0910G [Splendid Sun] 最后冲刺习作 by swekimn

swekimnUID：2649781

随着AW一天天逼近~~焦躁，烦躁，暴躁~什么都来了~
   为了更好互动，希望各位亲爱的可爱的仁爱的板油斑竹板子~~
    组里哥哥姐姐多多帮助某个无良的人~~
  
   各位有需要有的兄弟姐妹~~留个链接吧~~大家互相交流下~~
   
    我是小白~~小菜~~加新手～～

　　偶尔划划水~~
     
      拜托~~~~
   

                        关闭了
怕雷同~~~我耸了~~~

   
     
　

swekimnUID：2649781

题目：ARGUMENT2 - The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.

"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."

这篇我修改了好久的～～

Grounding on a committee of homeowners,
the letter posit that if the Deerhaven Acres(DA) adopt the restrictions mentioned would get benefic to the average property, and then supply the fact that Brookville community(Br) have tripled for the average property values. However, it is fraught with vague, and expose the inconsistency in the testimony.

Firstly, the homeowners ascribe the restrictions adopted is the only factor exclusive to Br, the reason it is irrational. While it is entirely that possible that one or more factors would be influence the reason. For example, it is maybe there are have many changes in the Br, such as the government build many roads across Br, the convenient traffics bring much opportunity investment. There are maybe build a large entertainment center or gym center or shopping plaza. These establishments would also increase the property values. Additionally, it is likely that the government or other institutions anticipate evaluate the Br potential values and hence the investors, enterprisers or customers have a good desire for the houses, so the average property values increase significantly. In short, without a detailed analysis, it is absurd for the homeowners assume that set of restrictions give to increase value. And adopt the restrictions to DA is unconvincing.

Secondly, the homeowners ignore the basic discriminate between Br and DA, arbitrarily assuming that the policy, which has a positive influence on Br would also beneficent to DA. But DA may have dramatic difference from Br on account of several fundamental conditions, maybe Br has lots of rich men, stars or government officials live there, it is also likely that Br has a beautiful environment, booming business around, meanwhile, the possibility that a huge population in Br make them have a severely compete for the houses would also be the reason. After these restrictions stimulate, people in Br will undoubtedly be attracted by the good landscaped yards and colorful exteriorly painted home which make them have thirstily purchasable desire, by this, the value there increase fleetly. Even if the DA and Br have the same or similar condition, what’s about the people’s taste in the two areas? What’re the people prefer for house? Maybe the people are keen on the function about the houses, or they want comfortable situation indoor not the exterior. Besides, maybe people have a both exterior and indoor desire in the DA. Even if the people in DA also prefer to the landscaped yards and house exterior as the Br people, what’s landscaped and color should be selected? The same restrictions would influence the people in DA? The letter did not give such information about the people select. So if the committee homeowners could not supply further evidence about the two areas, hasting the same restrictions would available, it is make the letter considerably untenable.

Additionally, the homeowners unfairly equate values increase to values worth. In this letter, they only provide the information about Br has tripled than before, ignoring the values status about DA. Maybe DA has a rapidly increase in the past seven years. Compare Br tripled than before, the value in DA may have a quadrupled. Besides, the value of DA may more worth than Br’s, the restriction adopted may useless or increase the cost of houses and make loss of target customer, so the value maybe decline.


Finally, the homeowners more emphasize the policy the effect in the ameliorate the values in Br, he in base on situation that will remain unchanged in the future, failing to rule out the possibility that maybe change in upcoming years. Therefore, the people taste, demand or government policy changes would make the restrictions no use or value decline.

To sum up, the homeowners supplied a seemingly favorable proposal to increase the value of DA is irrational. To buttress the conclusion, they should provide more evidence that the development of DA, and stipulate a detail survey about people and situation in DA. Additionally, the homeowners must rule out other possible causes of increase values.

swekimnUID：2649781

7.The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview newspaper.

"In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council, because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."


Grounding on the environmental deteriorate, citing the three examples, and then assuming that Ann Green (AG) would do better than current council and another factor that the environment problems are the main city problems, and should select he instead Frank Braun (FB).However, it is fraught with vague, oversimplified, and unwarranted assumptions and exposed the inconsistency in the letter.

Firstly, the author cites the examples to support his point that the current members are not protecting our city, it is groundless. Even if the number of factories doubled last year, it is lack evidences to prove these factories would make air pollution. It is entirely possible that one or more factors would be influence the reason. As is known to all, the atmosphere is move from one area to another, maybe the near cities have an awful air problem or occur a accident last year, and Clearview (C) in the lee position, of course, C would get a bad effect from these. Even if the doubled factories increase the air pollution level, the author haste to ascribe it is the only factor exclusive to respiratory illnesses. The author ignore the other factor may also lead the respiratory illnesses, for example, food pollution, water problems, other illnesses or abroad inflow such as V1H1 or SARS. Even if air pollution leading more patients with respiratory illness, the author fail to rule out provide assurances that the data represent all the city respiratory illnesses. Maybe the survey only contains the large or well-know hospital or the respiratory department. So without detailed analysis of the reasons give to environmental problems, it is absurd for author to posit that the problems are very severe and the current council cannot solve the problem well.

