要把联系写明白。 and combine "human selection" together with natural selection. 请把human selection的定义用几个词写写清楚。考官是不清楚的。We can easily see from the graduating（gradually） decreasing area of forests where thousands kinds of animals live, the Amazon Forest as an example这不是范文里用的例子嘛= =+; and the enlarging acres of deserts where few species survive. What's more, we know from the fact that some kinds of species have been disappeared resulting from exceeding hunter, and many are just at the edge of extinction like the Tibetan antelopes in China. It is too hasty to draw the conclusion that北美范文模板 human processes do not have significance influence on the extinctions.

这一段其实没有论证好。人类逐渐发展科技了，于是相对较少地依赖自然力量了。而为什么科技发展了，自然就被破坏了，你没有论证。只是举了几个例子说明环境遭到破坏了。这只是表面现象，没必要举那么多个例子来充字数，文章深层次的原因你直接忽略没写。而且你这一段与past results do not show the current situation这个中心一点相关的语句都没有。至少要点下中心吧。

As human's activity is a factor of the extinction stated above, it is necessary for we human to take measures to prevent the situation continuing. We human being live on the earth, but not only we human being do so. And every specie（s） has its own role in the food chain and the circle of eco-system. If one gets lost（any link is forced to disappear） in the circle, perhaps disasters would come to（fall on） us. Take the frogs as an example: imagining that frogs have been disappeared on the earth. Frogs eat on insects, such as mosquitoes, flying, and other kinds live on the crops. There may be a huge emergement（emergency） of these insects, which leads the result of decreasing amount of crops and maybe also diseases（diseases as well）.
It could be a huge lost just of only a species of frogs.这句是什么意思？ What would it be as many species are disappeared?这里最好再提下，disappearance是由人类引起的。 Hardly could we visualize the catastrophe. So it is needed（a must） to save the disappearing animals and it is our human's responsibility.

这一段的总体论证还不错~

However, the arguer suggests that it is not reasonable北美范文模板
to save them at great cost in money and jobs. I agree with this point because it is too absolute to assert 北美范文模板saving at any cost. There may be many species disappearing now, and it would possibly that a huge sum of money and jobs are needed to protect them. Moreover, the worse result maybe many kinds of animals still extinct 加个though with the saving processes（behavior）. We should have a cost and benefit analysis before doing the salvage.这里的转变太过突兀了，最好把下句since的内容提前这句说，这样思路更为流畅些。
Since there are many other problems in societies of human world currently, such as the savage of the poor and the territory crisis（这个和保护动物的代价比起来，为什么这个更重要？重要在哪里？你没有提到）, it would be unwise to save the animals at any cost.

这一段并没有论证好。你只提出了你的观点：即at any cost是不可取的。但是，不可取的原因没有提，与之相比较的事物的重要性没有提，更加需要cost的原因没有提。所以，你只是给出了你的观点和其他such as的罗列。论证很空洞。

In sum, human should take measures to save the disappearing animal species in order to both help them and ourselves. However, it is unjustifiable to do so at any cost.
结尾习惯性不看。

总结：这篇文章的整体思路我觉得和北美范文上那篇几乎是类似的。只是你把第一个分论点给改了改。但是你改了之后，没有和文章的开头联系起来。我开头就说了，看了你的开头，考官会以为你是想以为什么past results do not show the current situation来入手，然后层层表明你支持的观点。但是，你除了第一段有这个意思（而且你还没有点明其中的联系）以外，后面两段完全没有提到相关联的东西。

继续加油吧~