Argument47【加州阳光】第五次作业★from 叶子★

leaf99UID: 2174003

字数：560

1、没有陨石撞击的历史纪录并不代表没有发生。可能纪录被毁，发生在无人地区，或者没有语言记载的地区。
2、loud boom不一定就是火山爆发。
3、气温下降的原因不一定只有火山爆发和陨石撞击。可能还有其他原因。

In this argument, the author contributes the sudden temperature decline in the mid-sixth century to a volcanic eruption rather than a meteorite collision. He rules out the possibility of a meteorite collision based on the evidence that no extant historical material of the time has ever recorded a flash produced by a meteorite collision. To justify his conclusion, the author cites evidence in some Asian historical records where a loud boom consistent with a volcanic eruption was mentioned. However, close scrutiny of this evidence reveal that it lends little credible support to the author's assertion.

First of all, there is no sufficient evidence to eliminate the possibility of a meteorite collision as the reason for the dramatic temperature decline of the time. According to the author, it is only probable that a meteorite collision would create a sudden bright flash of light, which indicates that some meteorite collisions do not certainly produce a flash. Therefore, the absence of a flash in historic record is not logical enough to exclude a meteorite collision. Besides, it is entirely possible that historical material of the time recording a large meteorite collision or a bright flash of light was completely destroyed during the next few hundred years. Or perhaps when the meteorite collided with the earth, only places without human trace such as the South Pole and the Arctic Pole were visible areas of this huge crash. It is equally possible that people who witnessed this huge collision of the time happened to be uncivilized and illiterate, unable to put it down in a written form. Unless the author could provide more evidence to exclude the above-mentioned possibilities of a meteorite collision, the conclusion will remain unconvincing.

Second, the record of a loud boom does not lend sufficient support to a volcanic eruption of the time. On the one hand, there is no historical record directly targeting at a volcanic eruption. On the other hand, the author provides no evidence to prove the relationship between a loud boom and volcanic eruption. It is very likely that other reasons such as bombing and earthquake caused the loud boom of the time.  Moreover, lacking information about the exact time of the loud boom, it is unknown to us whether it happened before or after the climate change.  Therefore, based on an unclear record of a loud boom, the author is not convincing enough to demonstrate the occurrence of a volcanic eruption of the time.

Finally, besides a volcanic eruption and a large meteorite collision, there might be other reasons for the sudden temperature drop. Specifically in the argument, the author fails to provide any scientific data to support his assumption that a volcanic eruption and a meteorite collision are the only two causes of the weather change. Without excluding other potential reasons, it will be hasty or even fallacious for the author to contribute the cooling to a volcanic eruption.  

To sum up, the author's reasoning does not warrant his conclusion. To make it logically acceptable, the author would have to provide more evidence concerning a volcanic eruption of the time. Additionally, he would have to rule out the possibility of a meteorite collision or other factors as the reason for the dramatic temperature decline of the time with sufficient historical or scientific data. Only with more logical reasoning and compelling evidence could this argument become more than a dubious statement.

timboyUID: 193944

1、没有陨石撞击的历史纪录并不代表没有发生。可能纪录被毁，发生在无人地区，或者没有语言记载的地区。
2、loud boom不一定就是火山爆发。
3、气温下降的原因不一定只有火山爆发和陨石撞击。可能还有其他原因。

In this argument, the author contributes the sudden temperature decline in the mid-sixth century to a volcanic eruption rather than a meteorite collision. He rules out the possibility of a meteorite collision based on the evidence that no extant historical material of the time has ever recorded a flash produced by a meteorite collision. To justify his conclusion, the author cites evidence in some Asian historical records where a loud boom consistent with a volcanic eruption was mentioned. However, close scrutiny of this evidence reveal（s） that it lends little credible support to the author's assertion.
开头略些长了，可以考虑把证据概括化
First of all, there is no sufficient evidence to eliminate the possibility of a meteorite collision as the reason for the dramatic temperature decline of the time. According to the author, it is only probable that a meteorite collision would create a sudden bright flash of light, which indicates that some meteorite collisions do not certainly produce a flash. Therefore, the absence of a flash in historic record is not logical（sufficient） enough to exclude a meteorite collision. Besides, it is entirely possible that historical material of the time recording a large meteorite collision or a bright flash of light was completely destroyed during the next few hundred years. Or perhaps when the meteorite collided with the earth, only places without human trace such as the South Pole and the Arctic Pole were visible areas of this huge crash. It is equally possible that people who witnessed this huge collision of the time happened to be uncivilized and illiterate, unable to put it down in a written form. Unless the author could provide more evidence to exclude the above-mentioned possibilities of a meteorite collision, the conclusion will remain unconvincing.
写的很好，过渡和词汇很棒！
Second, the record of a loud boom does not lend(lend在此是什么意思？用provide是不是更好呢？)sufficient support to a volcanic eruption of the time. On the one hand, there is no historical record directly targeting at a volcanic eruption. On the other hand, the author provides no evidence to prove the （causal）relationship between a loud boom and volcanic eruption. It is very likely that other reasons such as bombing and earthquake caused the loud boom of the time.  Moreover, lacking information about the exact time of the loud boom, it is unknown to us whether it happened before or after the climate change.  Therefore, based on an unclear record of a loud boom, the author（argument） is not convincing enough to demonstrate the occurrence of a volcanic eruption of the time.
整体不错，个别地方表意希望更清楚
Finally, besides a volcanic eruption and a large meteorite collision, there might be other reasons for the sudden temperature drop. Specifically in the argument, the author fails to provide any scientific data to support his assumption that a volcanic eruption and a meteorite collision are the only two causes of the weather change. Without excluding other potential reasons, it will（would） be hasty or even fallacious for the author to contribute the cooling to a volcanic eruption.  

To sum up, the author's reasoning does not warrant his conclusion. To make it logically acceptable, the author would have to provide more evidence concerning a volcanic eruption of the time. Additionally, he would have to rule out the possibility of a meteorite collision or other factors as the reason for the dramatic temperature decline of the time with sufficient historical or scientific data. Only with more logical reasoning and compelling evidence could this argument become more than a dubious statement
整体写的很好，词汇/句式/论证很成熟，在部分细节上需要加强，加油！
问一下：第六次作业是那些题目啊：）

timboyUID: 193944

帮忙看看我的吧：）
A2 https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1
I51
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1