【NINE小组】【作业集】---by me

gengshuUID: 3012360

While it may be true that the Centerville High School take the driver's education course will more or less reducing the accidents in and around the Centerville. The evidence in this argument which the author say（says） is not enough to prove the conclusion that it is the only solution to this serious problem.

First, the teenagers which（who） involve in these accident（accidents） may not from Centerville. For instance, they could be some teenagers from the city near Centerville. If it is true, the author fails to convince us that the cause of the accident is by the lack of safety awareness of the Centerville’s teenagers. So taking the driver's education course at Centerville high school may not solve the problem.
事故中的青少年不是本镇的青少年，所以教育本镇的青少年对于改善交通情况没有用。

Second, the author falsely assumes that the teenagers who lead to the accident are from high school. May be most of them are junior high school or college students or even not student at all .But the driver's education course can just develop the standard of the high school students and cannot resolve the problem.
事故中的青少年不是大学生，所以在大学中开设课程无用。

Third, the author unfairly assumes（可以换一些同义的词，避免用词的重复） that the cause of the accidents is the unsafe driving of the teenagers. May be in the past two years, the weather of the Centerville is extremely bad. More than half of the days are cloudy and rainy which result the inferior condition of the road .Bring about large number of difficulties to all the drivers surely including the teenagers. If the weather still so bad like last two years the high school driver's course may not have any help.
青少年出事，不是因为技术不行，而是因为客观因素不利。

Fourth, the author falsely indicate（indicates） that it is the only solution to this serious problem. The government can do other things to solve this problem such as publish some posters at public place to teach residents some tips of traffic safety. They can also organize more activities in which individuals can learn knowledge of traffic safety.
并不一定要开课，可以有其他解决办法。

Last but not the least, the author convince that Centerville's high school should set a mandatory course to their students .But not all the high school students need this course ,they may not drive cars and even don't want to drive in follow years. This course will just increase their burden of study, So that they have no time to learn the other course which means more to them.
不应该强制，应该是给那些有需要的人开设。

In conclusion ,the author make some unstated assumptions in this argument ,so that we cannot sure if the Centerville should take the driver's education course at high school .Even though these assumptions are all right .We also cannot be sure that take driver's education course is the only way to solve this problem.（最后这个说法和之前的有重复）

据陈懂说，现在写文章最好不要用“firstly, secondly, thirdly……”开始，对于AW来说比较老套了。
然后，最好能够每段写长一点而不是现在这样每段只有不到100字，虽然总体上写的挺多，但是有种很碎的感觉。最好把提到的几个问题多分析一下，而不是谈的很多，但是都很浅。
最后就是，在攻击逻辑漏洞的时候，最好有主次之分。

gengshuUID: 3012360

While it may be true that the Centerville High School take the driver's education course will more or less reducing the accidents in and around the Centerville. The evidence in this argument which the author say is not enough to prove the conclusion that it is the only solution to this serious problem.

First, the teenagers which involve in these accidents may not from Centerville .For instance, they could be some teenagers from the city near Centerville. If it is true, the author fails to convince us that the cause of the accident is by the lack of safety awareness of the Centerville’s teenagers. So taking the driver's education course at Centerville high school may not solve the problem.

Second, the author falsely assumes that the teenagers who lead to the accident are from high school. May be most of them are junior high school or college students or even not student at all .But the driver's education course can just develop the standard of the high school students and cannot resolve the problem.

Third, the author unfairly assumes that the cause of the accidents is the unsafe driving of the teenagers. May be in the past two years, the weather of the Centerville is extremely bad. More than half of the days are cloudy and rainy which result the inferior condition of the road .Bring about large number of difficulties to all the drivers surely including the teenagers. If the weather still so bad like last two years the high school driver's course may not have any help.

Fourth, the author falsely indicates that it is the only solution to this serious problem. The government can do other things to solve this problem such as publish some posters at public place to teach residents some tips of traffic safety. They also can organize more activities in which individuals can learn knowledge of traffic safety.
Last but not the least, the author convince that Centerville's high school should set a mandatory course to their students .But not all the high school students need this course ,they may not drive cars and even don't want to drive in follow years. This course will just increase their burden of study, So that they have no time to learn the other course which means more to them.

