argument131 噼里啪啦砍了啊～～

victoriazhizhiUID: 163135

Argument131  第1篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：吱吱    共用时间：30分2秒     468 words / 513 words after revised
从2005年3月2日13时59分到2005年3月2日14时30分
------题目------
The following appeared in an environmental newsletter published in Tria Island.
'The marine sanctuary on Tria Island was established to protect certain marine mammals. Its regulations ban dumping and offshore oil drilling within 20 miles of Tria, but fishing is not banned. Currently many fish populations in Tria's waters are declining, a situation blamed on pollution. In contrast, the marine sanctuary on Omni Island has regulations that ban dumping, offshore oil drilling, and fishing within 10 miles of Omni and Omni reports no significant decline in its fish populations. Clearly, the decline in fish populations in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing, not pollution. Therefore, the best way to restore Tria's fish populations and to protect all of Tria's marine wildlife is to abandon our regulations and adopt those of Omni.'
------正文------
In this newsletter, the author concludes that the decrease of fish populations in Tria is caused by overfishing and further recommends that in order to protect marine wildfish of Tria people should adopt the regulations of Omni. However, i find this argument unconvincing because it is based on poor supported evidence, which undermines the argument.

First and foremost, the author unreasonably eliminates pollution as a factor that could effect the environment of fish and result in the decrease of fish populations. There is no evidence that the pollution of maritime space of Tria is so well controlled that it does not much harm to the fish in that area. Although regulations banning dumping and offshore oils have been carried out, it is entirely possible that much oil could ooze into the sea. It is also possible that many other industrial factories are dumping pollution such as wasted water, some poisonous material into the sea. Without providing detailed information about the environment of that area, the author could not exclude the pollutions as a factor that causes the decrease of fish population in Tria.

Next, even if there is no pollution in that area, the author could neither arbitrarily attribute the reason that leads to the decrease of fish population of Tria to overfishing. There is no information of the accurate quantity of fishing in that area and no contrast between fishing quantity nowadays and in the past. It might be the case that the perishing climate changing that causes the reduction of fish population in Tria. Unless the author makes a careful investigation and provides us exact number of fishing, I could not accept that it is the overfishing lead to the decrease of fish population.

Finally, suppose that the decline in fish population in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing, not pollution, it does not necessarily mean that the best way to protect fish populations and protect Tria's marine wildlife is to abandon the origin regulations and adopt those of Omni. Although Omni reports no significant decline in its fish populations, perhaps it is because that the origin number of fish population in Omni is so rare that little decline is not obvious to discover, or it might be the case people have hidden the truth of fish decline. Even though the regulations of Omni has proved to be successful, it is unknown yet Tria will reach the same effect because there is no evidence to prove similarity of the environmental conditions, species of fish and such factors between the two areas. Without provide more evidence that the regulation of Omni is adoptable in Tria, the author could not fast conclude that the best way is to use the regulations of Omni.

In conclusion, the recommendation for abandon regulations of Tria and adopt those of Omni is not well supported. To convince me that the reason of decline in fish population in Tria is the overfishing and the effective way to protect fish is adopt the regulations of Omni, the author should provide clear and detailed information of the discussed issues.

staralwaysUID: 193479

In this newsletter, the author concludes that the decrease of fish populations in Tria is caused by overfishing and further recommends that in order to protect marine wildfish of Tria people should adopt the regulations of Omni. However, I find this argument unconvincing because it is based on poor supported evidence, which undermines the argument. [开头很简练。我最近基本上也这样写，一个开头大概就70、80个words的样子，发现可以省好些时间在下面的论述上。]

First and foremost[Firstly and the foremost（是不是应该这样说？我没这样写过所以也不太确定）], the author unreasonably eliminates pollution as a factor that could effect the environment of fish and result in the decrease of fish populations. There is no evidence that the pollution of maritime space of Tria is so well controlled that it does not much harm[it does no harm] to the fish in that area. Although regulations banning dumping and offshore oils have been carried out, it is entirely possible that much oil could ooze into the sea. It is also possible that many other industrial factories are dumping pollution such as wasted water, some poisonous material into the sea. Without providing detailed information about the environment of that area, the author could not exclude the pollutions as a factor that causes the decrease of fish population in Tria.

