argument50 <米国有米寒假作业1.30日第四天〉

blackswitchUID: 2110679

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the water in Earth’s oceans must have originated from comets. To support it, the arguer points that  planet’s gravitation can hold gases and water vapor when it approached its currents size and comets are largely ice made up of frozen water and gases . However, this argument contains several logical flaws, which render it unconvincing.

In the first place, the arguer unfairly assumes that a comet striking Earth happened after the planet approach its current size. However, the arguer provides no evidence to substantiate it. It is entirely possible that when the comet stroken the earth, the earth was larger or smaller than its current size. In short ,without related data and record , the arguer cannot unwarrantedly consider it is this case.


In the second place, the arguer asserts that the resulting water of comet striking have retained in the atmosphere only based on comets  are largely ice made up of frozen water and gases. Although frozen water and gases from comets would vapor when it strike the planet, the arguer fails to provide evidence to show that the water  was kept in planet. In fact, it is highly possible that the vapor water gone off  to the space not the planet given that the arguer mention that the resulting water from the collision of space rock gone off  to the space.

In the final analysis, even if the water from comet striking indeed has been retained in the atmosphere of earth, it is problematic for the arguer concludes that the water in Earth’s oceans must have originated from comets. In fact ,there are many reasons for the formation of the Earth’s water. Perhaps, the water of the Earth contributes to the  chemic action of the elements in earth. Perhaps the water came from other planets. Further, it is entirely possible that there are water  when the earth was just formed. Without ruling out this possibility, the arguer cannot convince me that the earth’s water originated from comets.

In sum, the assertion of the arguer is not cogent. In order to support his/her conclude effectively, the arguer must provide more records  about comet striking earth and the comet was the only source of earth’s water.