argument50 同主题写作第四期

mellon_lUID：2364758

TOPIC: ARGUMENT50 - From a draft textbook manuscript submitted to a publisher.

"As Earth was being formed out of the collision of space rocks, the heat from those collisions and from the increasing gravitational energy of the planet made the entire planet molten, even the surface. Any water present would have evaporated and gone off into space. As the planet approached its current size, however, its gravitation became strong enough to hold gases and water vapor around it as an atmosphere. Because comets are largely ice made up of frozen water and gases, a comet striking Earth then would have vaporized. The resulting water vapor would have been retained in the atmosphere, eventually falling as rain on the cooled and solidified surface of Earth. Therefore, the water in Earth's oceans must have originated from comets."

提纲：
1、        没有证据说明彗星是在地球到现在这么大之前就发生了撞击的
2、        因为水气变成雨是有条件的，彗星上的冰不一定能变成雨
3、        雨形成后也许不以海洋的形式存在在地球上
4、        海洋的形成还可以有许多别的途径
The above argument draw the conclusion that the water in Earth's oceans must have originated from comets because of the collision with comets which are mainly made up by ice will leave gas and water vapor in the atmosphere. It seems to be convincing. However, careful scrutiny reveals that this argument is unreasonable because of several logical flaws.

To begin with, the argument is based on a dubious assumption that comets do have collision with Earth after the planet approached its current size.  If the collision took place when the planet is big enough and gravitation is strong enough to hold gas and water vapor, however collisions between planet and comets will leave no water because of the high temperature and no atmosphere for lacking strong gravitation.

Second, even comets do crack Earth after it reached its current size; the arguer fails to prove that the ice of the comets will become water on Earth.  It is a fact that only after the amount of water vapor accumulates into a certain large quantity, they are able to from rain and drop on the surface of Earth. There is no evidence mentioned can justify that the amount of gas and water vapor is sufficient. Though it is mentioned that the comets are made up largely by ice, it is possible that the size of the comets are so small that the ice are insufficient and the vapor will be little.

Next, supposing the quantity is enough, the falling rain could be stored on Earth in many other forms rather than oceans. For example, the water could permeate though the surface and become the under-ground water of the Earth.

In addition, the arguer fails to take account other alternatives which may form the oceans. In the argument, the arguer only considers one possible way by which Earth attains water from the space. However, there are other alternatives such as absorbing gas and water vapor into atmosphere from cracking with planet which contains large amount of water. Furthermore, except getting water from space, the Earth itself probably could produce water though certain ways, such as though chemical reaction between hydrogen and oxygen.

To sum up, the arguer fails to convince me of the theory that the water of oceans on Earth is originated from comets. To evaluate it better, the arguer needs to provide more details about the assumption and enough evidence.

thomas_yangzjUID：2179841

不知道你的时间如何，我总觉得版里的很多板油们阿狗的结尾处理太过草率了，结尾毕竟还是一个建议式的中肯尾巴比较好
“To evaluate it better, the arguer needs to provide more details about the assumption and enough evidence.”这个令人感觉是草草结束，或者一开始就敢时间写了...

作一个自己觉得好些的尾巴吧

另外我一直觉得那个242的提纲还是不一定要全部照搬，比如这篇：一开头当年raccoon老大的帖子里讲过，可以先直攻对方要害，提纲说：“没有证据说明彗星是在地球到现在这么大之前就发生了撞击的”，你可以先说：“没有证据说明曾有彗星撞击过地球...（第一段继续）另外，即使可以找到有撞击的证据，也不能说明时间问题...”

开头第一段，一定要直刺对方之要害，一剑封喉，之后的两段还好。