Next, even if there is no pollution in that area,[恩，不错，前后串起来了。] the author could neither arbitrarily attribute the reason that leads to the decrease of fish population of Tria to overfishing. There is no information of the accurate quantity of fishing in that area and no contrast between fishing quantity nowadays and in the past. It might be the case that the perishing climate changing that causes the reduction of fish population in Tria. Unless the author makes a careful investigation and provides us exact number of fishing, I could not accept that it is the overfishing lead to the decrease of fish population.

Finally, suppose that the decline in fish population in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing, not pollution, it does not necessarily mean that the best way to protect fish populations and protect Tria's marine wildlife is to abandon the origin regulations and adopt those of Omni. Although Omni reports no significant decline in its fish populations, perhaps it is because that the origin number of fish population in Omni is so rare that little decline is not obvious to discover, or it might be the case people have hidden the truth of fish decline. Even though the regulations of Omni has proved to be successful, it is unknown yet Tria will reach the same effect because there is no evidence to prove similarity of the environmental conditions, species of fish and such factors between the two areas. [恩，commits a fallacy of "false analogy"]Without provide more evidence that the regulation of Omni is adoptable in Tria, the author could not fast[hastily] conclude that the best way is to use the regulations of Omni.[还可以再考虑下作者没有想到其他行之有效的方法。]

In conclusion, the recommendation for abandon regulations of Tria and adopt those of Omni is not well supported. To convince me that the reason of decline in fish population in Tria is the overfishing and the effective way to protect fish is adopt the regulations of Omni, the author should provide clear and detailed information of the discussed issues.

整篇是很流畅地跑下来了。Argument基本上是没有什么问题了。

victoriazhizhiUID: 163135

star 好久不见 咔咔
最近颓废了几天 没好好学 咔咔

有什么要砍的告诉我

我阿狗题目还没看一半呢 一会鬼鬼就来骂我了 :(

staralwaysUID: 193479

我也是，练习的欲望不强烈。

就帮我看看那篇87吧，好象是哪天晚上糊里糊涂的时候写的。前面断断续续地也发过几篇，不过都沉了，我自己也懒得找了。谢谢吱吱啊。

argument题库还没看完的剩下一个星期肯定可以搞定的。我就是用了一星期多点的时间看的。

sailing_yfUID: 150982

很好很好

鬼谷子UID: 159645

Argument131 第1篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：吱吱 共用时间：30分2秒 468 words / 513 words after revised
从2005年3月2日13时59分到2005年3月2日14时30分
------题目------
The following appeared in an environmental newsletter published in Tria Island.
'The marine sanctuary on Tria Island was established to protect certain marine mammals. Its regulations ban dumping and offshore oil drilling within 20 miles of Tria, but fishing is not banned. Currently many fish populations in Tria's waters are declining, a situation blamed on pollution. In contrast, the marine sanctuary on Omni Island has regulations that ban dumping, offshore oil drilling, and fishing within 10 miles of Omni and Omni reports no significant decline in its fish populations. Clearly, the decline in fish populations in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing, not pollution. Therefore, the best way to restore Tria's fish populations and to protect all of Tria's marine wildlife is to abandon our regulations and adopt those of Omni.'
------正文------
In this newsletter, the author concludes that the decrease of fish populations in Tria is caused by overfishing and further recommends that in order to protect marine wildfish of Tria people should adopt the regulations of Omni. However, i find this argument unconvincing because it is based on poor supported evidence, which undermines the argument. 【似乎形成了风格】

First and foremost, the author unreasonably eliminates pollution as a factor that could effect the environment of fish and result in the decrease of fish populations. There is no evidence that the pollution of maritime space of Tria is so well controlled that it does not much harm to the fish in that area. Although regulations banning dumping and offshore oils have been carried out, it is entirely possible that much oil could ooze into the sea. It is also possible that many other industrial factories are dumping pollution such as wasted water, some poisonous material into the sea. Without providing detailed information about the environment of that area, the author could not exclude the pollutions as a factor that causes the decrease of fish population in Tria.

