Argument47 勇往直前小组第六次作业 bynashiong

xiongnashiongUID：2359406

TOPIC: ARGUMENT47 - Scientists 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.
WORDS: 343          TIME: 上午 12:29:47          DATE: 2007-7-26

In the argument above, the arguer claims that the cooling was probably caused by a volcanic eruption, this conclusion could be threefold:
   1)only two reasons, volcanic eruption and meteorite collision ,could result in the decline of temperature.
   2) meteorite collision could not be the reason of temperature decline.
however , after close scrutiny of the argument , above conclusions could find little support from them .
Firstly. the arguer unfairly rule out other possibilities which could contribute to a significantly cold ,although in that time Asia and Europe suffered from a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperatures ,it is possible that sand-storm ,which could come from desert , could also be the reason attributable to a dimming sun while extremely cold temperature might lie largely in the atmosphere vortex ,which usually forms a low pressure and temperature. if so ,the residents would got the same records .from this point , we could see that there might be other factors resulted in these records.
Secondly. even conceding that only above two reasons could be possible, it is not sufficient for the arguer to cite the facts that no record of flash of light remained other than some ones referring to a loud boom to sustain the deduction that the causing reason must be a volcanic eruption , common sense tells us , if meteorite appears in the day time ,we could not notice its flash because of the sunshine ,so it is very possible that a loud boom ,noted by people in that era ,shoud be made out by the meteorite collision . or assume that meteorite came at night ,however ,people would possible go to sleep at that time-we know there could be no electricity in that era .then people could still only notice the sound made by collision, it is too presumptuous to rule out the possibility of meteorite collision and assert a volcanic eruption must be the only reason .
in sum, the argument lacks credibility ,only the arguer could provide more evidence to rule out above fallacies , the argument could be persuasive.

zhangjing106UID：2157010

In the argument above, the arguer claims that the cooling was probably caused by a volcanic eruption, this conclusion could be threefold:
   1)only two reasons, volcanic eruption and meteorite collision ,could result in the decline of temperature.
   2) meteorite collision could not be the reason of temperature decline.
however , after close scrutiny of the argument , above conclusions could find little support from them .
Firstly. the arguer unfairly rule out other possibilities which could contribute to a significantly cold ,although in that time Asia and Europe suffered from a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperatures ,it is possible that sand-storm ,which could come from desert , could also be the reason attributable to a dimming sun while extremely cold temperature might lie largely in the atmosphere vortex ,which usually forms a low pressure and temperature. if so ,the residents would got the same records .from this point , we could see that there might be other factors resulted in these records.
Secondly. even conceding that only above two reasons could be possible, it is not sufficient for the arguer to cite the facts that no record of flash of light remained other than some ones referring to a loud boom to sustain the deduction that the causing reason must be a volcanic eruption(好长的一句话！) , common sense tells us , if meteorite appears in the day time ,we could not notice its flash because of the sunshine ,so it is very possible that a loud boom ,noted by people in that era ,shoud（should） be made out by the meteorite collision . or assume that meteorite came at night ,however ,people would possible go to sleep at that time-we know there could be no electricity in that era .then people could still only notice the sound made by collision, it is too presumptuous to rule out the possibility of meteorite collision and assert a volcanic eruption must be the only reason .
in sum, the argument lacks credibility ,only the arguer could provide more evidence to rule out above fallacies , the argument could be persuasive.
错误都找到了，驳的也没问题。
首先是格式的问题。大小写，标点符号！
句子太长了，影响理解。
可能是限时写的吧，逻辑结构还不够清晰。

linshaoUID：2338229

In the argument above, the arguer claims that the cooling was probably caused by a volcanic eruption, this conclusion could be threefold:（明明下面是2个嘛）
   1)only two reasons, volcanic eruption and meteorite collision ,could result in the decline of temperature.
   2) meteorite collision could not be the reason of temperature decline.
however , after close scrutiny of the argument , above conclusions could find little support from them .

Firstly. the arguer unfairly rule out other possibilities which could contribute to a significantly cold ,although in that time Asia and Europe suffered from a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperatures ,it is possible that sand-storm ,which could come from desert ,（沙尘暴不会吹这么高吧！）could also be the reason attributable to a dimming sun while extremely cold temperature might lie largely in the atmosphere vortex ,which usually forms a low pressure and temperature. if so ,the residents would got the same records .from this point , we could see that there might be other factors resulted in these records.

Secondly. even conceding that only above two reasons could be possible, it is not sufficient for the arguer to cite the facts that no record of flash of light remained other than some ones referring to a loud boom to sustain the deduction that the causing reason must be a volcanic eruption , common sense tells us , if meteorite appears in the day time ,we could not notice its flash because of the sunshine ,so it is very possible that a loud boom ,noted by people in that era ,should be made out by the meteorite collision . or assume that meteorite came at night ,however ,people would possible go to sleep at that time-we know there could be no electricity in that era .then people could still only notice the sound made by collision, it is too presumptuous to rule out the possibility of meteorite collision and assert a volcanic eruption must be the only reason .

in sum, the argument lacks credibility ,only the arguer could provide more evidence to rule out above fallacies , the argument could be persuasive.

总的来说论述比较清晰，观点比较独特啊。

只是批驳点不全，影响了字数。