Argument 170处女作渴求得到评价，从而有信心坚持下去

不死鸟UID: 181168

170For the past five years, consumers in California have been willing to pay twice as much for oysters from the northeastern Atlantic Coast as for Gulf Coast oysters. This trend began shortly after harmful bacteria were found in a few raw Gulf Coast oysters. But scientists have now devised a process for killing the bacteria. Once consumers are made aware of the increased safety of Gulf Coast oysters, they are likely to be willing to pay as much for Gulf Coast as for northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters, and greater profits for Gulf Coast oyster producers will follow.

正文：
Only due to the reports that the bacteria in Gulf Coast oysters could be killed, can the arguer conclude that oyster producers here will achive greater profits? Of course not, we can not reach such conclusion only by the arguer’s superfial reasons.

First of all, why have consumers been willing to pay much money for the northeastern Stlantic Coast oysters for the past five years? Does it only for the harmful bacteria in Gulf Coast oysters? (此处时态不敢确定) Or for any other reason, such as the smell、 the taste or the quality of the oysters? All of these questions can not be answered trough the argument. Image that the oysters from Gulf Coast have bad odor which makes people have the feeling of retching, and through baked the smell still can not be cleaned out. Also if the oysters here are much smaller than northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters, of course, people are likely to choose larger and weighter one, which will taste better. Futhermore, probably,the northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters are helpful for human's health and can increase our resistance for some disease. As a result, people prefer to pay much for them.

In the second place, can the scients insure that all bacteria in oysters would be killed completely for ever? Or have they made a experiment which proves that the killing process would have no side effect for human? From the argument we still can not solve these questions. As we know, killing bacteria usually takes chemical ways which sometimes use solvent harmful for our health. Given that people eat oysters without bacteria but with harmful solvent, they have diarrhea、 retch、fall in a faint、and even die. Further, the possiblity that the bacteria adapt themselves to the scientist's killing process after a few of months and survive well. In other words, this killing way has no use to the bacteria, however, people who do not find and still eat this kind of oysters will undergo big trouble and pain. Thus, who will eat these oysters? Nobody!

Last, even if the oysters, which have been cleaned bacteria successfully, are really no harmness, can the oysters producers follow greater profits? Need not they consider a function of supply and demand、the quality of their serve、the price of oysters、formidable competitor、producer ’s reputation、 management and market problem、 or the changes of policy and law? If the oysters from Gulf Coast are usually transfered slowly, and when they reach California, some of them are not fresh. While, the producers of the northeastern Atlantic Coast are more effective, and their oysters are always as good as fished from the sand just now. As the result, consumers like to choose their oysters no matter how much the oysters cost.

In the sum, the arguer is not persuasive as it stands. To make it more convincing, the arguer would have to provide more evidence concerning the real merit of northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters、 the real effect of the killing process and the approach to gain greater profits.

一小时
希望得到评价，因为现在很迷茫，不知自己到底是什么水平。
3.15鼎均
当然，从现在起就给别人改：）

flyingwindUID: 189320

GRE 学术性写作正式文体
你写的和、过于随意了吧
文中spell错误多处，在word里面检查一下没有？
这样不尊重别人哦  比如“superfial ”
As we know, killing bacteria usually takes chemical ways 过于绝对了吧，语气变一下可能好点啊

不死鸟UID: 181168

对不起，刚才一着急把没改过的那一版贴上来了：（
不明白为什么说我的文章太随意，我正是研读了imong关于argument的三篇文章，才觉得应该写的灵活些，而不是完全按照孙远老师的模版。尤其是imong对问句写法的赞赏，才让我有胆用三个问句的形式写分论点。难道我犯大忌了吗？！苦恼中

170For the past five years, consumers in California have been willing to pay twice as much for oysters from the northeastern Atlantic Coast as for Gulf Coast oysters. This trend began shortly after harmful bacteria were found in a few raw Gulf Coast oysters. But scientists have now devised a process for killing the bacteria. Once consumers are made aware of the increased safety of Gulf Coast oysters, they are likely to be willing to pay as much for Gulf Coast as for northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters, and greater profits for Gulf Coast oyster producers will follow.

正文：
Only due to the reports that the bacteria in Gulf Coast oysters could be killed, can the arguer conclude that oyster producers here will achieve greater profits? Of course not, we can not reach such conclusion only by the arguer’s superficial reasons.

