Argument47

woodmanUID：161906

Argument47
The arguerconcludes that a significantly cooling on Earth in the mid-sixth century wasprobably caused by a volcanic eruption. He provides severalhistorical records to support his opinion. At first glance, his view seems to be soundand convincing. However, I’m afraid his argument can hardly bear furtherconsideration since there are several flaws in it.

Firstly, thearguer does not provide enough evidence to show that the loud boom mentioned inthe surviving Asian historical records of the time came from a volcanic eruption;consequently, there maybe no volcano erupted in the mid-sixth century. It isentirely possible that the loud boom may be due to an earthquake or a largethunder. Since at that time science and technology were not developed, people’sknowledge and their equipments failed to judge the source of the boom, and theymistakenly regarded it as a sound derived from volcanic eruption. Thus, withoutconsidering the above possibility, the arguer’s claim is unconvincing.

Secondly,no evidence shows that a large meteorite colliding with Earth did not happen inthe mid-sixth century. The arguer ignores the possibility that people of thattime did record the sudden bright flash of light, but after experiencing somany wars, bad weathers or many other disasters, these records are lost ordestroyed. Perhaps the huge volcanic eruption and the collision between a largemeteorite and Earth together led to the sharply lower global temperatures. Thus,only the existed few records are not enough to achieve a trustworthyconclusion.

Finally, thearguer fails to take other possible factors causing the cooling into account. Besides thehuge volcanic eruption and the collision between a large meteorite and Earth, there are several other reasons could cause the decliningtemperature of Earth.Perhaps the movement of the Sun is mainly responsible for the significantlycooling. The Sun might reduce its energy releasing; accordingly, the earth got farless energy to absorb than before, resulting in a sharp decrease in temperature.Without ruling the possibilities above, the arguer’sconclusion is problematic.

In all, to persuade me thata notable cooling on Earth in the mid-sixth century is due to a volcanic eruption,the arguer must provide detail information that loud boom mentioned in thesurviving Asian historical records of the time is from a volcanic eruption, andoffer convincing evidence that a large meteorite colliding with Earth did nothappen in that time. Moreover, the arguer should show me that only can the hugevolcanic eruption and the collision between a large meteorite and Earth cause the Earth’s cooling.
提纲稍后补上                                      

[ 本帖最后由 woodman 于 2007-7-27 19:46 编辑 ]

forestlevyUID：2320694

The arguer concludes that a significantly cooling on Earth in the mid-sixth century wasprobably caused by a volcanic eruption. He provides severalhistorical records to support his opinion. At first glance, his view seems to be soundand convincing. However, I’m afraid his argument can hardly bear furtherconsideration since there are several flaws in it.

Firstly, thearguer does not provide enough evidence to show that the loud boom mentioned inthe surviving Asian historical records of the time came from a volcanic eruption;consequently, there maybe no volcano erupted in the mid-sixth century. It isentirely possible that the loud boom may be due to an earthquake or a largethunder. Since at that time science and technology were not developed, people’sknowledge and their equipments failed to judge the source of the boom, and theymistakenly regarded it as a sound derived from volcanic eruption.(.......不是they regarded！) Thus, withoutconsidering the above possibility, the arguer’s claim is unconvincing.

Secondly,no evidence shows that a large meteorite colliding with Earth did not happen inthe mid-sixth century. The arguer ignores the possibility that people of that time did record the sudden bright flash of light, but after experiencing somany wars, bad weathers or many other disasters, these records are lost ordestroyed. Perhaps the huge volcanic eruption and the collision between a largemeteorite and Earth together led to the sharply lower global temperatures. Thus,only the existed few records are not enough to achieve a trustworthyconclusion.

Finally, the arguer fails to take other possible factors causing the cooling into account. Besides thehuge volcanic eruption and the collision between a large meteorite and Earth, there are several other reasons could cause the decliningtemperature of Earth.Perhaps the movement of the Sun（内部活动，内部~！） is mainly responsible for the significantlycooling. The Sun might reduce its energy releasing; accordingly, the earth got farless energy to absorb than before, resulting in a sharp decrease in temperature.Without ruling the possibilities above, （就一个啊...再编一个才是复数...）the arguer’sconclusion is problematic.

In all, to persuade me thata notable cooling on Earth in the mid-sixth century is due to a volcanic eruption,the arguer must provide detail information that loud boom mentioned in thesurviving Asian historical records of the time is from a volcanic eruption, andoffer convincing evidence that a large meteorite colliding with Earth did nothappen in that time. Moreover, the arguer should show me that only can the hugevolcanic eruption and the collision between a large meteorite and Earth cause the Earth’s cooling.

forestlevyUID：2320694

:loveliness:
螃蟹进步很大啊...我落伍了...

