[1010G精英组] ISSUE&ARGU 习作 by Group Energy

nanfeng25899UID: 2629871

===========
     论点提纲
===========
1.
未学会培养孩子社会化--à无法带来更好的社会
2.
培养孩子社会化--à将来会变得更好
3.
孩子的社会化不是影响将来社会的唯一因素



===========
     习作正文
===========

   When asked about whether or not we have learned to raise the children who will bring us a better society, the speaker claim that we haven’t master this crucial “technique”, which will determine the future of our society. Undoubtedly, our society’s destiny might be affected by the socialization of our kids, however, its statue should not be overemphasized as many factors will have a influence on our future.

   As for the speaker’s conclusion, if those future’s owners are not socialized , how do they, who lack of the basic communication skills and team spirit, live a better life themselves, not to speak of a better society. As the rapid development of China, “Guanxi”, which is originated from the internet, has become a new word in the English vocabulary. This word typically stands for the essence of Chinese business culture, that is, how to cooperate with others determines your business career to some extent. Therefore, without the fundamental skills, even if you’re the professor of Peking University, you perhaps are not eligible as a successful businessman who boosts the economy most.

   On the contrary, social children do make a great contribution to better the society.In most cases, the most meaningful breakthrough is not achieved by individual, but a team no matter how many people involved in it. Being a team, negotiation, communication and cooperation play the key role in the study. The brainstorm is one way to exchange the distinguish ideas and create new views among college students when they needs some inspirations. In this way, they are indeed out of box, and get the innovative results. It’s those seminal perspectives that become the motivation of the society change, a better society. So, one of the most useful ways to improve our society is, admittedly, to socialize our offspring.

   Of course, I concede the speaker’s assertion that society’s fate depends on how social the children are, but there must also be other factors which decide the prospect of our society, ranging from personal belief to intelligence. For instance, as one of the three global religions, the Christian impart the doctrine of universal love to the adherents who believe they will go to the paradise by doing a lot of deeds after their deaths. There is no doubt that those followers will be the good citizens even the great scientists whose inventions are the milestone in the history of human beings like Isaac Newton. Thus, the personal conviction, in this sense, is one kind of impulsion to the better society instead of the obstacle. What is more, intelligence level is still the inevitable limitation to the development, because this internal and physical factor does restrict how much information or knowledge we can absorb. And some study just point out that our ancestors’ brain volume is much smaller than ours. As a result, I deem that even though they are socialized, they cannot better the society in the way we do now.

   To sum up, the socialization is one of the significant ingredients in the form of our future; yet taking other parameters into consideration are indispensable. As far as I’m concerned, when weighing up the factors affecting the society’s destiny, the speaker should and must consider all of them discreetly.

  终于写完了！！！

=======================

Revised By

=======================           

CypherUID: 2793818

占一个先
菜鸟一只很不熟练，期中考试又来了，所以最近可能会落下点进度，希望组长谅解啊。。。

zmssghhUID: 2779772

===========
     论点提纲
===========
（由于第一篇ISSUE不知道应该是怎么写  就写的很发散 第三段好像确实跑题了 呵呵 以后再改吧 ）
1 对孩子的社会化教育是很有必要的
2 然而当今社会人们普遍过于重视社会化而忽视了其他方面的塑造
3 言传不如身教



===========
     习作正文
===========


It has been long claimed that children are the future of our world, to which i cannot agree more. However, the debate, which concerned with the most significant characteristics children should have to boost our world to a more harmonious one, never stop at all. From my point of view, several characteristics, including socialization, are essential for the next generation to achieve our expectation. Unfortunately, people now have hardly adopt any
effective method to convey these good fret to the next generation.

