[a习作temp] Argument47 高频机经这样的水平在考场上能得几分？ [复制链接]

figogo
UID: 175735

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 423
注册时间: 2004-8-24
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2005-3-8 16:10:39 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

Argument47
限时写的，除了单词拼写和一些简单语法错误，其它都没改，这样的水平在考场上能得几分？
------题目------
Scientists studying historical weather patterns have discovered that in the mid-sixth century, Earth suddenly became significantly cooler. Although few historical records survive from that time, some accounts found both in Asia and Europe mention a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperatures. Either a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding with Earth could have created a large dust cloud throughout Earth's atmosphere that would have been capable of blocking enough sunlight to lower global temperatures significantly. A large meteorite collision, however, would probably create a sudden bright flash of light, and no extant historical records of the time mention such a flash. Some surviving Asian historical records of the time, however, mention a loud boom that would be consistent with a volcanic eruption. Therefore, the cooling was probably caused by a volcanic eruption.
------正文------
Based solely upon the information given above, it is unwise for the arguer to conclude that the cooling of the earth in the mid-sixth century was probably caused by a volcanic eruption. In fact, the evidences presented in the argument should be carefully examined from several other angles.

First, the argument depends on a problematic assumption that the whole earth became cooler at that time. Yet the arguer only provides with the historical records about the weather of Asia and Europe. Since Asia and Europe are only two parts of the earth, both of which are on the northern hemisphere, it is entirely possible that other areas in world, such as Antarctic in the south, did have colder temperature than before. Without offering information concerning other parts of the world, the assumption the argument relies on is unconvincing.

Second, the fact that the sun dimmed then was not necessarily the result of the large dust cloud of the Earth's atmosphere. An alternative explanation is that it is the activities of the sun itself, which has nothing to do with the Earth, that cause the dimming of the sun. In this case, the reason for lower temperature of the earth might lie in other possible reasons. Even if the intensity of sun light generated from the sun did not change, there is no reason to believe that the cloud was capable of blocking enough sunlight to cause the cold. Perhaps the cloud was dispelled so quickly that it did affect the temperature of the Earth.

Finally, the evidence that no extant records mention a sudden bright flash is insufficient to rule out the possibility that a meteorite collision may be responsible for the cold. Perhaps the record recording the flash of meteorite collision lying somewhere in the world was not discovered. Or maybe the record was not well preserved and was damaged some time ago. On the other hand, it may also be the case that there were no humans lived in the areas where one can observe the meteorite collision, such as the center of Pacific Ocean. Besides, the loud boom mentioned in some record is not a unique feature of the volcanic eruption in that several other earth phenomena, such as earthquake and tsunami, can cause such a loud loom.

In sum, the argument suffers from several critical fallacies as discussed above. Before any conclusion concerning the cooling of the earth in history is reached, the arguer should make a complete investigation into the historical records available and evaluate all the alternatives to the situation.