In conclusion ,the author make some unstated assumptions in this argument ,so that we cannot sure if the Centerville should take the driver's education course at high school .Even though these assumptions are all right .We also cannot be sure that take driver's education course is the only way to solve this problem.

gengshuUID: 3012360

Argument 50（原稿）


Educators should base their assessment of students' learning not on students' grasp of facts but on the ability to explain the ideas, trends, and concepts that those facts illustrate.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position

In this argument the speaker indicate that the scent of lavender flowers has been proved effective for the remedy for insomnia from the environment include 30 volunteers with chronic insomnia slept during three weeks on lavender-scented pillows in a controlled room. Although the scent of lavender flowers may have good effect on remedy for insomnia, there are some problems which undermine the speaker's argument.

The first to say is how to define the insomnia. If we define the insomnia as whether the person can sleep easily ,then the argument indicate that the volunteers sleep soundly and wakened feeling tired or how long they can sleep cannot convince anything about insomnia .That is to say that the speaker's argument should build up on a clear define on what he want to prove.

Besides, the speaker unfairly to indicate that it is the effect of the scent of lavender flowers that making the volunteers sleep longer. There are a lot of other factors which disturb the result .For example, volunteers of this experiment sleep in a new environment, may be the first two week they cannot adapt this environment so they feel tired after these weeks and at the third week they have adapt the new circumstance ,as a result they sleep longer than before .Another explain is that for the volunteers stop eating their sleeping medication at the beginning of the second week .Then they sleep bad in the second week and feel too tired. Thus, they sleep longer and more soundly than previous in the third week.

Moreover, the experiment want to prove the scent of lavender flowers can cures insomnia quickly. But we cannot say the scented pillows have equal effect to the scent of the flowers. May be the comfortable degree the pillows have more effect on the insomnia and the pillows of this experiment are very cozy and make the volunteers sleep longer in the third week. That means without the scent of lavender flowers the condition of the volunteers' sleep will be still become better.

Two final problems with the argument involve the experimental process. If we want the test the effect of the scent of the flowers whether or not the volunteers eat the sleeping medication in first two weeks have little use to this experiment .Furthermore, even though the scent have good effect to the chronic insomnia volunteers, we cannot say this scent have same effect on the other insomnia patients.

In conclusion, the argument cannot indicate that the scent of lavender cures insomnia within a short period of time by that experiment. The speaker should take another better experiment which considers the effect of other factors.

gengshuUID: 3012360

In this argument the speaker indicate(indicates) that the scent of lavender flowers has been proved effective for the remedy for insomnia from the environment include(including) 30 volunteers with chronic insomnia slept during three weeks on lavender-scented pillows in a controlled room. Although the scent of lavender flowers may（表示让步的话，最好用might） have good effect on remedy for insomnia, there are some problems which undermine the speaker's argument.

The first to say is how to define the insomnia. If we define the insomnia as whether the person can sleep easily ,then the argument indicate(indicating) that the volunteers sleep（slept） soundly and wakened feeling tired or how long they can sleep cannot convince anything about insomnia .That is to say that(that去掉) the speaker's argument should build up on a clear define（definition） on what he want（wants） to prove.

Besides, the speaker unfairly to indicate that it is the effect of the scent of lavender flowers that making the volunteers sleep longer. There are a lot of other factors which disturb the result .For example, volunteers of this experiment sleep(去掉sleep，否则语法有误) in a new environment, may be the first two week （perhaps in the first two weeks）they cannot(could not) adapt(to) this environment so they feel(felt)tired after these weeks(sleep) and at the third week they have adapt（adapted to） the new circumstance ,as a result they sleep longer than before .Another explain is that for the volunteers stop(stopped) eating their sleeping medication at the beginning of the second week .Then they sleep(slept) bad in the second week and feel(felt) too tired. Thus, they sleep longer and more soundly than previous in the third week.(后面是否应该加一句总结？)

Moreover, the experiment want（wants） to prove the scent of lavender flowers can cures insomnia quickly. But we cannot say the scented pillows have equal(similar会不会更恰当？) effect to the scent of the flowers. May be（Maybe） the comfortable degree the pillows have more effect on the insomnia and the pillows of this experiment are very cozy and make the volunteers sleep longer in the third week. That means without the scent of lavender flowers the condition of the volunteers' sleep will be still(also) become better.