Secondly, in the letter, the author only claims the city have environmental problems and supply several evidences to support his point, but he ignores the information about GEC and AG and he also not provide other information statement about the city. Neither the capacity or contribute or experiment about AG, he haste and curt that AG is the best choose make the comparison is unconvincing. Maybe AG very excellent at solve the environmental problems, the ability of mayoral could not measure only depend on this. For example, the welfare of people life, the local economic, the city fundamental establishments etc. all of the mentioned can reflect the mayoral ability and contribute to the city. The author even takes a example about the local factories doubled past year, the example reflects the C have a booming and prosperous develop business and FB has his own trait for govern the city. What’s more, the author only supply AG and FB as candidate whom should select for next mayoral, at least without supply other people who can achieve a better performance for the city, the two people mentioned be select as mayoral is unwarranted.


Additionally, the author cannot take one year statement of the city to define a mayoral contribute. In any profession, which should have a period to evaluate his contribute. FB may do very well in his tenure, and make the city have a rapidly development in the pass years, and inevitably engender some problems along the building the city. Since, the author provides no detailed information about FB, this conclusion seems like a hasty generalization at best.

To sum up, the author supplies a seemingly favorable proposal to the mayoral selection, whereas his deduction is irrational. To buttress the conclusion, the author should provide evidence that FB not an eligible mayoral. Additionally, the author must rule out AG can make concrete process to solve the problems and give hope to the tomorrow of Clearview.

swekimnUID：2649781

题目：ARGUMENT17 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Walnut Grove town newspaper.

"Walnut Grove's town council has advocated switching from EZ Disposal (which has had the contract for trash collection services in Walnut Grove for the past ten years) to ABC Waste, because EZ recently raised its monthly fee from $2,000 to $2,500 a month, whereas ABC's fee is still $2,000. But the town council is mistaken; we should continue using EZ. EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. Moreover, EZ-which, like ABC, currently has a fleet of 20 trucks-has ordered additional trucks. Finally, EZ provides exceptional service: 80 percent of respondents to last year's town survey agreed that they were 'satisfied' with EZ's performance."

这篇我没怎么修改的～～顶着肚子痛写的～～

Grounding on the letter to the editor Walnut Grove(WG), supposing that
WG town council take a mistake, providing the fact that WG has cooperate with EZ for ten years, and then synthesizing two benefic situation about EZ, and supply a survey , the author accordingly suggests that choose ABC is a error. However, it is fraught with vague, and expose the consistency in the letter.

Grounding on the fact that EZ Disposal collects twice a week and order 20 additional trucks, citing a survey in which 80 percent of the respondents showed satisfied with EZ’ performance last year, supposing that EZ provides better service that ABC, the author suggests the Walnut Grove town continue use EZ Disposal, though it recently raised its monthly fee. However, the argument fraught with vague, oversimplified, unwarranted assumptions and exposed some inconsistencies.



Firstly, the author fail to prove that EZ have highly quality service, he only said that EZ have a more time to collect trash, arbitrarily assuming that EZ work more diligence than ABC.
To begin with, the only evidence that EZ collect twice a week is insufficient to prove that EZ will work more diligently, since the collection services depend more on the quality of trash disposal than the times. But he ignores the collection services contain many works not only collect trash one time or several times. For example, the services should keep the company or institution which they service cleaning. The EZ have to collect twice a week which prove them fail to keep work place cleaning, so they must collect more time than ABC. Besides, the author unfairly equates that collect more times to excellent service. EZ need to collect again in a week, imply that it cannot collect clean in a time, maybe its staff very lazy or careless or inept, in some case they maybe not collect all trash in a time. What's more, the collect times could not represent they work time. Maybe EZ only use one hour to collect trash, but ABC use one day or much more time to collect it. So unless the author can provide more information about the work quality of the two services, the evidence mentioned above completely unwarranted.

Secondly, it is considerably for author to assume that EZ have ordered additional trucks influence it can promote them collect efficiency and quality. All of the trucks ordered maybe would not use in collect work. Even if they use the truck, their system maybe confuse and inability in a short time, this is no benefic their work. Even if they could keep in a normal orbit, EZ maybe can extensive their own operation, and they maybe decline care for WG, and even they keep the same care for WG, how do you know the increase trucks would make WG get advantages in a saturated state. Besides, the author only supply the information about EZ who would add trucks, but not provide the policy that ABC would adopt. In short, without more information about the ABC and EZ, it is impossible to assess whether those services have a positive impact.