Next, even if there is no pollution in that area, the author could neither arbitrarily attribute the reason that leads to the decrease of fish population of Tria to overfishing. There is no information of the accurate quantity of fishing in that area and no contrast between fishing quantity nowadays and in the past. It might be the case that the perishing climate changing that causes the reduction of fish population in Tria. Unless the author makes a careful investigation and provides us exact number of fishing, I could not accept that it is the overfishing lead to the decrease of fish population. 【也可能是天敌数量增加，疾病蔓延，迁徙等】

Finally, suppose that the decline in fish population in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing, not pollution, it does not necessarily mean that the best way to protect fish populations and protect Tria's marine wildlife is to abandon the origin regulations and adopt those of Omni. Although Omni reports no significant decline in its fish populations, perhaps it is because that the origin number of fish population in Omni is so rare 【反了，多才能说少了一点发现不了，要是本来就少的话，再减点就没了】that little decline is not obvious to discover, or it might be the case people have hidden the truth of fish decline. 【这个说的不太好，隐瞒我觉得还是比较牵强的，可以说可能那里污染少，或者，哪里的鱼群不适合食用，所以捕捞的少。而当地的政策执行情况如何并不清楚，可能是原本就很多，少了点没有发现。而政策其实并没有管用。也可能正职繁衍期，鱼的数量多，所以减少的不明显。等等等等。】 Even though the regulations of Omni has proved to be successful, it is unknown yet Tria will reach the same effect because there is no evidence to prove similarity of the environmental conditions, species of fish and such factors between the two areas. Without provide more evidence that the regulation of Omni is adoptable in Tria, the author could not fast conclude that the best way is to use the regulations of Omni.

In conclusion, the recommendation for abandon regulations of Tria and adopt those of Omni is not well supported. To convince me that the reason of decline in fish population in Tria is the overfishing and the effective way to protect fish is adopt the regulations of Omni, the author should provide clear and detailed information of the discussed issues.


  【思路上基本上不错了，多想几个可能会更好一点。加油！】  

victoriazhizhiUID: 163135

TKS 鬼鬼

刚出去下 回来就发觉给我改了啊 呵呵

那个隐瞒的是临时编上去的 没想到你还有这么多主意啊 嘿嘿

我已经没空研究开头要虾米样了 就这样的 以后每篇估计都这样。。。sigh

lianglcl05UID: 181629

In this newsletter, the author concludes that the decrease of fish populations in Tria is caused by overfishing and further recommends that in order to protect marine wildfish of Tria people should adopt the regulations of Omni.那来引题,并指出错误,字数刚好 However, i find this argument unconvincing because it is based on poor supported evidence,个人感觉主要问题不是论据有问题,不支持结论,而是考虑的周全程度 which undermines the argument.

First and foremost, the author unreasonably eliminates pollution as a factor that could effect the environment of fish and result in the decrease of fish populations. There is no evidence that the pollution of maritime space of Tria is so well controlled that it does not much harm to the fish in that area. Although regulations banning dumping and offshore oils have been carried out, it is entirely possible that much oil could ooze into the sea. It is also possible that many other industrial factories are dumping pollution such as wastedwaste water, some poisonous material into the sea. Without providing detailed information about the environment of that area, the author could not exclude the pollutions as a factor that causes the decrease of fish population in Tria.

Next, even if there is no pollution in that area, the author could neither arbitrarily attribute the reason that leads to the decrease of fish population of Tria to overfishing. There is no information of the accurate quantity of fishing in that area and no contrast between fishing quantity nowadays and in the past.个人认为，在这里没有必要进行含混攻击，减少是个事实 It might be the case that the perishing climate changing that causes the reduction of fish population in Tria.［可以归到其他原因中］ Unless the author makes a careful investigation and provides us exact number of fishing, I could not accept that it is the overfishing lead to the decrease of fish population.

Finally, suppose that the decline in fish population in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing, not pollution, it does not necessarily mean that the best way to protect fish populations and protect Tria's marine wildlife is to abandon the origin regulations and adopt those of Omni. Although Omni reports no significant decline in its fish populations, perhaps it is because that the origin number of fish population in Omni is so rare that little decline is not obvious to discover, or it might be the case people have hidden the truth of fish decline.总数少的话，减少会更加明显的。如果要对他进行攻击的话，我认为，不如说，是因为他的设备，人员素质等主观因素导致那个没有证据表明，有一篇范文就是这样批的，还是比较有说服力的 Even though the regulations of Omni has proved to be successful, it is unknown yet Tria will reach the same effect because there is no evidence to prove similarity of the environmental conditions, species of fish and such factors between the two areas.如果是错误类比的话，要说出A行，而B不行的原因，并且最好论述一下，在这里感觉缺点什么 Without provide删掉 more evidence that the regulation of Omni is adoptable in Tria, the author could not fast conclude that the best way is to use the regulations of Omni.