Two final problems with the argument involve the experimental process. If we want the（to?） test the effect of the scent of the flowers whether or not the volunteers eat the sleeping medication in first two weeks have little use to this experiment .(这句话求解释，不懂)Furthermore, even though the scent have good effect to the chronic insomnia volunteers, we cannot say this scent have same effect on the other insomnia patients.
个人觉得谈到实验过程的问题，可以提出缺少实验对照组这个问题。

In conclusion, the argument cannot indicate that the scent of lavender cures insomnia within a short period of time by that experiment. The speaker should take another better experiment which considers the effect of other factors.
最后一段最好可以再把需要给出的evidence总结一下。因为题目要求specific evidence。还有哦，这篇和北美范文有点相似，不过语言不同，应该不怕雷同。
另外建议me注意一下语法，因为太多语法错误还是会影响分数的，葬送不必要的分数是很可惜滴~加油！

gengshuUID: 3012360

Argument 50 (修改稿)
In this argument the speaker indicate that the scent of lavender flowers has been proved effective for the remedy for insomnia from the environment include 30 volunteers with chronic insomnia slept during three weeks on lavender-scented pillows in a controlled room. Although the scent of lavender flowers may have good effect on remedy for insomnia, there are some problems which undermine the speaker's argument.

The first to say is how to define the insomnia. If we define the insomnia as whether the person can sleep easily ,then the argument indicate that the volunteers sleep soundly and wakened feeling tired or how long they can sleep cannot convince anything about insomnia .That is to say that the speaker's argument should build up on a clear define on what he want to prove.

Besides, the speaker unfairly to indicate that it is the effect of the scent of lavender flowers that making the volunteers sleep longer. There are a lot of other factors which disturb the result .For example, volunteers of this experiment sleep in a new environment, may be the first two week they cannot adapt this environment so they feel tired after these weeks and at the third week they have adapt the new circumstance ,as a result they sleep longer than before .Another explain is that for the volunteers stop eating their sleeping medication at the beginning of the second week .Then they sleep bad in the second week and feel too tired. Thus, they sleep longer and more soundly than previous in the third week.

Moreover, the experiment want to prove the scent of lavender flowers can cures insomnia quickly. But we cannot say the scented pillows have equal effect to the scent of the flowers. May be the comfortable degree the pillows have more effect on the insomnia and the pillows of this experiment are very cozy and make the volunteers sleep longer in the third week. That means without the scent of lavender flowers the condition of the volunteers' sleep will be still become better.

Two final problems with the argument involve the experimental process. If we want the test the effect of the scent of the flowers whether or not the volunteers eat the sleeping medication in first two weeks have little use to this experiment .Furthermore, even though the scent have good effect to the chronic insomnia volunteers, we cannot say this scent have same effect on the other insomnia patients.

In conclusion, the argument cannot indicate that the scent of lavender cures insomnia within a short period of time by that experiment. The speaker should take another better experiment which considers the effect of other factors.

gengshuUID: 3012360

Argument 163 (原稿)
[The following memo appeared in the newsletter of the West Meria Public Health Council.]”An innovative treatment has come to our attention that promises to significantly reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces. A study reports that in nearby East Meria, where consumption of the plant beneficia is very high, people visit the doctor only once or twice per year for the treatment of colds. Clearly, eating a substantial amount of beneficia can prevent colds. Since colds are the reason most frequently given for absences from school and work, we recommend the daily use of nutritional supplements derived from beneficia. We predict this will dramatically reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces."

[Specific Task Instruction: Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.]

In this argument, the author recommends a method that can reduce absenteeism in their school significantly. It seems well persuaded that plant beneficia really have good effect to treat the colds since the people in East Meria visit doctor only once or twice per year. But to make this argument have more persuasion, a lot of questions would need to be answered.


To indicate whether the beneficia really have effect on the cure of colds, some question followed need to be answered. Does the high consumption of beneficia have cause-and-effect relationship with people seldom visit the doctor for cold? May be the people in East Meria just be used to not see the doctor and eat medicine themselves. Moreover, if they go to see the doctor, it might because the cold is very serious and cannot indicate they catch a cold no frequent. Furthermore, does the study of East Meria have comparability with other places? For example, may be the environment of East Meria is very suitable for live, the atmosphere there is very fresh so that people hard to have a cold. Or maybe just because people live in East Meria have a lighter pressure and people have a relative high resistibility. But we cannot ensure all these circumstance suitable for our schools and workplaces.


Even though beneficia really can prevent colds, do the nutritional supplements derived from beneficia also have same effect to our body? We cannot ensure the supplements which just have some ingredient of beneficia have good effect for us to prevent colds. The production method and scale of the effect composition will all determine the effect of these supplements. Moreover, we do not know the supplements derived from beneficia have other bad effect to our body. If these supplements have no good function on us, it will have no influence to the absenteeism of their schools and workplaces.


