L的Daily Writing

坏绿的眼睛UID: 3138294

2月4日 综合
The reading talks about there are 3 kinds of great damages caused by "let it burn" policy which purpose is to let forest fire burn themselves out quickly and safely, especially the 1988 Yellowstone fire这一段前面加个逗号 单做一个分句比较好. The professor in the lecture refutes that, as a part of nature cycle, the forest fire is not only destructive but also creative 我不确定能不能这样用嗷 , so "let it burn" policy is good for ecosystem. Taking the fire in 1988 Yellowstone as an example, we should give more attention to what happened after that fire.# a* M& Q3 O. a, r; Z% r2 Y

The reading suggests 因为后面接的是作者表达的一个属于事实的陈述 所以换成 hold the point that 会更好吧 that the forest fire destroyed the trees and vegetation in Yellowstone, even including smaller plants. The policy made the nature park into a vast ruin. However, the professor argues that the burning of forest fire made a large open area which gave an opportunity to a quantity of new colonized plants. And some certain plants which need high temperature to germinate also appeared after the fire.' Y! L/ i: }. ]1 R0 Q

The reading also cites换成present 会不会比援引更恰当 that the forest fire affected wildlife. It disturbed food chains, by engulfing many small animals, so the larger species which might flee from that fire would not come back. 喵君 这里可以单独起一句话的呀 不一定得写这么长 But the professor believes 应该用过去式believed that because of 后面要接词组不可以是句子  the small plants replacing the trees after the fire 改成the small plants' replacing by the trees after the fire , the smaller animals which relied on them like rabbits lived so well that made the food chains stronger for their predators.& [1 i0 a7 P. B6 E( n, Z1 C& \# Y  r

. i2 M! E: e  I- r9 y
Lastly, the reading says that the local economy suffered from the forest fire好用法哇, because a large amount of tourists went away, which is a big strike to the local tourism.感觉上 这句是不是不做从句而单独写比较好 Disagreeing with this, the professor says that if the fire happens every year, it will damage the local tourism, but it is not我猜你是想用wrong?. It was an unusual fire caused by the combination of factors in 1988. And in fact, since 1988, the visitors come to the park every year instead of 这个词组放在这里的话 就是人们每年来这里代替火灾的发生？这样很奇怪呀 the fire happening.




15# loveinwc

loveinwcUID: 3241878

谢谢绿君哇~~~其实是这样的，因此每次写作文的时候都不能上网，所以就各种自己纠结，然后冒出各种稀奇古怪的用法…………汗，比如这句哇
Disagreeing with this, the professor says that if the fire happens every year, it will damage the local tourism, but it is not。。。
其实我想说的是，教授说如果每年都火灾，那旅游业就完蛋啦，但它才没有呢。。（汗，它才没有每年都火灾呢）囧。。。中文都混乱了，果然不成立。。
还有还有。。
And in fact, since 1988, the visitors come to the park every year instead of the fire happening.
哇咔咔，胡乱想的果然很纠结。。
唉，其实人家的原意是，哎哟，自那之后，火灾不来了，游客倒是年年有。。。。
所以………………很崩溃吧………………
16# 坏绿的眼睛

alexfanfanUID: 3133140

哈哈 你的名字很有趣啊 love in wc?
2/4的独立 我在看了别人写的 发现 其实是自己思路狭窄了。。。
加油！
14# loveinwc

alexfanfanUID: 3133140

14# loveinwc

sodapengUID: 3242849

2.6在哪里= =

loveinwcUID: 3241878

我对不起你们我又晚交了………………为啥每天独立的感觉都像在油锅里游泳啊啊啊啊（挥泪狂奔而去—— 20# sodapeng

loveinwcUID: 3241878

2月6日 101009NA Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? People can take care of their family members better when they living big cities than in the countryside.

To choose a city or to stay in the countryside, which choice would be better for our family members, can be measured in many ways? However, in this essay, I will focus on how can the environment influences individual development: the process from some sides, such as education and professional circumstance, or the public equipment. The statement is about hints at the traditional values of civility and the expectations of individuals. I fundamentally believe that with technology development, nowadays, living in big cities will be more help for people taking caring of their family members. To put the question rhetorically, why would most youngsters of today go to big cities for jobs rather than staying in countryside to have a peaceful life?

To begin with, it is true that the scenery and the air in the countryside seem better than them in the cities where are more polluted. One who expects the healthy life may think the countryside would be more suitable for their family members, but for the people in big cities, they could be provided more convenient transport facilities to meet the needs of their family members. To exemplify what I mean, once the emergency happened, the transport in the city could help people sent their family members to the hospital as soon as possible. In this way, the efficient advanced transport of cities could benefit citizens than the one who lives in the countryside. As one member of the family, we could use the spare time to do more meaningful things for our others family members. In other words, the considerable saving in time also could be used to foster the family members' aesthetic consciousness and literacy. Therefore, comparing with the physical health, the mental health is more important.  