In conclusion, the recommendation for abandon regulations of Tria and adopt those of Omni is not well supported. To convince me that the reason of decline in fish population in Tria is the overfishing and the effective way to protect fish is adopt the regulations of Omni, the author should provide clear and detailed information of the discussed issues.
总体说，比上次的好多了。错误都是击中要害的，而且种类也很全。同时，思路和结构都很清楚。但是，我也有一些不明白的地方，比如是不是里面多余的话太多了。早上，在改之前我也写了一下，采取了“断其一指”的方法，不知道会不会感觉错误找的不够多阿。同时，还是老毛病，字数太少，郁闷。望指教。
http://edu.gter.net/bbs/showthread.php?s=&threadid=261500

龙非UID: 193190

占个座。。。

龙非UID: 193190

------题目------
The following appeared in an environmental newsletter published in Tria Island.
'The marine sanctuary on Tria Island was established to protect certain marine mammals. Its regulations ban dumping and offshore oil drilling within 20 miles of Tria, but fishing is not banned. Currently many fish populations in Tria's waters are declining, a situation blamed on pollution. In contrast, the marine sanctuary on Omni Island has regulations that ban dumping, offshore oil drilling, and fishing within 10 miles of Omni and Omni reports no significant decline in its fish populations. Clearly, the decline in fish populations in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing, not pollution. Therefore, the best way to restore Tria's fish populations and to protect all of Tria's marine wildlife is to abandon our regulations and adopt those of Omni.'
------正文------
In this newsletter, the author concludes that the decrease of fish populations in Tria is caused by overfishing and further recommends that in order to protect marine wildfish of Tria people should adopt the regulations of Omni. However, i find this argument unconvincing because it is based on poor supported evidence, which undermines the argument.

First and foremost, the author unreasonably eliminates pollution as a factor that could effect the environment of fish and result in the decrease of fish populations. There is no evidence that the pollution of maritime space of Tria is so well controlled that it does not much harm to the fish in that area. Although regulations banning dumping and offshore oils have been carried out, it is entirely possible that much oil could ooze into the sea. It is also possible that many other industrial factories are dumping pollution such as wasted water, some poisonous material into the sea. Without providing detailed information about the environment of that area, the author could not exclude the pollutions as a factor that causes the decrease of fish population in Tria.

Next, even if there is no pollution in that area, the author could neither arbitrarily attribute the reason that leads to the decrease of fish population of Tria to overfishing. There is no information of the accurate quantity of fishing in that area and no contrast between fishing quantity nowadays and in the past. It might be the case that the perishing climate changing that causes the reduction of fish population in Tria. Unless the author makes a careful investigation and provides us exact number of fishing, I could not accept that it is the overfishing lead to the decrease of fish population.

Finally, suppose that the decline in fish population in Tria's waters is the result of overfishing, not pollution, it does not necessarily mean that the best way to protect fish populations and protect Tria's marine wildlife is to abandon the origin regulations and adopt those of Omni. Although Omni reports no significant decline in its fish populations, perhaps it is because that the origin number of fish population in Omni is so rare that little decline is not obvious to discover这句话不符合逻辑啊，数量少不更加是少一点点就很明显？？, or it might be the case people have hidden the truth of fish decline. Even though the regulations of Omni has proved to be successful, it is unknown yet Tria will reach the same effect because there is no evidence to prove similarity of the environmental conditions, species of fish and such factors between the two areas. Without provide more evidence that the regulation of Omni is adoptable in Tria, the author could not fast conclude that the best way is to use the regulations of Omni.

In conclusion, the recommendation for abandon regulations of Tria and adopt those of Omni is not well supported. To convince me that the reason of decline in fish population in Tria is the overfishing and the effective way to protect fish is adopt the regulations of Omni, the author should provide clear and detailed information of the discussed issues.

基本上条理清晰，逐段让步，中规中矩。但就是觉得整篇的线不是特别好，只是抓住三个细节，然后逐个批判，总觉得大局观不强，当然这是个人意见，抛开这些，这篇还是可以。