Even if the nutritional supplements derived from beneficia also can cure colds. Dose it means that recommend this supplements will dramatically reduce absenteeism in their schools and workplaces? Does the people who absent schools and workplaces really catch a cold? Maybe they just use it as a reason to do other things or they actually be infect with another virus which have a similar symptom with cold and they mistake consider they catch a cold. If we cannot ensure whether these people have a cold, we cannot guarantee the absenteeism of their schools or workplaces will be reduced either.


If the author cannot explain such question before, the result of recommending the nutritional supplements derived from beneficia will be unsure and the absenteeism of their schools or workplaces may not be reduce dramatically.

gengshuUID: 3012360

In this argument, the author recommends a method that can reduce absenteeism in their school significantly. It seems well persuaded that plant beneficia really have good effect to treat （have a good effect on treating）the colds since the people in East Meria visit doctor only once or twice per year. But to make this argument have more persuasion, a lot of questions would need to be answered.


To indicate whether the beneficia really have (an) effect on the cure of colds, some question followed need to be answered. Does the high consumption of beneficia have cause-and-effect relationship with people seldom visit the doctor for cold? May be the people in East Meria just be used to not see(seeing) the doctor and eat(eating) medicine themselves. Moreover, if they go to see the doctor, it might because the cold is very serious and cannot indicate they catch a cold no frequent(这句没明白是什么意思••). Furthermore, does the study of East Meria have comparability with other places? For example, may be （maybe）the environment of East Meria is very suitable for live(living), the atmosphere there is very fresh so that people hard to have a cold(it’s hard for local people to catch a cold). Or maybe just because people live(living) in East Meria have a lighter(a lighter—less. pressure不可数) pressure and people have a relative（relatively） high(higher) resistibility(不可数). But we cannot ensure all these circumstance suitable for our schools and workplaces.
感觉你这段不只是在说明beneficia不一定对于治疗感冒有效果，furthermore后面的都是在说两地的不可比性，我觉得这个可以单独做一段放在后面。


Even though beneficia really can prevent colds, do the nutritional supplements derived from beneficia also have same effect to（on） our body? We cannot ensure the supplements which just have some ingredient of beneficia have good effect for us to prevent colds. The production method and scale of the effect composition（effect composition是什么？） will all determine the effect of these supplements. Moreover, we do not know (whether) the supplements derived from beneficia have other bad effect(s) on our body. If these supplements have no good function on us, it will have no influence to the absenteeism of their schools and workplaces.（我觉得这最后一句有点不严谨，毕竟你这段说了这些成分可能没有和beneficia同样的效果以及它们可能有副作用，就是即使它们可能有好的作用但是如果有副作用人们也不应该大量使用。觉得最后一句既没有概括全段内容也没有直接和倒数第二句相关，是不是应该斟酌一下••）


Even if the nutritional supplements derived from beneficia also can cure colds. Dose it means that recommend this supplements will dramatically reduce absenteeism in their schools and workplaces? Does the people who absent schools and workplaces really catch a cold? Maybe they just use it as a reason（pretext是否更好） to do other things or they actually be（are） infect（infected） with another virus(other diseases) which have a similar symptom(symtoms) with cold and they mistake(wrongly) consider they catch a cold. If we cannot ensure whether these people have a cold, we cannot guarantee the absenteeism of their schools or workplaces will be reduced (by the prevention of cold)either.


If the author cannot explain such question before(above), the result of recommending the nutritional supplements derived from beneficia will be unsure and the absenteeism of their schools or workplaces may not be reduce(reduced) dramatically.

文章采用让步式的论证结构，逻辑比较清晰，但细节还需要斟酌一下。以上改正纯属个人意见，欢迎讨论！

gengshuUID: 3012360

Argument 163 （修改稿）
In this argument, the author recommends a method that can reduce absenteeism in their school significantly. It seems well persuaded that plant beneficia really have a good effect on treating the colds since the people in East Meria visit doctor only once or twice per year. But to make this argument have more persuasion, a lot of questions would need to be answered.

