0910G argument37by [NAF TTG]Michael

Michael_HanUID: 2656795

TOPIC: ARGUMENT37 - Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been unique to the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a "Palean" basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could only have crossed it by boat, but there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats. And boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared. Moreover, Paleans would have had no need to cross the river-the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game. It follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea.
WORDS: 506
TIME: 00:45:26
DATE: 2009-7-24 13:45:52

Grounding on a discovery, a Palean basket have been found in the Lithos, and
a hypothesis that the Palea people could not and had no needs to pass the river between the Palea and Lithos, the arguer get a conclusion that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea.

Firstly, although here is river between the Palea and the Lithos, there is no evidence that in the prehistoric time here was river either. As we known, the geographical feature can be totally changed in a long period. So the arguer fails to rule out the possibility that the river-now between the two villages, does not exist at that time which led to that the Palean people could arrive Lithos conveniently. Even if there is definitely there was a river between the two villages, it is nevertheless possible that the river is not so deep and broad that the Palean people could swim to the other riverside. Therefore, the argument is unwarranted without ruling out such possibility.

Secondly, granted that the so deep and wide river between the two village does exist, it is also irrational for the arguer to claim that the Pelaen people could not pass the river by boat. Although there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats and the boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed at the period they lived, it is also possible that the Palean did have boats which were only able to transport one or two persons and they just did not remain the evidence of the boat or the evidence have not been found. Thus, without the clear evidence concerning the Palean people could not pass the river, the arguer's assumption can convince me.

Thirdly，the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game, the arguer cites is not necessarily due to the Palea need not to pass the river. Now there is full of nuts and berries and small game but it does not mean that at the prehistoric time there was full of food. It is likely that the condition of this side was no suitable for growth of plants, so the Palean people had to search for food at the other riverside. And even the woods around Pelea were full of food, the arguer cannot get the conclusion that the Palean people never went to the other riverside. For example maybe the Palean people’s favorite food could not be found around their village, so they had to search the food through crossing the river. Since the arguer fails to account for this possibility, the conclusion cannot convince me.

To sum up, the arguer’s hypothesis about the Palean people had not been the Lithos is lack of the supporting from the credible evidence sine there is the possibility that there was no river between the two villages or they could through their way to pass the river for their aims. So the conclusion that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea is unreasonable.

刨去思考的时间还是用了45分钟  怎么办呢。。。

chouchouerUID: 2593290

恩...我今天写的一篇同主题用了29分钟但是只有四百出头的字，攻击点和你一样，我按照模板句子没怎么考虑写上去的，点都写到了，只是句子用的没有你充分。我觉得你多练练打字速度吧