argument45 球拍必回

after17UID: 2681985

TOPIC: ARGUMENT45 - The following appeared as an editorial in a wildlife journal.

"Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic region. They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of a year. Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed, and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. Unfortunately, according to reports from local hunters, the deer populations are declining. Since these reports coincide with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, we can conclude that the decline in arctic deer populations is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea."
WORDS: 379/412
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010/2/23 10:56:45

At first glance, the editorial appears to be plausibly well-reasoned. The author advocates that the decrease of arctic deer populations is the result of their unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea. To justify this claim, the editor points that a decline in their population reported by local hunters. In addition, the author cites that global warming makes their path to melt. However, this argument contains a series of flaws, which contributes to its prematurity.

First and foremost, the population reported by local hunters is not warranted. The survey depends on the report by local hunters while the arguer fails to provide any information about how the local hunters observed those deer. Thus, there is a good chance that local hunters did not went to the community which the deer are living while they went to
the places deer nearly have never been. Therefore, unless it can be indicated that the data are valid; I am not convinced by the assertion.

In the second place, there is no evidence showing that the global warming influenced the places where the deer live. Although global warming has caused the sea ice to melt, it do not affect, if any, habitat of the deer. Or perhaps global warming makes the habitat of deer more suit for plants to grow, while do little harm to the paths they across from place to place. Lacking of such information, the author cannot substantiate that the decline in arctic deer populations is the result of deer bring unable to follow their age-old irrigation patterns across the frozen sea.

Finally, even assuming that the population of deer is decreasing, there is no causal relation between the melting of ice and the decline. The argument overlooks other possible explanations. It is possible that there are more hunters than before, so they hunt more deer. Also, with the pollution, the plants become decrease, thus deer die by lacking of food. Besides, maybe in recent years, the population of predators of deer increased dramatically, hence the population of deer is declined. Without ruling out all these possibilities, the author's conclusion remains dubious at best.

In sum, the writer's recommendation is ill conceived and poorly supported. To strengthen the argument, the editor must ensure me that the report by the hunt is valid. In order to better evaluate the editorial, we would need more evidence about the causal between global warming and melting of ice in the paths of deer.