To indicate whether the beneficia really have an effect on cure of colds, some question followed need to be answered. Does the high consumption of beneficia have cause-and-effect relationship with people seldom visit the doctor for cold? May be the people in East Meria just be used to not seeing the doctor and eating medicine themselves. Moreover, if they go to see the doctor, it might because their illness is very serious and cannot indicate they catch a cold no frequent. Maybe they catch a cold frequently but it has no need to see the doctor. Furthermore, does the study of East Meria have comparability with other places? For example, maybe the environment of East Meria is very suitable for living; the atmosphere there is very fresh so that it is hard for local people to catch a cold. Or maybe just because people living in East Meria have a less pressure and people have a relatively higher resistibility. If the East Meria have its particularity, we cannot conclude that beneficia have effect on the treat of colds.

Even though beneficia really can prevent colds, do the nutritional supplements derived from beneficia also have same effect on our body? We cannot ensure the supplements which just have some ingredient of beneficia have good effect for us to prevent colds. The production method and scale of the effect ingredient will all determine the function of these supplements. Moreover, we do not know whether the supplements derived from beneficia have other bad effects to our body. The arguer should provide more experiments to illustrate the function of the nutritional supplements before he persuaded people to take them.

Even if the nutritional supplements derived from beneficia also can cure colds. Dose it means that recommend this supplements will dramatically reduce absenteeism in their schools and workplaces? Does the people who absent schools and workplaces really catch a cold? Maybe they just use it as a pretext to do other things or they actually are infected with other diseases which have similar symptoms with cold and they wrongly consider they catch a cold. If we cannot ensure whether these people have a cold, we cannot guarantee the absenteeism of their schools or workplaces will be reduced by the prevention of cold either.

If the author cannot explain such question above, the result of recommending the nutritional supplements derived from beneficia will be unsure and the absenteeism of their schools or workplaces may not be reduced dramatically.

gengshuUID: 3012360

Argument 6 (原稿)

Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic regions. They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of the year. Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. Unfortunately, according to reports from local hunters, the deer populations are declining. Since these reports coincide with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, we can conclude that the purported decline in deer populations is the result of the deer's being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.

[Specific Task Instruction: Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.]

In this argument, the author indicates that the arctic deer's being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea cause the decline in deer populations. Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, there are some specific evidence is needed to sustain it.


First of all, no evidence convince that the arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic regions cannot migrate from island to island like before. If the ice covered the sea still exist in some time of a year, they still can search for food by moving on ice from island to island. Even though the road of ice may disappear, they can also choose other method to migrate. For example, maybe the sea separating from the islands is very shallow, the arctic deer can just go through this shallow water easily. It is also very likely that this deer is good at swim and they can swim across the sea between the islands to search for food. The author's opinion is definitely flawed unless he can convince me that these and other possibilities are unlikely.


Besides, the author does not supply any evidence to confirm that there are some cause-and-effect relationships between the decline in deer populations and the global warming.  Although the global warming may cause the temperature of the islands which the deer live decline relatively, it is quite possible that there also exist some time in a year that the weather is cold enough for the deer to live and the plants on these islands can still alive and enough for these deer to eat. And the change which the global warming brings may not influence the life of the deer itself. Without accounting for these other alternatives, the author cannot bolster the recommendation.


Furthermore, the author fails to set and evidence that the report of the local hunters have any reliance. The hunter may just go out for hunting little time of a year and their experience cannot use for show the number of the deer populations have declined. We need more statistics which record the number of deer populations comprehensively. Besides, it is just possible that the deer change their habitats so that the local hunters see the deer not so frequently like before. To reach the cited conclusion, the arguer must explain either why none of these alternatives is available.


To sum up, the author’s argument mentioned above is not based on valid evidence. In order to draw a better conclusion, the author should take more evidence to sustain his argument.

gengshuUID: 3012360

In this argument, the author indicates that the arctic deer's being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea cause the decline in deer populations. Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, there are some specific evidence is needed to sustain it.(there are去掉)

First of all, no evidence convince（indicates） that the arctic deer live（living） on islands in Canada's arctic regions cannot migrate from island to island like before. If the ice covered the sea still exist in some time of a year, they still can search for food by moving on ice from island to island. Even though（even if吧？） the road of ice may disappear, they can also choose other method（s） to migrate. For example, maybe the sea separating from the islands is very shallow, the arctic deer can just go through this shallow water easily. It is also very likely that this deer is good at swim（swimming） and they can swim across the sea between the islands to search for food. The author's opinion is definitely flawed unless he can convince me that these and other possibilities are unlikely.

Besides, the author does not supply any evidence to confirm that there are some cause-and-effect relationships between the decline in deer populations and the global warming.  Although the global warming may cause the temperature of the islands which(where) the deer live decline relatively, it is quite possible that there also exist(there is also) some time in a year that the weather is cold enough for the deer to live and the plants on these islands can still alive and enough for these deer to eat. And the change which the global warming brings may not influence the life of the deer itself. Without accounting for these and other alternatives, the author cannot bolster the recommendation.