Secondly, let us analyze the individuals who face the choice of to live in the cities or countryside. We must admit that all of us more or less have an innate desire to have an idyllic life after retired. This leads us to make effort to gain enough salary in order to have the life someday. However, cities could offer a stimulating environment to let the family members get better development in their careers. To my opinion, all factors, whether they are high quality schooling education or more opportunities to positions in big companies, would contribute those in cities to be more easier accessible to their ambitions. A recent survey of 500 countryside family members found that 95.6% of the parents chose to go to the big cities in order to give their children the better education. Therefore, I believe that there are infinite possibilities in big cities waiting for the aspiring people.

In conclusion, one should stay in cities if they want to take care of their family members than anyone else in order to give their families the better future. The every pace in human life should not be mediocre, though everyone would get the peace in the end. Furthermore, we should catch the opportunities to expand our horizons as far as possible. Thus, I strongly agree with the statement that people can take care of their family members better when they living big cities than in the countryside.

loveinwcUID: 3241878

谢谢高人君的更改~~~您改的好认真啊~~~感动ing 19# alexfanfan

坏绿的眼睛UID: 3138294

没关系的嗷
我这两天和你一样煎熬。。。
六号的独立我还没写呢
加油嗷嗷
今天的综合我可能又和一组 我贴好了哦
亲你要加油哦
17# loveinwc

loveinwcUID: 3241878

坏绿君！！大半夜看到你的话我就像被打了鸡血一样！！！！啊啊啊啊！！头疼的飘然欲仙啊哈~~独立好难，我要缓一天………b] 24# 坏绿的眼睛

sodapengUID: 3242849

已改~~

loveinwcUID: 3241878

二月七日综合 TPO21

In the lecture the professor questions the reading's assertion that changing the tree's genes to let it yield higher and grow faster, as a biological technology, genetic modification could bring the farmers a serious of benefits. The lecture, however, puts forth the idea that in fact, genetically modified trees are not as good as they sound, they have many problems.

Firstly, the reading mentions that genetically modified trees are hardier and easier to survive than unmodified ones. Like the papaya, after modification, this species could resist the ring spot which could reduce the tree population before. However, the professor hold the point that because of their uniform genes, if they meet the environmental challenge their genes have not been designed for, they will die out.

Secondly, the reading presents that the genetically modified trees will bring to the famers bigger profit faster, by growing faster and yielding greater. But the professor say that the planters should mentions the hidden costs of the genetically modified trees---they have to pay the company every time they plant.

Lastly, the reading says that the genetically modified trees could be used to relieve deforestation, because of their characters，they also could meet the needs of the people. The professor rebuts this by saying that the genetically modified trees are so aggressive that they could damage the local threes by occupying the sunlight, waters and other resources, then result the natural trees in extinction.

MELODYSKIINGUID: 2841950

27# loveinwc LZ2.8写的是2.7？那我帮你改2.7好了

MELODYSKIINGUID: 2841950

已改~~求回改~~综合没有语言错误的话好像木有什么好改的……= =

loveinwcUID: 3241878

29# MELODYSKIING

汗，您也太神速了…………八号的在这里呐………

二月八日 tpo22



In the lecture, the professor is skeptical about the idea of the reading passage that there are several reasons why the ethanol fuel which made by plants is not a good alternative to gasoline. The professor argues that ethanol really is good, none of the reasons offered by the reading is convincing.

Firstly, in the reading passage, ethanol fuel can't help solve the global warming, because burning ethanol fuel also could emit carbon dioxide like the gasoline. On the contrary, the professor explains that the process to make ethanol like growing corns itself could absorb a large amount of carbon dioxide. the more plants, the more carbon dioxide will be reduced.

On top of that, the reading passage describes that using plants to produce ethanol fuel would consume a large mount of plants like the corn. Then there will appear the food shortage and a large number of animal deaths. However, the professor asserts that a part of corns to make ethanol could be replaced by cellulose which is not eaten by animals and human. So in this way, producing ethanol will not damage creature's population.

Finally, the professor disproves the reading's idea that the price of ethanol fuel will be much higher than gasoline, if the government stops to exempt the tax of ethanol fuel. The professor points out that，in future, the increasing production of ethanol will cause it's price to drop dramatically. According to the forecast, the ethanol will be down 40% on sale.