Additionally, the argument mentions a survey about EZ who have 80 percent respondents agree they satisfy with the EZ performance. It is haste for author to make the conclusion that EZ has a better performance than ABC. Maybe another survey reports that ABC has 90 percent satisfaction. Since the author provide no other information about ABC, this conclusion like a half-moon, has no signification.

Finally, the argument gives us the information about the fee of two institutions. EZ has raised the fee to $2500 recently, but the ABC did not increase it. So in this case, ABC could save more money for WG, it is benefic for the company and make leaders delight.

To sum up, the author supplies a seemingly correct analysis about the letter, whereas his deduction is irrational. To buttress the conclusion, the author should provide more information that ABC statement and recently policy. Additionally, the author must rule out the two services discriminate in some aspects.

swekimnUID：2649781

26. The following appeared in a memo from the chairperson of the school board in the town of Saluda.

"For the past five years, Mr. Charles Schade has been the music director at Steel City High School, and during that time the school band from Steel City High has won three regional band competitions. In addition, the quality of the music rehearsal facilities and musical instruments at Steel City High has improved markedly over the past five years. Because of such successes at Steel City High, the Saluda school board should hire Mr. Schade to plan and direct the general music education programs for the entire Saluda school system."


Grounding on the past five years experience, citing that the Steel City High School (SC) success, and then synthesizing several hypothesizes and the author conclude hire Mr. Charles Schade(CS) would also promote Saluda school(SS). However, it is fraught with vague, oversimplified, and unwarranted assumption and exposed the inconsistency in the memo.

To begin with, the author ignores the basic discriminate between SC and SS, arbitrarily assuming that the direct by CS which exerts positive influence on CH will be inevitably favorable to SS. But the latter may have difference from CHHS on account of fundamental establishments, school history, research background, professors and students’ ability, and so on. For example, SH has lots of equipments and material in music part, so the students can use the resource to improve his ability in music. SS is very poor which cannot provide much resource about music study. Furthermore, SH maybe a music school, in this case, of cause it can win three regional band competition. What’s more, students in SC maybe work very hard in music and with professors’ benign help, with which also can make them successful. So the author fails to rule out the discriminate the both schools, rendering the conclusion of the memo considerably untenable.

Secondly, in this memo, the author only supplies the information about SC and ignores the basic situation about SS. Whether the two schools in the same city or not? What’s development status and achievements about SS? Is SS has any advantages compare with CS? If the author cannot answer the questions which mentioned, the conclusion about SS board soul hire CS is unconvincing. The author infers on the assumption that SS is very bad or behind with SC, and it is a sufficient condition for the conclusion. So at least without enough evidences to support his view about SS, it is very doubtful make this hasty result.

Additionally, even if SS is very poor in the music faction, the author ascribe CS is the only factor excusive to improve music level, the reason it is irrational. While it is possible that one or more factors would be influence to change music level. For example, the other teachers or administers maybe also play a significant role in improve music level. Term work needs every individual coherence and harmony, and in this case they would work more efficiency. Besides, in the memo, the author only provide that SC the music rehearsal facilities and musical instruments have a markedly improve in the past five years, he fails to tell us about other faction of music. Such as, vocal solo, final perform and so on.


In sum up, the author supplies a seemingly favorable proposal to change SS, whereas his deduction is not rational. To buttress his conclusion, he should provide that SS do not well in music. Additionally, the author must rule out other possible causes may influence the music quality.

swekimnUID：2649781

题目：ARGUMENT160 - As people grow older, an enzyme known as PEP increasingly breaks down the neuropeptide chemicals involved in learning and memory. But now, researchers have found compounds that prevent PEP from breaking neuropeptides apart. In tests, these compounds almost completely restored lost memory in rats. The use of these compounds should be extended to students who have poor memory and difficulty in concentrating-and therefore serious problems in school performance. Science finally has a solution for problems neither parents nor teachers could solve.
字数：514
用时：00:30:00(+30分)
日期：2009/8/21 18:32:50

Grounding on the fact that the author mentioned the first sentence, supposing that the PEP play crucial role in the memory, and then synthesizing a hypothesize about rats and another factor that memory is the main cause influence about students performance in school. However, the argument fraught with vague, oversimplified, unwarranted assumptions and exposed several inconsistencies.