Furthermore, the author fails to set and evidence that the report of the local hunters have any reliance. The hunter may just go out for hunting little（less） time of a year and their experience cannot use for show the number of the deer populations have declined. （这句子汉化思维有点明显诶，有语病••）We need more statistics which record the（直接statistics about the number就可以了） number of deer populations(population都不应该加复数的) comprehensively. Besides, it is just possible that the deer change their habitats so that the local hunters see the deer not so frequently like before. To reach the cited conclusion, the arguer must explain either why none of these alternatives is available.（其实我个人觉得， 根据这个Instruction的话，写的时候可以写些具体evidence，比如说作者应该调查猎人观察的范围，弄清楚鹿在整个区域的数量变化，之类的）

To sum up, the author's argument mentioned above is not based on valid evidence. In order to draw a better conclusion, the author should take more evidence to sustain his argument.

gengshuUID: 3012360

Argument 6 （修改稿）


In this argument, the author indicates that the arctic deer's being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea cause the decline in deer populations. Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, some specific evidence is needed to sustain it.


First of all, no evidence indicates that the arctic deer living on islands in Canada's arctic regions cannot migrate from island to island like before. If the ice covered the sea still exist in some time of a year, they still can search for food by moving on ice from island to island. Even though the road of ice may disappear, they can also choose other methods to migrate. For example, maybe the sea separating from the islands is very shallow, the arctic deer can just go through this shallow water easily. It is also very likely that this deer is good at swimming and they can swim across the sea between the islands to search for food. The author's opinion is definitely flawed unless he can convince me that these and other possibilities are unlikely.


Besides, the author does not supply any evidence to confirm that there are some cause-and-effect relationships between the decline in deer populations and the global warming.  Although the global warming may cause the temperature of the islands where the deer live decline relatively, it is quite possible that there is also some time in a year that the weather is cold enough for the deer to live and the plants on these islands can still alive and enough for these deer to eat. And the change which the global warming brings may not influence the life of the deer itself. Without accounting for these and other alternatives, the author cannot bolster the recommendation.


Furthermore, the author fails to set and evidence that the report of the local hunters have any reliance. The hunter may just go out for hunting less time of a year and their experience cannot show the number of the deer populations have declined. We need more statistics about the number of deer populations comprehensively. Besides, it is just possible that the deer change their habitats so that the local hunters see the deer not so frequently like before. To reach the cited conclusion, the arguer must explain either why none of these alternatives is available.


To sum up, the author's argument mentioned above is not based on valid evidence. In order to draw a better conclusion, the author should take more evidence to sustain his argument.

gengshuUID: 3012360

Argument 81(原稿)

[The following appeared in a business magazine.]”As a result of numerous complaints of dizziness and nausea on the part of consumers of Promofoods tuna, the company requested that eight million cans of its tuna be returned for testing. Promofoods concluded that the canned tuna did not, after all, pose a health risk. This conclusion is based on tests performed on samples of the recalled cans by chemists from Promofoods; the chemists found that of the eight food chemicals most commonly blamed for causing symptoms of dizziness and nausea, five were not found in any of the tested cans. The chemists did find small amounts of the three remaining suspected chemicals but pointed out that these occur naturally in all canned foods."

[Specific Task Instruction: Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be addressed in order to decide whether the conclusion and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to the questions would help to evaluate the conclusion.]

In this argument, the author advocates that the complaints of dizziness and nausea have no relation with the Promofoods tuna. Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, since the result of tests performed on samples of the recalled cans by chemists from Promofoods seems normal, a lot of questions need to be answered.


First and foremost, we do not know whether the three chemicals which were found in the Promofoods tuna out of limits. Although the author says that these three chemicals which can cause dizziness and nausea are very little, it still has possibilities that these small amounts of the chemicals cause the discomfort of the consumer, since we have no statistics to show how much of these chemicals can cause the dizziness and nausea of the consumers.  Furthermore, we have no standard to weigh big or small amounts of the chemicals. Maybe just minimum of these chemicals can cause serious dizziness and nausea. The author’s reasoning is definitely flawed unless the author can answer this question above.


