Argument112 [Victors小组]第九次作业 by solartorch

solartorchUID: 2244205

112The following proposal was raised at a meeting of the Franklin City Council.

"Franklin Airport, which is on a bay, is notorious for flight delays. The airport management wants to build new runways to increase capacity but can only do so by filling in 900 acres of the bay. The Bay Coalition organization objects that filling in the bay will disrupt tidal patterns and harm wildlife. But the airport says that if it is permitted to build its new runways, it will fund the restoration of 1,000 acres of wetlands in areas of the bay that have previously been damaged by industrialization. This plan should be adopted, for it is necessary to reduce the flight delays, and the wetlands restoration part of the plan ensures that the bay's environment will actually be helped rather than hurt."

1, flight delay不一定是由于capacity不够，也许是天气，也许是调度，服务或者技术问题。所以填了海也不能解决问题。
2，fund the restoration for the wetlands能不能解决environment damage as expected呢，解决环境问题不仅仅是钱的问题，还有比如说industrious company 不合作，计划问题，技术问题，或者那种不能挽回的damage…
3，也许filling900 acres of the bay带来的环境破坏将不能被挽回后果是严重的。Environment还是会被hurt.

WORDS: 571         
While it seems true that the facts presented in the above proposal contribute to the conclusion that the plan, which is necessary to reduce the flight delays and can help the bay's environment, should be adopted, the evidence and reasoning provided by the author are indefensible under serious scrutiny-- in three respects.

To begin with, the author unfairly assumes that the problem of flight delay is because of the small capacity of airport. It is entirely possible that the number of runways in this airport is more than enough and the notorious flight delays are due to other rational reasons. For example, since Franklin Airport is built on a bay, we should not ignore the influence of the unpredictable weather conditions in this area. Or perhaps the delays are the result of the unsatisfied service skills or dispatch abilities of the staff. It is the employees' qualities that lead to the flight delays but not the capacity.  Either of the scenarios, if true, would serve to undermine the assumption that the situation of lacking runways causes the flight delays and make the proposal of building new runways ungrounded.

In addition, the conclusion of this proposal depends on another unwarranted assumption that the fund provided by Franklin Airport will definitely solve the environment problem of that 1000 acres of wetlands. It is common sense that environment restoration does not only decided by the money be put in. For instance, as mentioned in the proposal that the wetlands in areas of the bay have been damaged by industrialization, we cannot negate the attitude on cooperation of the industrious companies which may still be affecting the environment in wetlands currently. Also, we are not informed the extent of environmental damage and the methods be used to treat on the problems. It is quite possible that the damage is kind of permanent and there is no way to achieve the restoration or the methods used are not promising enough to help on the environment as expected. Without ruling out these possibilities or even failing to consider them, the author's conclusion is dubious at best.

Lastly, the author tends to overlook the possible environment damage on 900 acres of the bay which are expected to be filled up in the proposal. The author stands on this premise that the sacrifice of 900 acres of bay can be better offset by the alleged restoration of 1000 acres of wetlands. However, merely using the number of acres as the compare of environment damage is naive. Leave alone the restoration of the wetlands is still serious questionable, even if we accept that the 1000 acres of wetlands can be environmentally helped, the damage on the bay due to the land filling is probably much more serious and cannot be restored any more. The tidal patterns and wildlife within this area are probably influenced by the runway-building without any chance of remediation. In any case, the intention of damaging environment is supposed to be considered more thoroughly. The author's opinion on the point that the bay's environment will be helped rather than hurt should be seriously examined under this condition.

In conclusion, the author not only logically unsounded but also relies on several doubtful assumptions and premises. To fully convince me, the author should provide more details and more concrete information as well as some necessary investigations on the reason of flight delays or some research on the environment issue.

jennetrjUID: 2275453

112The following proposal was raised at a meeting of the Franklin City Council. "Franklin Airport, which is on a bay, is notorious for flight delays. The airport management wants to build new runways to increase capacity but can only do so by filling in 900 acres of the bay. The Bay Coalition organization objects that filling in the bay will disrupt tidal patterns and harm wildlife. But the airport says that if it is permitted to build its new runways, it will fund the restoration of 1,000 acres of wetlands in areas of the bay that have previously been damaged by industrialization. This plan should be adopted, for it is necessary to reduce the flight delays, and the wetlands restoration part of the plan ensures that the bay's environment will actually be helped rather than hurt." 1, flight delay不一定是由于capacity不够，也许是天气，也许是调度，服务或者技术问题。所以填了海也不能解决问题。 2，fund the restoration for the wetlands能不能解决environment damage as expected呢，解决环境问题不仅仅是钱的问题，还有比如说industrious company 不合作，计划问题，技术问题，或者那种不能挽回的damage… 3，也许filling900 acres of the bay带来的环境破坏将不能被挽回后果是严重的。Environment还是会被hurt. WORDS: 571          While it seems true that the facts presented in the above proposal contribute to the conclusion that the plan, which is necessary to reduce the flight delays and can help the bay's environment, should be adopted, the evidence and reasoning provided by the author are indefensible under serious scrutiny-- in three respects. To begin with, the author unfairly assumes that the problem of flight delay is because of the small capacity of airport. It is entirely possible that the number of runways in this airport is more than enough and the notorious flight delays are due to other rational reasons. For example, since Franklin Airport is built on a bay, we should not ignore the influence of the unpredictable weather conditions in this area. Or perhaps the delays are the result of the unsatisfied service skills or dispatch abilities of the staff. It is the employees' qualities that lead to the flight delays but not the capacity.  Either of the scenarios, if true, would serve to undermine the assumption that the situation of lacking runways causes the flight delays and make the proposal of building new runways ungrounded. In addition, the conclusion of this proposal depends on another unwarranted assumption that the fund provided by Franklin Airport will definitely solve the environment problem of that 1000 acres of wetlands. It is common sense that environment restoration does not only decided by the money be put in. For instance, as mentioned in the proposal that the wetlands in areas of the bay have been damaged by industrialization, we cannot negate the attitude on cooperation of the industrious companies which may still be affecting the environment in wetlands currently. Also, we are not informed the extent of environmental damage and the methods be used to treat on the problems. It is quite possible that the damage is kind of permanent and there is no way to achieve the restoration or the methods used are not promising enough to help on the environment as expected. Without ruling out these possibilities or even failing to consider them, the author's conclusion is dubious at best. Lastly, the author tends to overlook the possible environment damage on 900 acres of the bay which are expected to be filled up in the proposal. The author stands on this premise that the sacrifice of 900 acres of bay can be better offset by the alleged restoration of 1000 acres of wetlands. However, merely using the number of acres as the compare of environment damage is naive. Leave alone the restoration of the wetlands is still serious questionable, even if we accept that the 1000 acres of wetlands can be environmentally helped, the damage on the bay due to the land filling is probably much more serious and cannot be restored any more. The tidal patterns and wildlife within this area are probably influenced by the runway-building without any chance of remediation. In any case, the intention of damaging environment is supposed to be considered more thoroughly. The author's opinion on the point that the bay's environment will be helped rather than hurt should be seriously examined under this condition. In conclusion, the author not only logically unsounded but also relies on several doubtful assumptions and premises. To fully convince me, the author should provide more details and more concrete information as well as some necessary investigations on the reason of flight delays or some research on the environment issue.

第三点的环境污染不能逆转与前面的叙述重复了，其他的部分写得很好！加油！