Argument47 【Persistence小组】第10次作业

Andy85UID: 2250503

A47Scientists 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.

1 地球真的变冷了？
2 真的排除了陨石撞地球的可能？就算不是陨石，难道没有其它原因了？
3 以一声巨响来证明是火山爆发，可信度不高。

Given evidences that some accounts mention a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperatures and some historical records found
in Asian mention a loud boom, the arguer asserts the reason for the cooling of earth in the mid-six century was a volcanic eruption. The statement seems to be convincing, however, it is not as sound as it stands.

First, whether the earth suddenly became cooler remains suspicious as there is no sufficient evidences to prove it. The accounts found
both in Asia and Europe might be only a regional record that could not used to represent the planet as a whole. Therefore, although
some regions of the earth became cool for some reasons, it might still as warm as usual. If it is the case, the arguer's assertion is entirely absurd.

Secondly, assuming that the temperature dropped dramtically in mid-sixth century, the arguer’s reasoning to rule out the possibility of
meteorite colliding is not convincing. If the meteorite colliding happened in an area where there was no human like Antarctic or the
people there had no written record, and the flash could not be seen in the rest of the world, it is logical that there is no extant
historical records of the flash. Further more, there might be other possible factors other than meteorite colliding and volcanic eruption
that caused the cooling, such as a forest fire.

Finally, the example the arguer used to support that it was a volcanic eruption that caused the cooling cannot stand up to a closer
scrutiny. Perhaps the historic records of a loud boom have nothing to do with a volcanic eruption. Even if the boom was caused by a
volcanic eruption, it might be just a coincidence that the cooling and eruption happened in the same period. And there is even no
evidence to prove that the eruption happened before the cooling, and if not, the volcanic eruption cannot be a possibility of the
reason for the cooling of earth any more.

In sum, if the arguer hopes to make his assertion more sound, more evidences about the cooling and more information about the
boom are needed, and more factors need taking into account.

vinnieUID: 2104933

Argument47 【Persistence小组】第10次作业
A47Scientists 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.

1 地球真的变冷了？
2 真的排除了陨石撞地球的可能？就算不是陨石，难道没有其它原因了？
3 以一声巨响来证明是火山爆发，可信度不高。

Given evidences that some accounts mention a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperatures and some historical records found in Asian mention a loud boom(这句感觉不通), the arguer asserts the reason for the cooling of earth in the mid-six century was a volcanic eruption. The statement seems to be convincing, however, it is not as sound as it stands(as….as感觉多余).

First, whether the earth suddenly became cooler remains suspicious as there is no sufficient evidence to prove it. The accounts found both in Asia and Europe might be only a regional record that could not used to represent the planet as a whole. Therefore, although some regions of the earth became cool for some reasons, it might still as warm as usual. If it is(was) the case, the arguer's assertion is entirely absurd.

Secondly, assuming that the temperature dropped dramatically in mid-sixth century, the arguer’s reasoning to rule out the possibility of meteorite colliding is not convincing. If the meteorite colliding happened in an area where there was no human like Antarctic or the people there had no written record, and(as a result) the flash could not be seen in the rest of the world, it is logical that there is no extant
historical records of the flash. Further more, there might be other possible factors other than meteorite colliding and volcanic eruption that caused the cooling, such as a forest fire.

Finally, the example the arguer used to support that it was a volcanic eruption that caused the cooling cannot stand up to a closer scrutiny. Perhaps the historic records of a loud boom have nothing to do with a volcanic eruption. Even if the boom was caused by a volcanic eruption, it might be just a coincidence that the cooling and eruption happened in the same period. And there is even no evidence to prove that the eruption happened before the cooling, and if not, the volcanic eruption cannot be a possibility of the
reason for the cooling of earth any more.

In sum, if the arguer hopes to make his assertion more sound, more evidences about the cooling and more information about the boom are needed, and more factors (are needed) need taking into account.
看来大家的思路都大同小异，都是从这几个点进行攻击，文章没什么漏洞，但是可以在每个攻击点之间强调他们的逻辑关系，这样文章的逻辑性更强