Even though the other three chemicals may have no relevance with the dizziness and nausea of the consumers, do the other chemicals exist in the Promofoods tuna which can cause the dizziness and nausea? It is very likely that the Promofoods tuna contains some chemicals besides the eight food chemicals most commonly blamed for causing symptoms of dizziness and nausea which cause the discomfort of the consumers. But the author fails to give any information with can remove this possibilities. Without this information the author cannot answer the question above thus cannot conclude the dizziness and nausea have no relevant with the Promofoods tuna.


Moreover, we do not know if it is scientific to take these samples. The author indicates that eight million cans of its tuna be returned for testing. But since we do not know the total amount of the Promofoods tuna, we cannot conclude these samples have the representativeness. Maybe the total amount of the Promofoods tuna which have been sold is very big and eight million cans just very small samples of the total amount. It is very possible that other tuna cans which have the chemicals can cause the dizziness and nausea. To reach the cited conclusion, the author must give other statistics which can show the samples are representativeness.


To sum up, in order to draw a better conclusion, the author should resolve the questions which mention above. Otherwise, we cannot conclude that it is not the Promofoods tuna which cause the dizziness and nausea of the consumers.

gengshuUID: 3012360

In this argument,the author advocates that the complaints of dizziness and nausea have no relation with the Promofoods tuna. Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, since the result of tests performed on samples of the recalled cans by chemists from Promofoods seems normal, a lot of questions need to beanswered.

感觉最后一句话有点冗长，可以这么说：although…… because of the result（也可以修饰一下这个result） of the tests on the xxx performed by xxx, …………可能读起来会稍微舒服点。  仅供参考^

First and foremost, we do not know whether the three chemicals which were found in the Promofoods tuna 加 were out of limits. Although the author says that these three chemicals which can cause dizziness and nausea are very little, it still has possibilities that these small amounts of the chemicals cause the discomfort of the consumers, since we have no statistics to show how much of these chemicals can cause the dizziness and nausea of the consumers.  Furthermore, we have no standard to weigh big or small amounts of the chemicals我觉得这句话的表达有问题；另外标准有没有我们并不知道，我觉得应该有，最好说作者没有提供足够的这方面的信息. Maybe just minimum（这里用这个不太好，应该是要表达 ”很少量 “的吧） of these chemicals can cause serious dizziness and nausea. The author'sreasoning is definitely flawed unless the author can answer this question above.

第一，不知道残留的三种物质是否超标，会不会引起消费者不适。

Even though the other three chemicals may have no relevance with （to） the dizziness and nausea of the consumers, do the other chemicals exist in the Promofoods tuna which can cause the dizziness and nausea? 用问句最好和前面的那半句各自单独成句..我觉得这里前面用even though后面可以不要问句，陈述句就行了.. It is very likely that the Promofoods tuna contains some chemicals besides the eight food chemicals most commonly blamed for causing symptoms of dizziness and nausea which cause the discomfort of theconsumers. But the author fails to give any information with（which） can remove this possibilities. Without this information the author cannot answer the question above thus cannot conclude the dizziness and nausea have no relevant (relation) with thePromofoods tuna.

第二，可能还有其他的物质引起头昏和恶心，而没被检测到。

Moreover, we donot know if it is scientific to take these samples. The author indicates that eight million cans of its tuna be returned for testing. But since we do not know the total amount of the Promofoods tuna, we cannot conclude these samples have the representativeness. Maybe the total amount of the Promofoods tuna which havebeen sold is very big and eight million cans just very small samples of the total amount. It is very possible that other tuna cans which have the chemicals 删掉can cause the dizziness and nausea. To reach the cited conclusion, the author must give other statistics which can show the samples are representativeness（representative）.


第三，不知道取样是否科学。

感觉你这里的逻辑有点问题：作者说800万个罐头被召回来检测。但是我们不知道市场上总共有多少P的罐头，我们不能得出结论说样本有代表性。

我觉得这800万个罐头是被召回的数量（召回是为了在还不太确定的情况下防止更多的消费者感到不适，因为有可能是因为P的罐头）检测的样本应该是从这800万个里面抽取。检测800万个罐头这个工作量太大了点。。而且要是没问题的话，它把800万个都拿去检测那不是亏大了。。

我是这么理解的：

1、P召回800万个，但是我们不知道它总共迈了多少出去，召回的比例是多少。有可能召回的这一批是合格的，所以没检测出问题，而其他没被召回的批次是有问题的。所以应该提供一个关于召回的信息。

2、作者没提供具体的样本信息，有800万个被召回作（作为总体），它检测用的sample含有多少个罐头？不知道样本的容量。

To sum up, in order to draw a better conclusion我觉得说 为了支持作者的结论好些，他写这篇argument就是为了支持他的结论，而我们批驳的是他的论证 , the author should resolve the questions which mentioned above. Otherwise, we cannot conclude应该是作者不能conclude that it is not the Promofoods tuna which（that）强调句应该用that cause the dizziness and nausea of the consumers.

