- 最后登录
- 2009-5-16
- 在线时间
- 0 小时
- 寄托币
- 224
- 声望
- 0
- 注册时间
- 2006-11-16
- 阅读权限
- 15
- 帖子
- 1
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 180
- UID
- 2274069

- 声望
- 0
- 寄托币
- 224
- 注册时间
- 2006-11-16
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 1
|
45 The followingappeared as an editorial in a wildlife journal.
"Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic region. They searchfor food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of a year.Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on whichthey feed, and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice to cover thesea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. Unfortunately,according to reports from local hunters, the deer populations are declining.Since these reports coincide with recent global warming trends that have causedthe sea ice to melt, we can conclude that the decline in arctic deerpopulations is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-oldmigration patterns across the frozen sea."
In this editorial, the arguer's view seems to be sound and convincing at first glance that the reasons of (去掉)decrease on artic deer population, indicated from the local hunters' reports, has to do with that melt of the sea ice caused by the global warming trends stops their migration across the frozen sea, which is the way they search for food. I'm afraid that this argument can hardly bear further consideration since the argument suffers several fallacies and relies on some unwarranted evidence.
First, the arguer concluded that the deer populations are declining according to the reports from local hunters. Although, to some extent, such reports do reflect the change of the deer population subjectively, it seems unscientific when appears in the journal for The reports are only carried out among hunters, a specific group of people who might only care deers (deer 单复同形)in vicinity, or their total quantity of varied preys rather than the quantity of one kind of animal. If the arguer can present with more scientific reports from scientists with some data, then the reports can be regarded as cogent evidence.
Another point worth close scrutiny is that the arguer attributed the occurrence of decline in arctic deer to the global warming trends only for it happens at the same time with the reports and it causes the sea ice to melt. First, it is widely belief that it is not necessary to have a causality between two events happen together even when one of them might impact the other one. For instance, some person is found dead with bruises all around the body. While, the cause of death is more likely beyond these bruises even when we calculate the bruises coincide with death. Also, just as we can't attribute the cause of death to superficial bruises, (举例不恰当)the global warming trends is not definitely the reason of decrease in deer population. After all, there exist many other causes which could probably lead to decrease of deer, such as contamination in air, water, food, on which Arctic deer live, increase in the deers' quantity as hunters’ or other animals’ preys and so forth. The conclusion is convincing only when the arguer excludes other factors those could be the main reasons to threaten the exist of Arctic deer.
In sum, it is not reasonable to assert the deer population are declining only depended on the report form hunters and ascribe it to the global warming. To strengthen the argument, the arguer should provide more scientific evidence and data to support the conclusion about the Arctic deer presented in the editorial.
第一篇阿狗,非限时,约430字。欢迎各位多提宝贵意见~
[ 本帖最后由 rita_moyo 于 2008-3-21 22:36 编辑 ] |
|