Just as the speaker has claimed, whether a person is well-socialized can really play an important role in determining his contribution to our society in the future. Socialization, defined as one's ability to adapt himself to the society, is an indispensible character for people living in such a society, which is running under so many certain rules. If a person is not well-socialized, it will be of great possibilities that he will suffer a lot in the process of finding his own role in this "big well-operated
machine" while others, who are well-socialized, are more likely to enjoy a meaningful life, in which masses of good can be done to our world. Thus, the extent to which children are socialized can, to some degree, determines our society's future.

Unfortunately, many parents, having realized the importance of the people's socialization, pay too much attention to teach their children how to survive in the society, ignoring the fact that many other fret, such as honesty, loyalty and diligence, can also play an important, even decisive, role in shaping a person. As a result, many children, nowadays, lack the basic virtue that is needed to be a member of a better society. When you chat with the teenagers, you will easily find out the fact that many of them have cheated in the examination to get a good result and some of them may even prefer to access success in some dishonorable way, which, to a certain extent, is the outcome of excessive socialization. Want to become the monitor of the class? Just send presents to the tutor. Want a chance for internship? Flatter as hardly as you can. That is what in the head of some teenagers now.

Here comes the problem: how can we guide children to help building a better society where no evil is tolerated? From my perspective, we can easily find the answer in an old Chinese saying--"example is better than percept."
We have been long teach children to be kindhearted, veracious and hard-working while ourselves kept to be indifferent, hollow and hedonistic, which leads to the result that many children now just copy the evil we do while leaving whose good things we teach them behind their mind. Thus, the key to the problem is not finding a way on how to teach but finding a way on how to restraint ourselves in order to guide the next generation, in a invisible way, to learn by themselves how to be bring about a more harmonious world.

BridgeRainUID: 2761345

先占

kingwyf87UID: 2457409

〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓

                                                             【1010G精英组】E小组第3次作业

〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓

Argument51

The following appeared in a medical newsletter.

"Doctors have long suspected that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing

quickly after severe muscle strain. This hypothesis has now been proved by preliminary results

of a study of two groups of patients. The first group of patients, all being treated for muscle injuries

by Dr. Newland, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, took antibiotics regularly throughout

their treatment. Their recuperation time was, on average, 40 percent quicker than typically

expected. Patients in the second group, all being treated by Dr. Alton, a general physician, were

given sugar pills, although the patients believed they were taking antibiotics. Their average

recuperation time was not significantly reduced. Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with

muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment."

●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●

                                 写作样式模板

●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●

===========
  Logical Chain
===========


===========
     论点提纲
===========


===========
     习作正文
===========


=======================

Revised By

=======================   

●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●

拍文顺序

1-->3

2-->6

3-->8

4-->1

6-->9

7-->4

8-->7

9-->2

●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●

kingwyf87UID: 2457409

===========
  Logical Chain
===========

1 The first group of patients, all being treated by given antibiotics --->40 percent quicker than typically expected
2 The second group of patients, all being treated by given sugar pills ---> average recuperation time was not significantly reduced
1,2---> all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment

===========
     论点提纲
===========

1 两个对照组实验对象的条件可能不一致
2 实验对象的样本数不足且实验结果描述不清，使实验结果不可信
3 实验结果可能受到其他因素的影响

===========
     习作正文
===========

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the patients of muscle strain would be well treated if they take antibiotics. To give good reason for this conclusion, the author cites a recent comparison experiment showing that the patients treated with antibiotics recover quicker than the patients treated with sugar pills. The argument relies on several doubtful assumptions which make his conclusion therefore unconvincing, such as the subjects are sufficient and under the same condition in two groups, and no other factors to affect the comparison result.

To begin with, a threshold problem with the argument is that the author assumes that the patients involved in the group of doctor Dr. have the same the condition of muscle strain as the patients treated by Dr. Alton. It is entirely possible that the most patients in the group of Dr. Newland are young and healthy, while the ones in that of Dr. Alton are old vulnerable people and have not been better taken care by others as soon as they get hurt. It is therefore the different condition of subjects instead of antibodies that result in length of recovery time. The argument fails to account for different conditions of treated patients, thus the author cannot make any sound conclusion.

