ISSUE69 by 晓航 【1010G8月AW小组】

zhangxiaohang1UID: 2705669

TOPIC:ISSUE69 - "Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientificresearch and development"

TIME:01:17:03

In this era of flying development ofscience and technology, whether we should reexamine the restrictions on thescientific research and development is an urgent problem for the development ofour civilization. The problem is more or fewer constrictions. It may be better if we take an appropriate restrain on scientific research and development.

Firstly, scientific research anddevelopment have brought us so many benefits that they have become necessitiesin our daily lives, such as communication, transportation and automation.Thousands of years ago, people communicate by letters laced on the pigeons orby messagersjust like the one running to the Marathon. But now only a mobile phone is enough. You can communicate with others rapidlyno matter where and when you are. What's more, Internet and facsimile cansometimes be a better choice. With the modern transport--cars, trains or aircrafts--you can go everywhere on the earth in a short time. 

Granted scientific research and developmentbring us so many advantages, but without any restrictions on it may cause somecatastrophic phenomena. High level of technology sometimes is uncontrolled bypeople. Like many science fictions show we may be replaced by the robot wecreated in the future. Someone may say that science fictions are based ondreams which may not be true. But can we say the creations have no relationwith the public skepticism about the flying speed development of science? Ifsomeday AI is accomplished successfully, the speed of the robot'sself-improvement is beyond our imagination. With the body of metal, the strongcomputing, ability of self-learning and never get tired the robots can easilylearn what we have learned, like nuclear, which can ruin our human and theearth. If so it means our scientific development killed ourselves. It seemsparadoxical. For this, government should take the duties to prevent the sciencefrom developing to a killing machine.

In other fields, we can also find such trends like robots. Forinstance, clone, research on the Big Bang and nuclear. These scientificresearch and development have the chances or to say the abilities to destroyour human civilization. Restrictions on it are urgent for that these researchesmay touch the danger line. Nuclear have become the greatest danger to ourexistence; clone have been on the way to destroy human's ethics and if we haveknow the principle of the Big Bang, it may be a next nuclear.

Secondly, to restrain scientificresearch and development too tight may cause many disadvantages to our society.In the Qing Dynasty, which at that time is called the Great Kingdom, took a quantity of restrictions on the scientific research and development andthe empires thought the science is just a useless hobby. In the empires'depository, numbers of inventions, which can change the destiny of China, arestored with dust. Without the scientific research and development, China from thewealthiest country rapidly fell down to a trampled colony. So for a country thescience is a basement of developing to a power. Gregor Mendel, who broughtforth the Law of Segregation and the Law of Independent Assortment, was neverrecognized by the public when he is alive. Also Nicolaus Copernicus is anotherexample like Mendel. Restrictions on scientific research and development let acountry decadence, let truth shown to public later and let great scientistscannot receive the admiration deserved. Few restrictions should be placed onscientific research a development.

The advantages and disadvantages are almost equal. With all or without restrictions is neither a good choice. Our government should take suitable restrictions on science by fields or itsdanger.

verydarkUID: 2765585

In this era of flying development of science and technology, whether we should reexamine the restrictions on the scientific research and development is an urgent problem for the development of our civilization. The problem is more or fewer constrictions. （Constrictions似乎不是同义替换，意思不对，可以换成limit）
It may be better if we take an appropriate restrain（restrain是动词，restriction） on scientific research and development.

Firstly, scientific research and development have brought us so many benefits that they have become necessities in our daily lives（科学研究和发展是我们日常生活中的necessity吗？这句话有些问题，应该说对社会的发展有很大帮助和作用）, such as communication, transportation and automation. Thousands of years ago, people communicate by letters laced on the pigeons or by messagers (没有这种用法) just like the one running to the Marathon. But now only a mobile phone is enough. You can communicate with others rapidly no matter where and when you are. (看起来怪怪的，建议改成You can communicate with others rapidly whenever and wherever you are.) What's more, Internet and facsimile can sometimes be a better choice. （这句话的意思我不是很理解）With the modern transport--cars, trains and aircrafts--you can go everywhere on the earth in a short time. 你本段的例子很多，但是条理有些乱

Granted scientific research and development bring us so many advantages, but without any restrictions on it may cause some catastrophic phenomena. High level of technology sometimes is uncontrolled by people. Like many science fictions show we may be replaced by the robot we created in the future.（这句话有点中式英语）Someone may say that science fictions are based on dreams which may not be true. But can we say the creations have no relation with the public skepticism about the flying speed development of science? (“creation”指的是science fictions还是发明，建议你写清楚)If someday AI is accomplished successfully, the speed of the robot's self-improvement may exceed our imagination. With the body of metal, the strong computing, ability of self-learning and never getting tired the robots can easily learn what we have learned, like nuclear, which can ruin our human and the earth. If so it means our scientific development killed ourselves. It seems paradoxical. For this, government should take the duties to prevent the science from developing to a killing machine.你的例子似乎缺乏说服力，表述上存在一些问题，感觉很生硬。说科学研究可能带来灾难没错，但你的例子中的灾难完全属于假设，没有可信度。建议你举一些当下的例子说明一些科学研究的成果给人类带来负面影响。

In other fields, we can also find such trends like robots（表意不清，robots是other field还是上面的指代）. Take the example of researches on cloning, the Big Bang and nuclear. These scientific research and development have the chances or to say （这个表达有点问题）the abilities to destroy our human civilization. Restrictions on these researches are urgent otherwise these researches may touch the danger line. Nuclear have become the greatest danger to our existence; cloning have been on the way to destroy human's ethics and if we have known the principle of the Big Bang, it may be a next nuclear. (Why? Big Bang研究的危险性你没有说出来，建议这个例子就不要用了，不好说)

Secondly（你的firstly 用了3段，有点太多了，而且你上面已经有转折了,这里应该又是另外一个转折）, to restrain scientific research and development too tight may cause many disadvantages to our society. In the Qing Dynasty, which at that time is called the Great Kingdom, a quantity of restrictions on the scientific research and development and the empires were taken because the rulers thought the science is just a useless hobby. In the empires' depository, numbers of inventions, which can change the destiny of China, are stored with dust. Without the scientific research and development, China rapidly fell down to a colony trampled by western colonists from the wealthiest empire of the world. So for a country the science is the foundation for developing to a strong power. Gregor Mendel, who brought forth the Law of Segregation and the Law of Independent Assortment, was never recognized by the public when he is alive. Also Nicolaus Copernicus is another example like Mendel. 这里你例子的转变太过突兀，没有承接的句子，容易让读者摸不着头脑，刚说完for a country…，突然转变成Gregor Mendel 的例子，比较唐突，我建议你可以多说一些国家在限制科学研究上其他西方国家与清政府的对比，他们政策的不同所导致的结果，这样很有说服力。Restrictions on scientific research and development let country decay, let truth shown to public later 表达不到位and let great scientists cannot receive the admiration deserved. Few restrictions should be placed on scientific research a development.

The advantages and disadvantages are almost equal. 表达不清楚，什么的adv和disadv are equal？With all or without restrictions is neither a good choice. 一样的问题，而且这句话本身也有毛病，你的观点是必须有restrictions，但又说with也不是good choice，总之我明白你想表达的意思，但是你的语言没有很好的把你的观点抒发出来。Our government should take suitable restrictions on science by fields or its danger.（最后一句我也没看明白，by fields or its danger什么意思）

从整篇文章上看，逻辑和层次基本上明确了，但例子的使用和语言的表达上尚有不当之处