In this argument, the author recommends that the budget for improvements to the publicly lands along the Mason River(MR) would be increased given that recreational use of the river is likely to increase. To support this conclusion, the author cites a survey which shows that the residents in this region prefer water sports. However, this argument is logically flawed in several critical respects.
To begin with, the survey is problematic in two aspect :First, we are not informed that how many residents in this region make responses for the survey .Perhaps only 10 percent residents provide responses to the survey . Perhaps the 10 percent residents just are athletes or young man and like water sports. But ,except them, other 90 percent residents do not love water sports. In this case ,to convince me that this survey is consistent with the truth, the author must provide the total number of the responses in this survey. Secondly ,the author do not provide the time the survey made. It is entirely possible that this survey was made three years ago. In this event, the residents may have transformed their preference for water sports to other ones such as playing football. In short, without these information, the author can’t convince that the residents in MC prefer doing water sports at present time.
Secondly, the author assumes that the Mason City residents’ seldom use of Mason River contributes to the quality of the water in the river. However, the author provide no evidence to substantiate this. Perhaps it is because there is no people to organize activities in Mason River. Perhaps it is because that people do not like joining water sports now. Perhaps it is because other activities in this city are more appealing. Perhaps it is because population in this city has decreased in recent several years. Either event scene would cause the result that the residents’ use of MR is seldom now.
In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster this the author must provide evidence to illustrate the quality of the river indeed influence the use of residents for MR.
"Atpresent, Mason City residents seldom use thenearby Mason River for any kind of recreationalactivity, even though surveysof the region's residents consistently rank watersports (swimming, fishing, and boating) as a favorite form of recreation. Sincethere have been complaints about thequality of the water in the river, residents must be avoiding the river becausethey think that it is not clean enough.But that situation is about to change: the agency responsible for rivers in ourregion has announced plansto clean up Mason River.Therefore, recreational use of the river is likely to increase, so the Mason City council will need to increase its budget forimprovements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River."
In thisargument, the author recommends that the budget for improvements to thepublicly lands along the Mason River(MR) would be increased given thatrecreational use of the river is likely to increase. To support thisconclusion, the author cites a survey which shows that the residents in thisregion prefer water sports. However, this argument is logically flawed inseveral critical respects.[简单的开头,不错]
To begin with, the survey is problematic in two aspect[复数]:First, we are not informed that how many residents in this region makeresponses for the survey .Perhaps only 10 percentresidents provide responses to the survey . Perhaps the 10 percent residentsjust are athletes or young man and like water sports. [个人认为这样的2句有点废话,而且举出的例子极端,记住ETS要求compelling reasons and persuasive examples] But ,except them,other 90 percent residents do not love water sports.[罗嗦]In this case ,to convince me that this survey is consistent with the truth, theauthor must provide the total number of the responses in this survey. Secondly,the author do not provide the time the survey made. Itisentirelypossible [考虑下entirely possible的意思再用]that this survey was made three years ago. In this event, the residents may havetransformed their preference for water sports to other ones such asplaying football. In short, without these information, the author can’tconvince that the residents in MC prefer doing water sports at present time.[本段措词和句式都非常简单,而且偶认为这个survey根本不是攻击的主要对象,你为什么又花那么多的笔墨在上面呢?其实本段的攻击是失败的,攻击不是看见错误就把其他可能性都罗列出来然后就直接给结论说没有考虑这些因素,作者的结论是不成立的。仔细钻研下别人的写的好文章,研究下题目,如果感觉写的没有进展就停下来吧,多做些总结,偶现在就没写了,在仔细钻研别人的习作呢。]
Secondly, the author assumes that the Mason Cityresidents’ seldom use of Mason River contributes [attributes]to the quality of the water in the river. However, the author provide noevidence to substantiate this. Perhaps it is becausethere is no people to organize activities in Mason River.Perhaps it is because that people do not like joiningwater sports now. Perhaps it is because other activities in this city are moreappealing. Perhaps it is because population in this city has decreased inrecent several years. Either event scene would cause the result that theresidents’ use of MR is seldom now. [用了这么多的Perhaps,绿色的部分]
In sum, the argument is unpersuasive as it stands. To bolster this the authormust provide evidence to illustrate the quality of the river indeed influencethe use of residents for MR.
[太简单了啊~~~~缺点太多啦,偶建议还是看看ETS的范文吧,这样会有帮助的]