In the second place, even the patients in the Dr. Newland’s group are parallel to that in the Dr. Alton’s group; the author also fails to indicate that the patients involved in the study are representative of all patients with muscle strain. Maybe, the comparison experiment only involves a few people, so that the author using the comparison is not statistically reliable to draw such conclusion. Even the experimental subjects can be representative of all patients, the experiment result are also unpersuasive to support the author’s conclusion, considering that the vague words used in the experimental interpretation. We cannot be sure that the patients in the Dr. Newland’s group recover better and with less recuperation time compare with those in Dr. Alton’s group.

Finally, another problem is that the author fails to consider other possibilities of treatment which may turn out to be more effective to deal with the severe muscle strain. Even the antibodies are the most effective ones, the common sense and experience tells us that the antibodies may not suit for everybody in light of they may allergy to the some kinds of antibodies. Without knowing more information from the patients, rashly advising them to using these antibodies would make the situation even worse. In short, without better evidence accounting for no other ways that can better to treat the muscle strain and the antibodies can be safely used in people, the author cannot convince me about his conclusion.

To sum up, the conclusion, which is made by the author who has disregarded or chosen to ignore several aspects of his conclusion, is on the basis of the scant credibility. To better bolster the reliability of the arguer’s conclusion, I would need more information about the study’s patients, whose size, condition, and other aspects, are comparable. I would also need to know whether there are other medical treatments, other than antibiotics, in order to revaluate the author’s conclusion more credible.

=======================

Revised By Cypher Waiting…  

=======================   

shevavaUID: 2574709

===========
  Logical Chain
===========

===========
     论点提纲
===========

===========
     习作正文
===========
   
In this argument, the author points out the conclusion is that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. Why should the patients take antibiotics as author claimed? The reason is that the author believes secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain.  To support his conclusion, the author gives many reasons. But after a careful examination, there are many flaws.

First of all, for an experiment to be accurate, it must have an eligible control. But, as we can get the information from the article, we could not ensure that the patients, in the two groups, are same. Perhaps, they are in the different races, in the different age and in the different living environment. Those all can affect the accurate of the experiment. A young people should have a shorter recuperation time than old person has. A people who get much nutrition everyday should have a shorter recuperation time than a poor people who cannot get enough food every day. A people who exercises frequently should have a shorter recuperation time than a “couch potato” should have.

We also doubt about the effect of the different doctors. Common sense tells us a doctor who specializes in sports medicine should have more experience about the muscle strain than a general physician. We could not ensure whether the sports doctor has several tricks what can make the muscle strain cure quickly. Another problem that weakens the logic of this argument is that the author does not tell us the accurate effect, what the sugar pills may cause. It still has a possibility that the sugar pills can delay the cure of the muscle strain.
What's more. The author implies every muscle strain may cause the infections. But there is no direct evidence to prove that. And the author ignores the advert of the antibiotics. As we know, antibiotics can cause anorexia, weakness and other illness.

To sum up, this argument fails to substantiate his claim that all patients who are diagnosed will muscle strain would be advice to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. To strengthen the argument, the author should present an eligible control, and give us more information about the effect of sugar pills. It is also necessary that the author should provide more evidence about the relation between the muscle strain and secondary infections.



=======================

Revised By

=======================   

nanfeng25899UID: 2629871

===========
  Logical Chain
===========
1。前提：医生长期以来怀疑二次感染会阻碍患者恢复
2．前提的论证：题目中的研究
3．结论：肌肉拉伤的患者应服用抗生素


===========
     论点提纲
===========
1前提的成立建立在实验的基础之上，而题目未说明试验中肌肉拉伤的患者一定会二次感染
2 即使患者都有二次感染的现象发生，题目中也未提及患者的基本信息
3 不能说二次感染会阻碍患者恢复，推出建议患者服用抗生素
，因为抗生素会有其他的副作用


===========
     习作正文
===========
  At the end of this letter, the speaker draws the conclusion that taking antibiotics will be an sensible supplement for all the patients with muscle strain, based on the fact the secondary infections will prolong the healing process. However, this premise is substantiated by a plausibly preliminary result of the study of two groups, which are treated by different specialized doctors respectively. Therefore, although this statement seems to be well-reasoned, the logical procedure is unconvincing.