To begin with, the author ignores the basic discriminate between rats and people, arbitrarily assuming that the research result have a positive effect on rats will be inevitably favorable to people. The author bases on a common sense that rats have some much similar with people, but he ignores people have lots of differences from rats on account of situations. If the author cannot provide other evidences about human will be also restoring memory by use these compounds, it is fallacy for he to posit the conclusion. What' more, the research has several inconsistencies in the research process. How about the researcher to measure rat' memories? How can they know the compounds influence to restore lost memory in rats? What's situation about the rats, their quantity, their gender, and their age? The argument short of so many evidences about rats and the author haste to conclude the rats’ memory can have a great amelioration by the compounds make it fraught with fallacious.

Secondly, the author ascribes the students’ performance in school which is determined, to some extent, by their poor memory and difficult in concentrate. At the first sentence, the author point a fact that with the grow age, an enzyme named PEP increased and break down their memory. AS all of know, the anima and cell has its own life cycle which we call it as Cradle to Grave in commonly. When we are little baby, we could not memory so many things and knowledge compare with we adolescent period. So in this era we have a good memory than any time in our life, but the author fallacious asserts we are poor memory. Even if we are in poor memory, it maybe cause by other alternatives such as nutrition, dormancy, method etc. Maybe some students not have a good life habit, which makes them very languor, lassitude, tied, faint in daytime. And the forementioned factors make the students could not concentrate in their study.

Additionally, the author is unfair to equate the school performance to their study circs. Maybe some of students do badly in their study but they performance excellent in other apart. It is also possible that they not have a good memory but they are heart to help others. What’ more, the author ever ignores other causes chemicals maybe also influence PEP or have a relative function to it. If so, then the mere fact may not the author mentioned would lend scant support to the recommendation.

To sum up, the author supplies a seemingly concrete process to the conclusion, whereas his deduction is irrational. To buttress the conclusion, the author should provide evidences that PEP actually influence the memory. Additionally, the author must rule out possible causes of the students’ school performance.

家家☆yoonjaeUID：2646910

小明加油昂~ ↖(^ω^)↗

模考时间到，家家晚上才粗现~ bless小明今天顺利^^

swekimnUID：2649781

201.The citizens of Forsythe have adopted healthier lifestyles. Their responses to a recent survey show that in their eating habits they conform more closely to government nutritional recommendations than they did ten years ago. Furthermore, there has been a fourfold increase in sales of food products containing kiran, a substance that a scientific study has shown reduces cholesterol. This trend is also evident in reduced sales of sulia, a food that few of the healthiest citizens regularly eat.

Grounding on a recent survey, providing several evidences to support his conclusion and cites food products contained liran be popular by citizens and the food contained sulia reduced, the author asserts Forsythe citizens want to a healthier lifestyle. However, the argument fraught with vague, oversimplified, unwarranted assumptions and exposed some inconsistencies.

To begin with, all of the argument evidences are concluded by a recent survey, the author reckons this can reflect the fact objectively. But he ignores the survey may not actually can represent of the local people. Does the responses is the citizens’ desire? What is the number about the survey? Does the survey is acted by unbalance gender or age? So it is impossible to assess the validity of the results. Or to call the author survey more scrupulous. Even if the survey can reflect the Forsythe citizens’ situation, it is fallacious to impose to the nation. The Forsythe maybe in a polluted environment, and the people there in a terrible situation and encounter diseases, of course, they want to have a healthier lifestyle to ameliorate them bad body. So the author needs to supply enough evidence that the Forsythe can represent the nation.

Secondly, in this argument, the author cites several examples to support his conclusion, but he ignores other alternatives will be also influence the food consume quantity. The first fallacy is that food contained kiren have a four times than that’s ten years ago. He only supplies the rate nowadays compare to ten years ago, it cannot reflect the pragmatic consume status, maybe it only sold 100 in past and now sold 400, these data cannot tell any information that kiren have a popular desire. The next false is the author cites a research about kiren, he supplies that one substance can reduce cholesterol, and he mistakes that the reduce cholesterol can make people a healthier life. In short, he ignores other substances may play a crucial role to make people more healthy and strong.


The third fallacy is that reduced sale of sulia, but occur through the argument, I find no more information about sulia, he only provides that it is few of healthiest. So I can suppose that situation compare with other healthy food, sulia not has a good sale, but it healthier than the kiren food, whether can you use the same trend to describe sulia’s. So such a healthy food could not have a good sale, the author concludes the assumption that people want a healthier lifestyle is unconvincing. What’ more, the argument also lack the other sale information about other healthy food, and he make the conclusion only base on a study, the premise it is not such sufficiency.

To sum up, the author supplies a seemingly concrete process to the conclusion, whereas his deduction is irrational. To buttress his position, he should provide more evidences about the kiren food and other healthy food. Additionally, he also must to rule out other possible causes that maybe influence the sale of food.

又搞了一小时~~~郁闷~~~