高加索UID：2246937

Argument47
The arguerconcludes that a significantly cooling on Earth in the mid-sixth century wasprobably caused by a volcanic eruption. He provides severalhistorical records to support his opinion. At first glance, his view seems to be soundand convincing. However, I’m afraid his argument can hardly bear furtherconsideration since there are several flaws in it. （模版用的很熟了哦）

Firstly, thearguer does not provide enough evidence to show that the loud boom mentioned inthe surviving Asian historical records of the time came from a volcanic eruption;consequently, there maybe no volcano erupted in the mid-sixth century. It isentirely possible that the loud boom may be due to an earthquake or a largethunder（这都能想出来，很有联想能力）. Since at that time science and technology were not developed, people’sknowledge and their equipments failed to judge the source of the boom, and theymistakenly regarded it as a sound derived from volcanic eruption. Thus, withoutconsidering the above possibility, the arguer’s claim is unconvincing.

Secondly,no evidence shows that a large meteorite colliding with Earth did not happen inthe mid-sixth century. The arguer ignores the possibility that people of thattime did record the sudden bright flash of light, but after experiencing somany wars, bad weathers or many other disasters, these records are lost ordestroyed. Perhaps the huge volcanic eruption and the collision between a largemeteorite and Earth together led to the sharply lower global temperatures. Thus,only the existed few records are not enough to achieve a trustworthyconclusion.

Finally, thearguer fails to take other possible factors causing the cooling into account. Besides thehuge volcanic eruption and the collision between a large meteorite and Earth, there are several other reasons could cause the decliningtemperature of Earth.Perhaps the movement of the Sun is mainly responsible for the significantlycooling. The Sun might reduce its energy releasing; accordingly, the earth got farless energy to absorb than before, resulting in a sharp decrease in temperature.Without ruling the possibilities above, the arguer’sconclusion is problematic.

In all, to persuade me thata notable cooling on Earth in the mid-sixth century is due to a volcanic eruption,the arguer must provide detail information that loud boom mentioned in thesurviving Asian historical records of the time is from a volcanic eruption, andoffer convincing evidence that a large meteorite colliding with Earth did nothappen in that time. Moreover, the arguer should show me that only can the hugevolcanic eruption and the collision between a large meteorite and Earth cause the Earth’s cooling（句式不错）.

看了两遍，还是没找到什么挑的错误，写得很不错哦
就是有的单词中间忘了空格，是不是粘上来的时候的问题呢？


[ 本帖最后由 高加索 于 2007-7-27 21:44 编辑 ]

iq28UID：2152875

再提醒下。。。空格别少。。。。看了让人很无语的

The arguer concludes that a significantly cooling on Earth in the mid-sixth century was probably caused by a volcanic eruption. He provides several historical records to support his opinion. At first glance, his view seems to be soundand convincing. However, I’m afraid his argument can hardly bear further consideration since there are several flaws in it.

Firstly, the arguer does not provide enough evidence to show that the loud boom mentioned in the surviving Asian historical records of the time came from a volcanic eruption; consequently, there maybe no volcano erupted in the mid-sixth century. It is entirely possible that the loud boom may be due to an earthquake or a large thunder. Since at that time science and technology were not developed, people’s knowledge and their equipments failed to judge the source of the boom, and they mistakenly regarded it as a sound derived from volcanic eruption. Thus, without considering the above possibility, the arguer’s claim is unconvincing.（本段的思维兜了一个大圈子。只需要证明大爆炸声音不一定是火山爆发的声音即可，还要再为了自己用于驳斥的假设写上一大段原因，没必要。这个不是写issue）

Secondly, no evidence shows that a large meteorite colliding with Earth did not happen in the mid-sixth century. （直接指明错误吧，没有发现证据不带表没有证据）The arguer ignores the possibility that people of that time did record the sudden bright flash of light, but after experiencing so many wars, bad weathers or many other disasters, these records are lost or destroyed. Perhaps the huge volcanic eruption and the collision between a large meteorite and Earth together led to the sharply lower global temperatures. （没有必要这么说了。argument的任务是挑出逻辑错误，不考验举例的能力）Thus, only the existed few records are not enough to achieve a trust worthy conclusion.

Finally, the arguer fails to take other possible factors causing the cooling into account. Besides the huge volcanic eruption and the collision between a large meteorite and Earth, there are several other reasons could cause the declining temperature of Earth. Perhaps the movement of the Sun is mainly responsible for the significantly cooling. The Sun might reduce its energy releasing; accordingly, the earth got farless energy to absorb than before, resulting in a sharp decrease in temperature. （这句也没太大必要。不如详细讨论原先材料中的都是地球本身上的因素而没有考虑地球之外的因素，而且这个因素事实上在材料开头也提到了。）Without ruling the possibilities above, the arguer’sconclusion is problematic.

In all, to persuade me thata notable cooling on Earth in the mid-sixth century is due to a volcanic eruption,the arguer must provide detail information that loud boom mentioned in the surviving Asian historical records of the time is from a volcanic eruption, and offer convincing evidence that a large meteorite colliding with Earth did not happen in that time. Moreover, the arguer should show me that only can the hugevolcanic eruption and the collision between a large meteorite and Earth cause the Earth’s cooling.

这个题不难，错误也多，还可以尝试写下地球不一定真的变暖。（亚洲和欧洲不代表全部。时间跨度？）
否则只是局限于探讨寒冷的原因。加油;)