First of all, the precondition about the secondary infection largely rests on the outcomes of the study, whereas the speaker provides no explicit evidence that the patients suffering from muscle strain must get secondary infections. Without 100% possibilities that the contamination will occur to them, the speaker cannot convince us of the deduction efficiently, let alone the credulity of the final conclusion. So, in order to make the consequences of the experiment, more direct proof ought to show to us,.

Yet even if the fallacy mentioned above is corrected, the lack of the information about basic conditions of the patients and the changing parameters such as the different doctors in the study will undermine the premise. If the age of the patients varies in the large span or their ability to restore from the pain is different from each other, it’s unrealistic to compare their recuperation time. On the other hand, the totally distinguish doctors who belongs to the two realm of medicine is bound to have a influence over the recovering time. For instance, the first doctor is more likely to cure the patient whose muscle pain is caused by sports for less time. Unless the speaker demonstrates more specific facts about the patients and rules out the affecting ingredients, the hypothesis can be suffice to be ensured.

Finally, the argument also fails to take the byproduct of the antibiotics, which leads to the unwarranted assertion that every patients including the one who are perhaps allergic to this kind of medicine should take it. Despite the fact that antibiotics will shorten the time for patient, we should be conscious of the exception when attempting to make the claim. And if these special groups are overlooked, no more severe results will be brought about to those innocent people. As a result, only when we figure out all the possible problems it will result in can we make the conclusion more grounded.

Overall, the argument which appears to the effective one should be strengthened at least by providing the full-developed stuff to confirm the link between the secondary infection and the muscle strain, conducting the study in the same situation such as the same doctors and the patients of the same age, and work out the problems of the antibiotics. Otherwise, the conclusion can not to say meaningful and trustful.


=======================

Revised By

=======================   

CypherUID: 2793818

===========
  Logical Chain
===========


===========
     论点提纲
===========

1.缺病人信息
2.为之两组受伤状况是否相同
3.两组医生不同
4.不能为所有的病人推荐使用抗生素


===========
     习作正文
===========

In this medical newsletter, the author proposed that all patients diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics, which were proved to be helpful in quicker recuperation, as part of their treatment. To support his proposal, the author cited the results of a study of two groups of people—the group who took antibiotics regularly under the guide of a specialized sports-doctor recovered more quickly than the group who took sugar pills instead under the guide of a general physician. However, a close scrutiny and further contemplation will reveal the lack of strictness and validity of the study.

To begin with, the author doesn’t provide any basic information about the patients in these two groups, thus, render the results of the study, which the proposal rested on, susceptible to doubt. General scientific knowledge tells us that the consistency of the two groups in every aspect designed in a contrast trial should be guaranteed at the first place; otherwise the results might be questionable. Such factors as health conditions, variation in age and physique, dietary habits of the patients might be attributable to the speed of restoration thus affecting the accuracy of the trial. Without eliminating these possible differences between the two groups, the author couldn’t safely rely on the study to offer any advice.

Moreover, another loophole hidden in this study that leaves the results of the study unconvincing is that we are not informed of the severities of muscle strain the two groups of patients suffered. It is totally possible that the group under the guide of the specialized doctor suffered far less heavy muscle strain than the group treated by the general physician, therefore, the former group recovered in a much shorter time than the latter.

Yet, the author also overlooks the possible fact that the specialized doctor is more experienced in treating sport-related injuries and could carry out a more systematical and elaborate rehabilitation schedule, which is more scientific for patient’s recovery, than a general physician can.

