argument50 求PP

zxwhy825UID: 2668443

题目：ARGUMENT50 - From a draft textbook manuscript submitted to a publisher.

"As Earth was being formed out of the collision of space rocks, the heat from those collisions and from the increasing gravitational energy of the planet made the entire planet molten, even the surface. Any water present would have evaporated and gone off into space. As the planet approached its current size, however, its gravitation became strong enough to hold gases and water vapor around it as an atmosphere. Because comets are largely ice made up of frozen water and gases, a comet striking Earth then would have vaporized. The resulting water vapor would have been retained in the atmosphere, eventually falling as rain on the cooled and solidified surface of Earth. Therefore, the water in Earth's oceans must have originated from comets."
字数：266
用时：00:30:00
日期：2010-8-1 下午 11:34:16

【原文】With the fact of change of the gravitational energy, from making entire planet molten to hold gases and water vapor as an atmosphere, and the information that comets are largely ice made up of frozen water and gases, the argument get the seemly cogent conclusion that the water in Earth's oceans must have originated from comets. However, there are some fallacies in the argement ,I will reveal in turn.
First, the aruger overlook the atternative of the origianal
water. The arugment show no evidence that comets are the only things in the universe that contain water.Without more informatin ,we cannot exclude the affect of other staff. For instance, as an common sense, most chemical reactions result in water, it's possible that the water in Earth's ocean comes from the reactions on earth, especially like the breath of cells.
Second, even if
the first
water originated from the comets, it does not necessarily have the luck to stay to form the oceans.Using the fact the argument display, that the interim between the size change of the size of earth, the water were once vaporized. There are no evidence show in the argument that the water vapor, the gravitation hold, was exactly the same water come from the comets.
Thirdly,the arguer assert "The resulting water vapor would have been retained in the atmosphere, eventually falling as rain on the cooled and solidified surface of Earch " without sound information showed in the argument. Is that there are some important information arguer choose to ignore ,such as the origin of life,whose breath result in water?
In sum , without

【a修改】With the fact of change of the gravitational energy, from making entire planet molten to hold gases and water vapor as an atmosphere, and the information that comets are largely ice made up of frozen water and gases, the argument get the seemly cogent conclusion that the water in Earth's oceans must have originated from comets. However, there are some fallacies in the argument, I will reveal in turn.
First, the arguer overlooks the alternatives of the original water. The argument show no evidence that comets are the only things in the universe that contain water. Without more information, we cannot exclude the effect of other staff. For instance, as an common sense, most chemical reactions result in water, it's possible that the water in Earth's ocean comes from the reactions on earth, especially like the breath of cells.
Second, even if the first water originated from the comets, it does not necessarily have the luck to stay to form the oceans. Using the fact the argument display, that the interim between the size changes of the size of earth, the water were once vaporized. There is no evidence showing in the argument that the water vapor, the gravitation hold, was exactly the same water come from the comets.
Thirdly, the arguer assert "The resulting water vapor would have been retained in the atmosphere, eventually falling as rain on the cooled and solidified surface of Earth " without sound information showed in the argument. Is that there are some important information arguer choose to ignore, such as the origin of life, whose breath result in water?
In sum, without more removing the possibility of other origin of water, and the record of the hit of comets, we cannot conclude such hasty verdict, that the water rise in the comets.
当地球在太空岩石的撞击作用下形成的时候，撞击产生的热量和行星越来越大的重力能量使整个行星融化，甚至包括表面。当时存在的任何水分都会蒸发并消失在太空。然而，当行星接近现在的大小的时候，它的重力强到了足以保持其周围的气体和水蒸气来形成大气层。由于彗星主要是由冻结的水和气体组成的冰，撞击地球的彗星将会蒸发。产生的水蒸气将被留在大气层，最终以降雨的形式落在地球已冷却而且坚硬的表面。因此，地球海洋的水分一定是来自彗星。Earth was being formed,draft textbook manuscript 论断：地球的海水一定是从彗星起源的。因为地球的形成是大空石头撞击的结果，撞击使得整个行星，甚至是表面都融化了，当时地球上的水都蒸发并跑到太空中。等到地球达到它目前的体积，才有足够强的重力把气和水气留在它的大气中。而彗星主要由冰构成，彗星撞地球就会气化，水汽会被留在大气层中，最终形成雨落在地球已冷却和坚固的表面。
·论断的前提不一定成立。前提是在地球在达到目前体积，重力足够留住气体和水蒸汽后，有彗星撞击过地球。论者没有提供任何这方面的证据。如果这之后没有撞击发生，海水就不可能来源于彗星。
·论断的另一个前提是彗星与撞地球相撞能给地球带来水。但是论者没有提供资料证明这一点。虽然彗星由冰构成，但是与地球相撞后，彗星的冰并不一定能变成地球上的水。论者没有提供任何有关彗星撞击地球的记录，以及它们确实有给地球带来水。

·另外论者的推论中有自相矛盾的地方。论者认为地球由太空石头撞击形成，当时的水份都蒸发跑到了太空中。那么彗星与地球的相撞同样也可能使彗星的水分跑到太空中，而不一定是留在了地球上。 ·
论断太武断。论断认为彗星相撞能给地球带来水，所以地球海水起源于彗星。但实际上还有其他很多途径能给地球带来水，比如地球上元素的化学变化等等。论断没有考虑其它因素仓促做出了论断。
结论：论者要加强说服力还应该进一步提供有关彗星撞击地球的记录，并排除海水起源于其他途径的可能。

对陌生题材分析不到位。

zxwhy825UID: 2668443

觉得范文 很多 废话。。自己怎么写都是字数好少。。只能被模板么。。

zxwhy825UID: 2668443

谢谢啊、、求P

zxwhy825UID: 2668443

谢谢 求PP