Argument59 飞跃 dreams 第二次作业

Marvelous_czUID: 2451875

59.The following appeared in an article in the health section of a newspaper.


"According to the available medical records, the six worst worldwide flu epidemics during the past 300 years occurred in 1729, 1830, 1918, 1957, 1968, and 1977. These were all years with heavy sunspot activity-that is, years when the Earth received significantly more solar energy than in normal years. People at particular risk for the flu should therefore avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun."


根据现有的医疗记录，过去300年中最严重的六次世界范围的流感大流行分别发生于1729，1830，1918，1957和1977。这些都是太阳黑子活动剧烈的年份，即：地球所接收的太阳能比平常年份多的多的年份。因此，那些特别易患流感的人群应该避免长时间暴露于日光下。



In this argument, the author points out that the six worst worldwide flu epidemics were caused by the heavy sunspot activity. And the author points out that people at particular risk for the flu should therefore avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun. However, the argument is undermined by several problems.


First of all, the author asserts the worldwide flu epidemics are caused by heavy sunspot activity, but there is no evidence to substantiate it. The tow things just happen in the same time, but it does not indicate that they have some necessity relationships, and it is entirely possible that they just are coincidence. Perhaps the people who at particular risk for the flu liked to go out for a travel in those years, which make the possibility of getting a flu increasing. And perhaps there are some other reasons which cause the flu epidemics, such as some abnormal climate bring out the flu and it has nothing to do with sunspot activity. These situations, if true, would render the author’s argument untenable.


Secondly, the author conclude that the people who at particular risk should avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun; yet the author does not provide any evidence to support it. There is no proof can indicate that prolonged exposure to the Sun would lead to increase the possibility of getting flu. Maybe the Sun just increase the temperature so that it would accelerate the propagation of pathogen, but the Sun may have the function, contrarily, which kills the pathogen and cure some diseases. I can not accept that Sun lead to the flu epidemics unless the author provide enough proof and consider other feasibility.


Thirdly, the author just give a statistics about years but the detail does not provide. Maybe the statistics is not precise and the author does not offer some information about other diseases which may cause the flu. In that case, perhaps the Sun would induce some diseases that would bring out the flu epidemics, and the people who at particular risk for the flu would not avoid exposure to the Sun since the Sun would result in other disease but not flu. Without ruling out these and other possible reasons and problems, the conclusion is totally dubious.      


In conclusion, the author’s conclusion is not well supported. To strengthen it the author must provide more evidence to support that the sunspot activity would lead to flu epidemics not other disease which can bring out the flu and the people would get flu if they prolonged exposure to the Sun. it would be necessarily for the author to consider these situations before we could better evaluate the conclusion.

wxtxxmUID: 2339833

In this argument, the author points out that the six worst worldwide flu epidemics，were caused by the heavy sunspot activity. And the author points out that people at particular risk for the flu should therefore avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun. However, the argument is undermined by several problems.

First of all, the author asserts the worldwide flu epidemics are caused by heavy sunspot activity, but there is no evidence to substantiate it. The two things just happen in the same time, but it does not indicate that they have some necessity relationships, and it is entirely possible that they just are coincidence. Perhaps the people who at particular risk for the flu liked to go out for a travel in those years, which make the possibility of getting a flu increasing.好奇怪的论证，出去旅游和驳斥作者认为禽流感由太阳黑子引起有关吗？And perhaps there are some other reasons which cause the flu epidemics, such as some abnormal climate bring out the flu and it has nothing to do with sunspot activity. 此处也可多列举些其他的可能性，来增强说服力These situations, if true, would render the author’s argument untenable.

Secondly, the author conclude that the people who at particular risk should avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun; yet the author does not provide any evidence to support it. There is no proof can indicate that prolonged exposure to the Sun would lead to increase the possibility of getting flu. Maybe the Sun just increase the temperature so that it would accelerate the propagation of pathogen, but the Sun may have the function, contrarily, which kills the pathogen and cure some diseases.一方面举出了作者认为晒太阳可能造成禽流感的原因，又从另一方面列举了晒太阳可能对防止禽流感所有的作用，正反两方面来论证，很有说服力I can not accept that Sun lead to the flu epidemics unless the author provide enough proof and consider other feasibility.

Thirdly, the author just give a statistics about years前半句主语是作者，建议后半句的主语还以作者为好，这样看着比较顺but the detail does not provide. Maybe the statistics is not precise and the author does not offer some information about other diseases which may cause the flu作者没有提供其他可能导致禽流感的疾病？？什么意思呢？？. In that case, perhaps the Sun would induce some diseases that would bring out the flu epidemics, and the people who at particular risk for the flu would not avoid exposure to the Sun since the Sun would result in other disease but not flu.不理解,这句话想表达什么意思?Without ruling out these and other possible reasons and problems, the conclusion is totally dubious.      

In conclusion, the author’s conclusion连用两个Conclusion感觉有些单调，可以选择别的说法 is not well supported. To strengthen it the author must provide more evidence to support that the sunspot activity would lead to flu epidemics not other disease which can bring out the flu and the people would get flu if they prolonged exposure to the Sun. it would be necessarily for the author to consider these situations before we could better evaluate the conclusion.

整体感觉不错，但是有些段落的论证内容不是很充分，继续加油~

[ 本帖最后由 wxtxxm 于 2008-1-30 14:35 编辑 ]

Marvelous_czUID: 2451875

In this argument, the author points out that the six worst worldwide flu epidemics，were caused by the heavy sunspot activity. And the author points out that people at particular risk for the flu should therefore avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun. However, the argument is undermined by several problems.

First of all, the author asserts the worldwide flu epidemics are caused by heavy sunspot activity, but there is no evidence to substantiate it. The two things just happen in the same time, but it does not indicate that they have some necessity relationships, and it is entirely possible that they just are coincidence. Perhaps the people who at particular risk for the flu liked to go to the area which has many patients so that the possibility of getting a flu increasing would be increasing. And perhaps there are some other reasons which cause the flu epidemics, such as some abnormal climate bring out the flu and it has nothing to do with sunspot activity. These situations, if true, would render the author’s argument untenable.

Secondly, the author conclude that the people who at particular risk should avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun; yet the author does not provide any evidence to support it. There is no proof can indicate that prolonged exposure to the Sun would lead to increase the possibility of getting flu. Maybe the Sun just increase the temperature so that it would accelerate the propagation of pathogen, but the Sun may have the function, contrarily, which kills the pathogen and cure some diseases. I can not accept that Sun lead to the flu epidemics unless the author provide enough proof and consider other feasibility.

Thirdly, the author points out that there are the six worst flu epidemics. What the definition of the “worst”? Maybe in some countries the number of people died is used to judge the “worst” flu, while in other countries, they used the area of infection. So we cannot clear that the six flu epidemics which the author claims are really the “worst” flu epidemics. Without ruling out this and other possible reasons and problems, the conclusion is totally dubious.      

In sum, the author’s conclusion is not well supported. To strengthen it the author must provide more evidence to support that the sunspot activity would lead to flu epidemics not other disease which can bring out the flu and the people would get flu if they prolonged exposure to the Sun. it would be necessarily for the author to consider these situations before we could better evaluate the conclusion.