Finally, neither did the author provide any relevant data to prove that every patient diagnosed with muscle strain would suffer from secondary infections nor did he supply any evidence to substantiate the necessity of everyone’s intake of antibiotics. Granted that each patient diagnosed with muscle strain would suffer from secondary infections, there is no need of taking antibiotics for everyone, in that presumptuous use of antibiotics might lead to serious allergy or other side effects that may cause harmful impacts on the patients.

To sum up, the proposal relying on the study is questionable. To better appraise the proposal given by the author, I would need to know more about the basic information concerning the patients selected in the trials and the differences between the rehabilitation schedules made by the two doctors. I would also need more information about whether the sugar pills that the second group took had counteractive effects on them.
=======================

Revised By

=======================   

zmssghhUID: 2779772

===========
  Logical Chain
===========

===========
     论点提纲
===========
提纲：
开头：复述题目说明有错误。
1.        未提供调查人数，样本可能不足。同是未提供病人的详细信息，病人体质可能不同。
2.        未考虑医生不同
3.        结论说所有的病人都得吃这种药，然而未给出服用抗生素的负面作用，可能只适合部分重病人群
总结：提供更多有关research的以及使用抗生素的正面负面作用的信息

===========
     习作正文
===========







In the argument, the author advised that patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would take antibiotics when being treated. In supporting his recommendation, the author cites a research, in which one group of patients, taking antibiotics as part of their treatment, recuperate much quicker than another group of patients, taking sugar pills as a substitute. However, failing to give sufficient convincing evidences makes the author's argument questionable.

First, the author fails to give more detailed information of the patients involved in the research. It might be the case that only an insufficient number of patients take part in this research, which, as a result, makes the research lack of persuasion. It is also possible that there is great difference between the physique of the patients in the two groups. It can be the case that most of the patients who take antibiotics also have a good physical condition, which, undoubtedly, will help them to recover from the muscle strain quickly. On the contrary, the patients, who take sugar pills instead of antibiotics, generally hold a bad physique, which might make their recovery time much longer.

What's more, when doing contrastive research, we have to change only one factor while keeping the other factors essentially the same. In the research cited in the argument, we find that the doctors of the two groups, who play an important role in the research, are not the same one. It is of great possibilities that Dr. Newland is much more experienced than Dr. Alton in treating muscle strain. In this case, the difference between the speed in which patients recuperate could more likely due to the method used to treat the patients rather than the medicine they take. With all the possibilities above, the result of the research lend little support to the author's recommendation.

In addition, even if the antibiotics do help patients to heal quickly after muscle strain, the author fails to give the information whether antibiotics have some negative effect on the patients. It is very likely that the use of massive amount of antibiotics would bring a lot of bad influence, or disease even more harmful than muscle strain, to the patients. If so, the use of the antibiotics should be restricted to the cases of some patients who really get a severe muscle strain. Thus, the author's recommendation that all the patients who strain their muscle should take antibiotics can be totally a negative one, which may make things worse for the patients.

In all, all the evidences the author give cannot lend a strong support to his recommendation. In order to persuade us, the author has to give more detailed information about the research. What's more, he also has to give more information about the effect antibiotics have on patients, both positive ones and negative ones.

pennycleverUID: 2777479

昨晚写完了但是断网了... 我下午上完英语课了来帖..

SandraShanUID: 2753079

===========
  Logical Chain
===========


1、专家怀疑二次感染阻止肌肉受伤病人的恢复
2、以对两组病人的研究为前提来证明上述假设
3、一组在整个治疗过程中服用抗生素，40%的人恢复时间快了  
4、另一组服用糖（病人认为是抗生素），恢复时间没有明显减少
3，4——>所有被诊断患有muscle strain的都应该被建议服用抗生素作为他们治疗的一部分
===========
     论点提纲
===========
1没有说明二次感染与抗生素的关系
2研究的两组病人，没有说明具体的数目和其他的情况，使结果没有可靠性
3即使结果正确，也不能建议所有的 muscle strain的病人服用抗生素，要考虑到病人的实际情况，如可能有的人抗生素过敏等
===========
     习作正文
===========

This newsletter to the arguer begins by stating the hypothesis that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. Then, by making a comparison of two groups of patients’ recuperation time, the arguer drew the conclusion that anyone who was diagnosed with muscle strain had better take antibiotics, since the study showed that their recuperation time was significantly reduced than typical expected.

