[phoenix] Argument78 第四作业 by 3号

ningbo1990UID: 2641538

Argument 78:
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of an archaeological magazine.
"Archaeologists excavated a cave that had been inhabited by prehistoric people for thousands of years. These people hunted wild animals, many of whose bones were found at levels corresponding to different times of habitation. Most of the bones at the oldest levels, over 40,000 years old, were from a deer species whose modern-day descendants are known to prefer woodland habitats, whereas most of the bones at more recent levels, dating from 30,000 to 10,000 years ago, were from a gazelle species whose modern-day descendants are known to prefer grasslands. We can thus conclude that the climate of the area changed dramatically between 40,000 and 30,000 years ago, causing the terrain to change from woodland to grassland."

The argument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned, there contains several facets are questionable. The main facets are both non-cause assumptions.

The first non-cause assumption is the author concludes that the animals` habitats were not changing during 40,000 years. Maybe there is a situation that the gazelle species lived in 40,000 years ago were prefer living in the woodland and the deer species lived in 30,000 to 10,000 years ago were prefer living in the grassland. There may be the habitat of gazelle or deer species changed not the climate changed.

In addition, the evidence built by people hunted wild animals may not a reason to woodland changed to grassland. The wild animals may not live in the local area; they may from other places taken by hunters. The deer species may take from a far place where grassland had or the gazelle species may lived in a place which had woodland. By arguing these conclusions, the local area maybe used to be woodland or grassland or something else.

Even if the animals` habitats were not changing and animals bones were came from local places, the climate maybe not the factor to change the terrain from woodland to grassland. Maybe it is the over population of deer species damaged the woodland and changed it to grassland; or maybe a big fire burned the wood and change it to grassland; or maybe there was a little rain and dry weather caused trees dying.

In conclusion, the argument, while it seems logical at first, has several flaws as discussed above. The argument could be improved by providing evidences that whether the animals` habitats were fixed and the animals bones were the animals lived in local place. It could be further improved by confirming it is the climate cause the dramatically change.