个人意见,有不对的请指正~

或者我们一起讨论~

gengshuUID: 3012360

Argument 81（修改稿）


In this argument, the author advocates that the complaints of dizziness and nausea have no relation with the Promofoods tuna. Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, since the result of tests performed on samples of the recalled cans seems normal, a lot of other questions need to be answered.


First and foremost, we do not know whether the three chemicals which were found in the Promofoods tuna were out of limits. Although the author says that these three chemicals which can cause dizziness and nausea are very little, it still has possibilities that these small amounts of the chemicals cause the discomfort of the consumers, since we have no statistics to show how much of these chemicals can cause the dizziness and nausea of the consumers.  Furthermore, the author fails to indicate the standard to weigh big or small amounts of the chemicals. Maybe just a few of these chemicals can cause serious dizziness and nausea. The author's reasoning is definitely flawed unless the author can answer this question above.


Even though the other three chemicals may have no relevance to the dizziness and nausea of the consumers, it is very likely that other chemicals exist in the Promofoods tuna which can cause the dizziness and nausea? It is very likely that the Promofoods tuna contains some chemicals besides the eight food chemicals most commonly blamed for causing symptoms of dizziness and nausea which cause the discomfort of the consumers. But the author fails to give any information which can remove these possibilities. Without this information the author cannot answer the question above thus cannot conclude the dizziness and nausea have no relation to the Promofoods tuna.


Moreover, we do not know if it is scientific to take these samples. The author indicates that eight million cans of its tuna be returned for testing. But since we do not know the total amount of the Promofoods tuna, we cannot conclude these samples have the representative. Maybe the total amount of the Promofoods tuna which have been sold is very big and eight million cans just very small samples of the total amount. It is very possible that other tuna cans which have the chemicals cause the dizziness and nausea. To reach the cited conclusion, the author must give other statistics which can show the samples are representative.


To sum up, in order to bolster the last conclusion, the author should resolve the questions which mentioned above. Otherwise, the other cannot conclude that it is not the Promofoods tuna that cause the dizziness and nausea of the consumers.

gengshuUID: 3012360

Argument 76（原稿）


In this argument, the author advocates that the complaints of dizziness and nausea have no relation with the Promofoods tuna. Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, since the result of tests performed on samples of the recalled cans seems normal, a lot of other questions need to be answered.


First and foremost, we do not know whether the three chemicals which were found in the Promofoods tuna were out of limits. Although the author says that these three chemicals which can cause dizziness and nausea are very little, it still has possibilities that these small amounts of the chemicals cause the discomfort of the consumers, since we have no statistics to show how much of these chemicals can cause the dizziness and nausea of the consumers.  Furthermore, the author fails to indicate the standard to weigh big or small amounts of the chemicals. Maybe just a few of these chemicals can cause serious dizziness and nausea. The author's reasoning is definitely flawed unless the author can answer this question above.


Even though the other three chemicals may have no relevance to the dizziness and nausea of the consumers, it is very likely that other chemicals exist in the Promofoods tuna which can cause the dizziness and nausea? It is very likely that the Promofoods tuna contains some chemicals besides the eight food chemicals most commonly blamed for causing symptoms of dizziness and nausea which cause the discomfort of the consumers. But the author fails to give any information which can remove these possibilities. Without this information the author cannot answer the question above thus cannot conclude the dizziness and nausea have no relation to the Promofoods tuna.


Moreover, we do not know if it is scientific to take these samples. The author indicates that eight million cans of its tuna be returned for testing. But since we do not know the total amount of the Promofoods tuna, we cannot conclude these samples have the representative. Maybe the total amount of the Promofoods tuna which have been sold is very big and eight million cans just very small samples of the total amount. It is very possible that other tuna cans which have the chemicals cause the dizziness and nausea. To reach the cited conclusion, the author must give other statistics which can show the samples are representative.


To sum up, in order to bolster the last conclusion, the author should resolve the questions which mentioned above. Otherwise, the other cannot conclude that it is not the Promofoods tuna that cause the dizziness and nausea of the consumers.