argument37 欢迎大家拍砖！

pringleUID: 195431

------题目------
Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been unique to the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a "Palean" basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could only have crossed it by boat, but there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats. And boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared. Moreover, Paleans would have had no need to cross the river—the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game. It follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea.
------正文------
In this argument, the author lists many facts to prove that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea, which is relatively sound at first glance. However, further close scrutiny into the evidences cited above would reveal that the argument is still flawed in several critical facets.
  In the first place, it is highly doubtful for the author to induce the situation of thousands of years ago from nowaday conditions. The differences of Brim River between prehistory and today clearly outweigh the similarities, thus to make analogy is strongly suspect. The fact that Brim River is very deep and broad does not mean it was the same in the prehistoric period. Several thousands of time is too long for the river to maintain unchangeable. Crust movement and climate transformation may change the width and depth of the river. It is even possible that Brim River was not existent before, but after so many years of rainy erosion, it was formed after the era of Paleans. So this fact must be established independently.
  Additionally, even though the Brim River was there as the author mentioned, it is arbitrary to say that the ancient Paleans could not cross the river without the boat. If the river was narrow than today, the Paleans would cross the river by a piece of wood. As the author doesn't refer the weather in prehistory, it can not be excluded that it was cold in winter and the Paleans could go across the river when it was frozen. It is also possible that when the river was droughty, they could go across without any tools. Thus it would be foolish to conclude that the ancient Paleans could only have crossed it by boat.
  Furthermore, the last cause mentioned above can not prove Paleans would have had no need to cross the river. Firstly, it is suspicious whether the woods around Palea were full of fruits and small games before. If it was not the case, the Palean had to cross the river for food and entertainment. Secondly, they crossed the river might for other things, such as trades, intermarriage and so on. As a result, the author fails to provide enough evidences to substantiate the assumption, the conclusion can not be reached rationally.
  In sum, all above factors, as well as other possible details should be strictly pondered before the final conclusion. After all，false confidence in unreliable induction will distort the history.

imjasonUID: 176604

占个座，晚上来。

legendhfwangUID: 191674

1.格式不是很对吧。
2。较少模版的痕迹，这个比较好
3。按照一般模版的看法来说，最后一段的内容少了一些。

imjasonUID: 176604

In this argument, the author lists many facts to prove that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea, which is relatively sound at first glance. However, further close scrutiny into the evidences cited above would reveal that the argument is still flawed in several critical facets.
In the first place, it is highly doubtful for the author to induce the situation of thousands of years ago from nowaday conditions. The differences of Brim River between prehistory and today clearly outweigh the similarities, thus to make analogy is strongly suspectsuspective?. The fact that Brim River is very deep and broad does not mean it was the same in the prehistoric period. Several thousands of timewhat does it mean here? is too long for the river to maintain unchangeable. Crust movement and climate transformation may change the width and depth of the river. It is even possible that Brim River was not existent before, but after so many years of rainy erosion, it was formed after the era of Paleans. So this fact must be established independently.
Additionally, even though the Brim River was there as the author mentioned, it is arbitrary to say that the ancient Paleans could not cross the river without the boat. If the river was narrow than today, the Paleans would cross the river by a piece of wood. As the author doesn't refer the weather in prehistory, it can not be excluded that it was cold in winter and the Paleans could go across the river when it was frozen. It is also possible that when the river was droughty, they could go across without any tools. Thus it would be foolish to conclude that the ancient Paleans could only have crossed it by boat.
Furthermore, the last cause mentioned above can not prove Paleans would have had no need to cross the river. Firstly, it is suspicious whether the woods around Palea were full of fruits and small games before. If it was not the case, the Palean had to cross the river for food and entertainment. Secondly, they crossed the river might for other things, such as trades, intermarriage and so on. As a result, the author fails to provide enough evidences to substantiate the assumption, the conclusion can not be reached rationally.
In sum, all above factors, as well as other possible details should be strictly pondered before the final conclusion. After all，false confidence in unreliable induction will distort the history.if the ending is more concrete, this passage will be perfect, in my opinion

另：要注意每段之间要空一行哦！
楼上的说得很对啊

pringleUID: 195431

多谢指教！
格式不对是不是说段之间没有空一行，还是别的。
最后一段是不是应该提出对argument不足之处的建议？

Several thousands of timewhat does it mean here? is too long for the river to maintain unchangeable.
这里想说几千年的时间, several thousands of years,