  However, the argument contains several facets that are questionable. To start with, the author failed to point out the exact relation between infection and taking antibiotics. The arguer didn’t clearly inform us whether it is the antibiotics that prevent patients from being secondary infected.

  Furthermore, the reliability of the survey is still open to question. Apart from saying two groups of patients, the arguer said nothing about the comparison objects. If it was limited to only few patients or they were of different ages and physical conditions, the results might be attributable to those particular individuals. Hence, the generalization drawn might not apply to most people.

  Last but not least, even if the result is reliable, the comment that all the muscle strained patients should take antibiotics is still unconvincing. The problem that undermine the argument is that the arguer overlook other factors that result in the muscle strain and the side effect of the antibiotics. As we all know , the antibiotics are used to kill bacterial which may not be needed for some patients. On the other hand, for people who are allergic to antibiotics, taking them would cause severe consequence.

  In conclusion, the argument, while it seems logical at first, has several flaws as discussed above.The argument could be improved by providing more information about the causal relationship that taking antibiotics efficiently reduces the probability of being secondary infected.It could be further improved by listing out the details of the survey and giving a convincing ending.

kingwyf87UID: 2457409

〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓

                                                             【1010G精英组】E小组第4次作业

〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓

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."

●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●

                                 写作样式模板

●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●

===========
  Logical Chain
===========


===========
     论点提纲
===========


===========
     习作正文
===========


=======================

Revised By

=======================   

●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●

拍文顺序

1-->5

3-->4

4-->8

5-->10

6-->9

7-->1

8-->6

9-->7

10-->3

说明：1-->5表示1号拍5号的习作

●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●

kingwyf87UID: 2457409

===========
  Logical Chain
===========

1 reports from local hunters---> the deer populations are declining
2 recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt
1,2---> the decline in arctic deer populations is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.

===========
     论点提纲
===========

1、调查报告的准确性
2、全球变暖与种群数量下降的关系
3、种群的下降可能与其他的因素有关系

===========
     习作正文
===========

In this journal, the editor concludes that the reason of declining in arctic deer populations is that deer populations are unable to follow their age-old migration patterns because of the recent global warming trends. To strengthen his conclusion, the author points out a fact that the local hunters report the deer populations are declining, and global warming have caused the sea ice to melt. The arguer depends on quite a few unconvinced assumptions, which render it unpersuasive as it stands.

In the first place, the author fails to consider the reliability of the reports which are made by the local hunters. It is entirely possible that the hunters, who have seen numbers of deer but not report. Even the local hunters reported the fact, the author still cannot be sure that the deer populations are decreasing indeed. Maybe, the deer is so afraid of human beings that they avoid to be seen by human. The hunters, therefore, only see a part of deer populations, and most of them hide themselves well. Since the author inadequately to this concern, he cannot justify about his conclusion based on these reports.

In a addition, these reports are the truth and can be trusted, the arguer provide no evidence the establish a causal relationship between the decline in the arctic deer populations and the recent global warming trends. Although, the world is suffering the global warming recently, the author is unfair to assert that it is the warming weather that affect this area and resulting in declining of the deer populations. It is highly likely that the global warming is not affect this local area where the sea covered with ice is actually unchanged at all. Without additional supporting information, the editor cannot make any sound conclusion.

