argumen33 superdavidg 最新力作，求拍、求骂、求侮辱~~~

superdavidgUID: 3019910

In the argument above, the arguer cites that the distinctively shaped pots found at a few sites were spread by migration, not trade. To justify this claim, the arguer recommends that high level of a certain metallic element contained in various food are strongly related with people who migrated to new places after childhood, and many of the bones found near the pots containing high level of the metallic element. As it stands, the argument suffers from several critical flaws as follow.
The first point I want to put forward is that the arguer fails to establish a causal relationship between the migration and the metallic element. Although the survey shows that level of certain metallic element in the bones found near the pots are high, it can’t demonstrate the conclusion that these people are migrated form outside. Because it is possible that foods these also contain the same kind of metallic element. In this situation, it is normal that high level of metallic element found in the bones. Without evidences that aboriginals’ bones don’t contain such high level of metallic element, the arguer can’t convince us these people are migrated to here.
Granted that these people are migration, the arguer still couldn’t prove these pots are brought by them. It is equally possible that these pots are traded here by someone. Because of the argument doesn’t provide any proof whether these pots are belongings to the migration or not, it is likely that before those whose remains contained a high level of a certain metallic element come here, and the pots had been already traded here. The pots and the bones may even belong to different eras. In the absence of further information, the validity of the conclusion is open to doubt.
Besides, the arguer’s point is based on the assumption that these distinctively shaped pots are extraneous instead of native. However, form the argument we can’t conclude that these pots are unique to some specific areas cause there lakes of evidence to testify it. There is a great chance that these pots are made locally instead of being traded or taking by migrations.
To sum up, the argument is based on a gratuitous supposition that these pots are brought here from outside. Moreover, the arguer neither fails to convince us these bones are the remains of the migration，nor to prove these pots are taken by those migration. To strengthen, the arguer ought to provide more information about the relationship between the pots and the bones, meanwhile rolling out the possibility that aboriginals’ can also produce such kind of pots and their bones contains the certain metallic element too.