Definitely, a victory 小组第2次作业 argue45 By Melody

claire530UID: 2363559

45.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."
逻辑谬误：
1.
local hunters人数有多少，报告有没有准确性不得而知。
2.
猎人报告鹿的数量可能是因为打猎到得太少，但是这些猎人活动的时间、范围以及习惯是否与鹿相同都会影响到他们是否能看见鹿。
3.
全球气温变暖，不一定鹿生活的地方气候也变暖了，没有具体的数据证明那里变暖了，而且甚至有可能下降。作者的这个推断很不合理。就算鹿生活的地方气候也变暖了，但是有没有变暖到足以使冰融化？作者只说了global warming使全球海洋冰面融化，但是北极圈有没有不得而知
4.
况且，论者没有提供任何资料证明如果气温上升，环境改变，鹿就会死亡。气温上升或许会使鹿生存的环境发生变化，它们的活动模式或许必需有所改变，但这些都不必造成鹿死亡。
5.
就算这些鹿都死了，也不能推测鹿的数量减少时因为海面冰融化的原因。有可能有其他原因，比如出现了鹿的predator，也有可能是因为猎人的捕杀过多。


By providing the local hunters’ reports about the decline of deer numbers in arctic region and the recent global warming trends reports, the author hastily makes the assertion that the reduction of the deer numbers ascribes to the melt ice which is caused by global warming. It seems reasonable for the first glance, however, close scrutiny of this conclusion, reveals that none of the evidences lend credible support about it.
For one thing, we are not acquainted about the number of the local hunters, thus their reports seems too unilateral to be trusted. It is entirely possible that there are very few hunters handed in their reports thus the ratiocination that the deer number is decline makes no sense.
Secondly, it is unknown for us about the way the hunters collected data for the report. Possibility that they had hunted very few deer thus curtly made the conclusion can not be ruled out. We should not ignore that the factors about the hunters’ range, time and habits of activity would interfere with the number of quarries. It aptly explains the disappearance of the deer if these factors were not coincide with their living habits.
Even if the deer number declines, the author improperly imputes it to global warming. Without detailed and convincing data given out, inference that the temperature of the arctic region has also risen would be hardly agreed with. It is entirely possible that the temperature of this region remains the same, or even it has decreased. What is more, granted the inference is believable, we are unacquainted about the particular degrees increased. It may not exceed the ice melt degree. Therefore make the inference as unpersuasive as it reveals.
Besides, the author did not prove that once the risen temperature and changed surroundings would result in the large scale of death among the deer. The changes of the temperature may influence the living surroundings of the deer and their living habits more or less, whereas the impact may not be strong enough and becomes intolerable for the deer which would cause the death.
Finally, there may be some alternative reasons other than the ice melt which is unjustly treated as the arch-terminal. It is probably that the decline of the deer number owes to the show up of their predator, or the overkill by the hunters.
In sum, in order to make this argument more persuasive and scientific, the author should look for more information to prove the abasement of the deer number and the local environment conditions, otherwise the argument would remains unconvincing as it stands.

liyao0509UID: 2825597

45.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."
逻辑谬误：
1.        local hunters人数有多少，报告有没有准确性不得而知。
2.        猎人报告鹿的数量可能是因为打猎到得太少，但是这些猎人活动的时间、范围以及习惯是否与鹿相同都会影响到他们是否能看见鹿。
3.        全球气温变暖，不一定鹿生活的地方气候也变暖了，没有具体的数据证明那里变暖了，而且甚至有可能下降。作者的这个推断很不合理。就算鹿生活的地方气候也变暖了，但是有没有变暖到足以使冰融化？作者只说了global warming使全球海洋冰面融化，但是北极圈有没有不得而知
4.        况且，论者没有提供任何资料证明如果气温上升，环境改变，鹿就会死亡。气温上升或许会使鹿生存的环境发生变化，它们的活动模式或许必需有所改变，但这些都不必造成鹿死亡。
5.        就算这些鹿都死了，也不能推测鹿的数量减少时因为海面冰融化的原因。有可能有其他原因，比如出现了鹿的predator，也有可能是因为猎人的捕杀过多。


By providing the local hunters’ reports about the decline of deer numbers in arctic region and the recent global warming trends reports, the author hastily makes the assertion that the reduction of the deer numbers ascribes to the melt ice which is caused by global warming. It seems reasonable for the first glance, however, close scrutiny of this conclusion,（逗号删掉） reveals that none of the evidences lend credible support about it.
For one thing, we are not acquainted about the number of the local hunters, thus their reports seems too unilateral to be trusted. It is entirely possible that there are very few hunters handed in their reports thus the ratiocination that the deer number is decline makes no sense.
Secondly, it is unknown for us about the way the hunters collected data for the report. Possibility that they had hunted very few deer thus curtly made the conclusion can not be ruled out（我不是很清楚这种句子的用法，但读上去觉得稍微有点累赘，前面类似的也有一句）. We should not ignore that the factors about the hunters’ range, time and habits of activity would interfere with the number of quarries. It aptly explains the disappearance of the deer if these factors were not coincide with their living habits.
Even if the deer number declines, the author improperly imputes it to global warming. Without detailed and convincing data given out, inference that the temperature of the arctic region has also risen would be hardly agreed with. It is entirely possible that the temperature of this region remains the same, or even it has decreased. What is more, granted that the inference is believable, we are unacquainted（出现了好几个acuqaint，可以换uniformed等） about the particular degrees increased. It may not exceed the ice melt degree. Therefore make（makes） the inference as unpersuasive as it reveals.
Besides, the author did not prove that once the risen temperature and changed surroundings would result in the large scale of death among the deer. The changes of the temperature may influence the living surroundings of the deer and their living habits more or less, whereas the impact may not be strong enough and becomes intolerable for the deer which would cause the death.
Finally, there may be some alternative reasons other than the ice melt which is unjustly treated as the arch-terminal（这是啥意思？）. It is probably that the decline of the deer number owes to the show up of their predator, or the overkill by the hunters.
In sum, in order to make this argument more persuasive and scientific, the author should look for more information to prove the abasement of the deer number and the local environment conditions, otherwise the argument would remains unconvincing as it stands.
语言用的很赞~~~差不多可以当范文读了。
攻击点多了些，比如第一第二就可以合为一个关于猎人提供信息不准确的攻击点；还有第四和第五个攻击点，都是在讨论导致鹿减少的其他原因，也可以合并为一。