The last but not the least, even the global warming may one of reasons that causes deer populations declined, the author fails to ignore other possibilities. It is entirely possible that the deer populations in this local area are infected with a kind of severe disease which is the main reason to be blamed for the diminishing of the deer populations. Under this situation, the global warming may cause a little decreasing of the deer populations, which can be totally negligible. Without eliminate other alternative explanations, the author cannot convince me about his conclusion.

To sum up, the conclusion, which is made by the editor, who has disregarded or chosen to ignore several aspects of his conclusion, is on the basis on scant credibility. To better bolster the reliability of the author's conclusion, the arguer must give more information about the deer populations in that area. I would also need to know whether there are other ways to explain the declining deer populations expect the factor of global warming.

=======================

Revised By nanfeng25899

=======================   


批改标注:
1。红色，表示“错误”
2。洋红，表示“用法欠妥当”
3。蓝色，是我的批注
4。绿色，表示“很精彩的文字”

In this journal, the editor concludes that the reason of declining in arctic deer populations is that deer populations are unable to follow their age-old migration patterns because of the recent global warming trends. To strengthen his conclusion, the author points out a fact【fact不可数】 that the local hunters report the deer populations are declining, and global warming have caused the sea ice to melt. The arguer depends on quite a few unconvinced assumptions【有点没有说玩的感觉】, which render it unpersuasive as it stands.

In the first place, the author fails to consider the reliability of the reports which are made by the local hunters. It is entirely possible that the hunters, who have seen numbers of deer but not report.【应该是to report】Even 【是even if吧】the local hunters reported the fact, the author still cannot be【前后时态不一致】 sure that the deer populations are decreasing indeed. Maybe, the deer is so afraid of human beings that they avoid to be【应该avoid doing】 seen by human. The hunters, therefore, only see a part of deer populations, and most of them【them的指代问题，我知道你想说的是deer，不过按照前一句为hunters】 hide themselves well. Since the author inadequately to this concern【since为因为的意思时，应该加上句子】, he cannot justify about【justify及物，去掉about】his conclusion based on these reports.

In a addition,【。。。应该是in addition】 these reports are the truth and can be trusted, the arguer provide no evidence the【to】 establish a causal relationship between the decline in the arctic deer populations and the recent global warming trends. Although, the world is suffering the global warming recently, the author is unfair to assert 【有点费解，改成it is unfair to assert 好点吧】that it is the warming weather that affect this area and resulting 【去掉and或者将resulting改成result】 in declining of the deer populations. It is highly likely that the global warming is not affect【两个动词】this local area where the sea covered with ice is actually unchanged at all.【有点费解】 Without additional supporting information, the editor cannot make any sound conclusion.

The last but not the least, even【even是甚至的意思，even if/though为即使的意思】 the global warming may one of reasons that causes deer populations declined【cause 没有这个用法吧。。。改成the decline of the deer】, the author fails to ignore【表达错了。。。】 other possibilities. It is entirely possible that the deer populations in this local area are infected【应该是deer感染而不是populations】with a kind of severe disease which is the main reason to be blamed for the diminishing of the deer populations. Under this situation, 【最好写 circumstance】the global warming may cause a little【有点怪】 decreasing of the deer populations, which can be totally negligible. Without eliminate【eliminating】 other alternative explanations, the author cannot convince me about【of】his conclusion.

To sum up, the conclusion, which is made by the editor, who has disregarded or chosen to ignore several aspects of his conclusion, is on the basis on scant credibility.【改成based on the scant credibility】 To better bolster the reliability of【最好把粉色删了】the author's conclusion, the arguer must give more information about the deer populations in that area. I would also need to know whether there are other ways to explain the declining deer populations expect the factor of global warming.

综合评价：
1．语法方面的错误还是相对多了一点，应该着重注意一下
2．单词的很多用法不太熟悉，用之前不确定的查一查
3．有些地方表达意思不是很通畅和易懂
4．最好用词在多元化一些

CypherUID: 2793818

占