First of all, why have consumers been willing to pay much money for the northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters for the past five years? Does it only for the harmful bacteria in Gulf Coast oysters? (此处时态不敢确定) Or for any other reason, such as the smell、 the taste or the quality of the oysters? All of these questions can not be answered trough the argument. Image that the oysters from Gulf Coast have bad odor which makes people have the feeling of retching, and through baked the smell still can not be cleaned out. Also if the oysters here are much smaller than northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters, of course, people are likely to choose larger and heavier one, which will taste better. Furthermore, probably, the northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters are helpful for human's health and can increase our resistance for some disease. As a result, people prefer to pay much for them.

In the second place, can the scientists insure that all bacteria in oysters would be killed completely for ever? Or have they made a experiment which proves that the killing process would have no side effect for human? From the argument we still can not solve these questions. As we know, killing bacteria may take chemical ways which sometimes use solvent harmful for our health. Given that people eat oysters without bacteria but with harmful solvent, they have diarrhea、 retch、fall in a faint、and even die. Further, the possibility that the bacteria adapt themselves to the scientist's killing process after a few of months and survive well. In other words, this killing way has no use to the bacteria, however, people who do not find and still eat this kind of oysters will undergo big trouble and pain. Thus, who will eat these oysters? Nobody!

Last, even if the oysters, which have been cleaned bacteria successfully, are really harmless, can the oysters producers follow greater profits? Need not they consider a function of supply and demand、the quality of their serve、the price of oysters、formidable competitor、producer ’s reputation、 management and market problem、 or the changes of policy and law? If the oysters from Gulf Coast are usually transported slowly, and when they reach California, some of them are not fresh. While, the producers of the northeastern Atlantic Coast are more effective, and their oysters are always as good as fished from the sand just now. As the result, consumers like to choose their oysters no matter how much the oysters cost.

In the sum, the arguer is not persuasive as it stands. To make it more convincing, the arguer would have to provide more evidence concerning the real merit of northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters、 the real effect of the killing process and the approach to gain greater profits.

zhoulin00001UID: 189304

Only due to the reports that the bacteria in Gulf Coast oysters could be killed, can the arguer conclude that oyster producers here will achieve greater profits? Of course not, we can not reach such conclusion only by the arguer’s superficial reasons.开头挺好，简洁！

First of all, why have consumers been willing to pay much money for the northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters for the past five years? DoesIs it only for the harmful bacteria in Gulf Coast oysters? (此处时态不敢确定) Or for any other reasonreasons, such as the smell、 the taste or the quality of the oysters? All of these questions can not be answered trough the argument. Image that the oysters from Gulf Coast have bad odor which makes people have the feeling of retching, and through baked the smell still can not be cleaned out. Also if the oysters here are much smaller than northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters, of course, people are likely to choose larger and heavier one, which will taste better有点绝对吧？. Furthermore, probably, the northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters are helpful for human's health and can increase our resistance for some disease. As a result, people prefer to pay much for them.

In the second place, can the scientists insure that all bacteria in oysters would be killed completely for ever? Or have they made a experiment which proves that the killing process would have no side effect for human? From the argument we still can not solve these questions. As we know, killing bacteria may take chemical ways which sometimes use solvent harmful for our health. Given that people eat oysters without bacteria but with harmful solvent, they have diarrhea、 retch、fall in a faint、and even die. Further, the possibility that the bacteria adapt themselves to the scientist's killing process after a few of months and survive well. In other words, this killing way has no use to the bacteria, however, people who do not find and still eat this kind of oysters will undergo big trouble and pain. Thus, who will eat these oysters? Nobody!

Last, even if the oysters, which have been cleaned bacteria successfully, are really harmless, can the oysters producers follow greater profits? Need not they consider a function of supply and demand、the quality of their serve、the price of oysters、formidable competitor、producer ’s reputation、 management and market problem、 or the changes of policy and law? If the oysters from Gulf Coast are usually transported slowly, and when they reach California, some of them are not fresh. While, the producers of the northeastern Atlantic Coast are more effective, and their oysters are always as good as fished from the sand just now. As the result, consumers like to choose their oysters no matter how much the oysters cost.这段不好， 和第二段重复，而且好多论点没有涉及，比如杀菌后和口味，费用等

In the sum, the arguer is not persuasive as it stands. To make it more convincing, the arguer would have to provide more evidence concerning the real merit of northeastern Atlantic Coast oysters、 the real effect of the killing process and the approach to gain greater profits.
感觉不随意呀？只是错误的批驳上有点问题，继续努力！