还有5天考试，第一次写A，I还没开始，真心求拍【argument 11】

saintxu108UID: 2589550

TOPIC: ARGUMENT11 - The following appeared in a memo from the mayor of the town of West Egg.

"Two years ago, our consultants predicted that West Egg's landfill, which is used for garbage disposal, would be completely filled within five years. During the past two years, however, town residents have been recycling twice as much aluminum and paper as they did in previous years. Next month the amount of material recycled should further increase, since charges for garbage pickup will double. Furthermore, over ninety percent of the respondents to a recent survey said that they would do more recycling in the future. Because of our residents' strong commitment to recycling, the available space in our landfill should last for considerably longer than predicted."
WORDS: 434
TIME: 00:28:56
DATE: 2010-7-17 21:30:58

Citing that the West Egg's resident has been recycling more aluminum and papers than before and this tendency seems to hold on, together with the survey results that ninety percent of the respondents were willing to do more recycling in the future, the author conclude that the available space of the landfill would last considerably longer than predicted. At first glance of this argument, it comes naturally this conclusion, however, after careful examining of it, we find this argument suffer from many flaws and is therefore unconvincing.

First and foremost, the author's conclusion relies on the precondition that two years ago, when making the predictions, our consultants did not take the recycling issue into consideration. However, we do not see any evidence supporting this assumption in this material. Thus, it is quite possible that the consultants, two years ago, has made full investigation about the future's recycling issue, and it is also very likely that the predictions has included the evaluation of recycling amount larger than the real statistics the author has provided. If this was the case, then it may come to result that the available space in our landfill would last shorter than predicted.

Moreover, the author has not pointed out what percentage the recycling amount account for (occupy) the whole amount of garbage. Only if the recycling amount takes up a large percentage of the whole garbage amount, will the author's conclusion be convincing. Thus, it is quite possible that in fact the recycled paper and aluminum is just a fairy small proportion of the whole garabage. And if in this case, we could not see any measurable effort to make the landfill long life, let alone to mention the available space can be remarkably sustainable.

Last but not least, the survey the author has mentioned is also doubtable, since we don't know if the respondents can be representatives of the overall population of the town. Even if they can be identified as representatives, the author should also provide more details to tell us how the survey was conducted. Was the sample randomly chosen? Was it by questionnaire and anonymous? If it was not anonymous, then it was quite possible that these respondents' answers were not reliable, since it was the common sense that most people will say the good things before the media, especially when their names and personal information are exposed to the public.
In conclusion, as stated above, this argument is unsubstantial and unconvincing, in order to improve this argument, the author needs to provide more information to demonstrate that the predictions two years ago did not consider the recycling issue. And he/she also needs to show more details about the percentage that the recycling amount accounting for the whole garbage amount, finally, the reliability of the survey should also be elaborated.

saintxu108UID: 2589550

自己顶一个。。。大概能得几分的样子~~~大家说一下吧~~~并指出点写作风格上的问题。。
完全随意写的，没看任何模板，就看了几篇官方范文，就开始写了~~~
额