argument150 【1106G】gelivable小组 第4次作业

鑫鑫小宁UID: 2795099

The argument contains facts that are questionable. First, the argument assumes a conlusion that the global pollution of water and air causes the worldwide amphinbians decline only based on aspecial case in Yosemite National Park. In addition, the studies in theargument is reasonable and persuesive or not. The argument also fails to establisha logical reason for why the introutuction of trout causeing the Yosemitedecline is wrong.


Obviously,any assertions without strong evidence is unreasonable and unpersuesive while a conlusion which depend on very special cases is rediculus. The author states the two studies about amphibians in Yosemite confirm his conclusion that worldwide amphinbians decline indicates the global pollution, which is a counter example of the mentioned theory. Regarless of the diversity of the amphinbians’ condition all over the world, we cannot simply persume a relation between the reason of decreasing amphibians and that in worldwide. Moreover, no evidence in the studies shows that the drastically reduced numbers of amphibians in Yosemit relate to the influence of the global pollution . The studies just present the numbers of the species of amphibians and the numbers of each species areabundant or reduced in 1992 and 1915, which have no substantial relevance with the global pollution. Varied excuses we can assume for the falling off amphibians, for instence the excessive fishing, the weakening protection, or the natural dying out. The untold background of Yosemite makes the possibilities more complex. I can assume a extreme condition of Yosemite that it is nearby a lake and amphibians are free distribution, sothe numbers of amphibians in Yosemite are random. Therefore, the argument illogical establish a conclusion with a special case at the same time the case is unreasonable.


At the end of the argument, the author presents that the introduciton of trout does not explain the worldwide decline, so it cannot be the real reason for the Yosemite decline. Consider a similar case in same logic --- A murderer was released, because the judge believed that murdering is not the real reason of the death accourding the various death around world. How ridiculous. In fact, the assertion is mistakenin logic. If we consider a reason is unpersuesive because it cannot apply to the whole, then any reason credible in special case are suitable for the whole.However, uncertainties in special cases and stable the whole is make the assertion illogical.


Overall,the studies of amphibians in Yosemite is unreasoned without establishing relation with global pollution. Farther,
the arthor assume a persuesive conclusion based on the unreliable case. In addition, a illogical assertion is given in the judgement of the rationality of that introducition trout causes Yosemite decline.