【Try Best】第一小组 ARGUMENT150 by小红莓

小红莓UID: 2641349

TOPIC: ARGUMENT150 - The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine.

"The decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide clearly indicates the global pollution of water and air. Two studies of amphibians in Yosemite National Park in California confirm my conclusion. In 1915 there were seven species of amphibians in the park, and there were abundant numbers of each species. However, in 1992 there were only four species of amphibians observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. The decline in Yosemite has been blamed on the introduction of trout into the park's waters, which began in 1920 (trout are known to eat amphibian eggs). But the introduction of trout cannot be the real reason for the Yosemite decline because it does not explain the worldwide decline."
WORDS: 402
TIME: 00:28:43
DATE: 2009-7-8 11:21:33

In this letter, the editor of the environmental magazine recommends that the decline in the number of amphibians results from the global pollution of water and air. To justify his recommendation, the editor cites two studies of amphibians in Yosemite National Park which shows the decline in the population of amphibians in the park. The editor also claims that the decline was caused by pollution instead of trout which was introduced to the park's waters. Close scrutiny of the argument, however, reveals that it lends little credible support to the editor's claim.

To begin with, the author fails to provide any evidence to show that trout was not the reason for the decline in the numbers of amphibians in Yosemite National Park. As we have known the fact that trout eat amphibian eggs, the author's claim, however, indicate that trout is actually one of the reasons that should not be ignored. Lacking evidence to show that trout is not the reason for the decline in Yosemite National Park, the author should not have a hasty conclusion.

Secondly, even if the introduction of trout cannot be the real reason for the decline in Yosemite National Park, the author fails to prove that it's the pollution of water and air, rather than any other reasons that cause the decline. Perhaps the weather condition in that area has changed during those years and the amphibians could not be used to the new weather condition, so the population declined. Or perhaps the amphibians were eaten by some other species rather than trout. Without ruling out all the possibilities, the argument is unconvincing.

Thirdly, even though the reason for the decline in the number of amphibians in Yosemite National Park was the pollution of water and air, it's hardly to have a conclusion that the worldwide decline was also the result of pollution. Perhaps the decline in Yosemite National Park is a special example rather than a general example in this aspect and means nothing in the worldwide decline.

In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the author must provide enough evidence that the real reason for the decline in the numbers of amphibians in Yosemite National Park was the global pollution rather than any other possibilities. To better assess the recommendation, I would also need to know that the Yosemite National Park is a general example and could represent the global condition.

tidejoyUID: 2527165

reveals that it lends little credible support to the editor's claim------------reveals that it lends ？
the author's claim, however, indicate that trout is actually one of the reasons that should not be ignored-------------------indicates
呵呵，逻辑关系我还得学习~

小红莓UID: 2641349

2# tidejoy
虽然都是小细节
不过还是谢谢：）
对于外行还说你已经尽力了，是不？