=七月流火=小组第1次小组作业Argument112 by kiki

KiKi~淇水滺滺UID: 2679824

The arguer suggests that the Franklin City Council should admit the proposal because it would help to reduce the flight delays of Franklin Airport and ensure the bay's environment being improved. However, this plan might not be an effective and feasible one for the following reasons.


First, increasing capacity may not result in the decrease in delays. The arguer fails to informs us the reason why there are so many delays occurring in Franklin Airport. It is possible that most of the delays are caused by the incompetence of the employees of the airport. Perhaps, they often give inappropriate instructions when several airplanes are going to land at approximately the same time. Then airplanes land at the wrong time or in the wrong position, leaving the airport in chaos, cumbering the landing of posterior airplanes and causing the delays. And the statement says that this airport is near port, the weather must be changefully. Then the planes may be influenced by weather. If these are true, increasing airport capacity will contribute little to reducing delays and will just be a waste of money. Therefore, before suggesting the Council to approve the plan, the arguer should have to prove that most of the delays occur due to lack of airport capacity.

Second, recovering the damaged wetland may not be able to counteract the environmental disruption resulting from the bay-filling. The statement, that the wetlands restoration part of the plan will help to improve the environment problem, lacks concrete statistic as its evidence. As is cited in the argument, filling in the bay will disrupt tidal patterns and harm wildlife, which means a threat to the biological diversification and some species may even extinct in the bay. So it is rather doubtful whether just restoring the wetlands can counteract this harmful effect. To better convince the City Council, it is wise for the arguer to provide precise and reliable data to consolidate that this plan will do more good than harm to local environment.

Last but not least, even if the plan can solve the problem of Franklin Airport's delays and at the same time help the environment rather than hurt, the financial situation of Franklin Airport may impede this plan from being carried out. On the one hand, filling 900 acres of the bay and funding the restoration of 1,000 acres of previously damaged wetlands requires a large sum of money. On the other hand, as Franklin Airport is notorious for its flight delays, people in Franklin City may get annoyed and may not travel by airplane very often. In that case, the airport may not be making too much money. So, we have every reason to doubt whether Franklin Airport possesses enough money for such a huge project. Unless the arguer can demonstrate that Franklin Airport can afford such a large sum of money or Franklin Airport will be loaned by banks, he/she cannot convince the Council that such plan can really be carried out.

To conclude, the argument is not very convincing. In order to gain the support of the City Council, the arguer would have to collect more information and consider all-sided about this proposal.

lghscuUID: 2552043

1# KiKi~淇水滺滺

112.The following proposal was raised at a meeting of the Franklin City Council.
     "Franklin Airport, which is on a bay, is notorious for flight delays. The airport management wants to build new runways to increase capacity but can only do so by filling in 900 acres of the bay. The Bay Coalition organization objects that filling in the bay will disrupt tidal patterns and harm wildlife. But the airport says that if it is permitted to build its new runways, it will fund the restoration of 1,000 acres of wetlands in areas of the bay that have previously been damaged by industrialization. This plan should be adopted, for it is necessary to reduce the flight delays, and the wetlands restoration part of the plan ensures that the bay's environment will actually be helped rather than hurt."
      位于海湾的Franklin机场因其航班的晚点而臭名昭著。机场管理者想建一些新跑道来增加机场容量，但这只能通过填埋900亩海湾来实现。Bay Coalition组织反对说填埋将会扰乱潮汐规律并对生物造成破坏。但机场方面声称如果修建新跑道的计划被批准，他们将会出资重整海湾以前因工业化而被破坏的地区的湿地。这一计划应该被采纳，因为减少航班误点是必须的，而且计划中重整湿地的部分将会保证海湾的环境将会得到改善而不是被破坏。

Franklin Airport,flight delays
论断：建议应该被接纳
论据：1需要减少航班延误；
2被毁湿地的修复也能保证港口的环境实上是受到了帮助而不是伤害。
F机场航班延误厉害，机场管理者想建一个新跑道提高容量，但这么做必须用上港口900亩地。政府部门反对，因为这样会打乱潮水的水纹而且对野生动植物有害。不过机场方面说如果这个作法被批准，他们会出资帮助恢复港上被以前工业破坏的湿地。
       1 前提：新建跑道会减少航班延误。
但没有资料证明F机场的延误是因为容量不够，考虑到它在港口上，会比其他机场更经常受到天气的影响，另外机场的管理是否科学也都会导致延误。这些都使是加跑道不一定能解决延误。
       2 前提：修复湿地对环境带来的改善能够抵消丧失土地对野生动植物的害处。
论者没有把这两者进行比较，我们无法从简单的900对1000来判断。但有一点是肯定的，就是新建跑道将使我们继续丧失自然状态下的土地，会使得很多野生动物失去栖之地，我们是在继续破坏。而虽然湿地也同样重要，修复后的湿地是否能解决野生动植物的问题，而且光有资金是不足以解决湿地的破坏问题，不排除目前的湿地已无法彻底挽救。有了这样的教训，我们为什么还要继续破坏呢。
       3 影响潮水水纹是否会对港口带来灾难性的后果。论者没有证明新建跑道就能解决延误问题，同时也无法让我们相信新建跑道为什么能给我们的环境带来好处。考虑到湿地环境破坏已经给我们带来了严重后果，似乎继续破坏自然环境是非常不明智的。

4 补充攻击点：航空公司以盈利为主，填湾建跑道、修复湿地会增加巨额成本，而且该公司notorious，那么采取这些措施后，是否会盈利是一个未知数


1 kiki
第一段：总结作者论点，提出作者论据，并怀疑其存在的问题。
第二段：增加容量可能并不会减少延误：机场工作人员存在问题(employees’ incompetence at the airport)、机场气候变化多端(the weather is changeful)
第三段：修复湿地(recovering the wetland)不能抵消(counteract)填湾造道带来的环境破坏。
第四段：即使前两条成立，但机场是否拥有雄厚资金(a large amount of money)进行如此巨大的工程，是否能够盈利(be able to make money)（让步式攻击）
第五段：简单总结
句子收获：The arguer suggests that 论点 because 论据. However, this argument may not be an effective and feasible one for the following reasons.
The author fails to inform us the reason why there are so many delays occuring in Franklin Airport.
A contributes little to B.
To better convince the City Council, it is wise for the arguer to provide precise and reliable data to consolidate that this plan will do more good than harm to local environment.
we have every reason to doubt whether Franklin Airport possesses enough money for such a huge project(or not). Unless the arguer can demonstrate that …, he/she cannot convince…
Last but not least,
To conclude, the argument is not very convincing. In order to gain the support of the City Council, the arguer would have to collect more information and consider all-sided(all sides) about this proposal.

The arguer suggests that the Franklin City Council should admit the proposal because it would help to reduce the flight delays of Franklin Airport and ensure the bay's environment being improved. However, this plan might not be an effective and feasible one for the following reasons.


First, increasing capacity may not result in the decrease in delays. The arguer fails to informs(inform) us the reason why there are so many delays occurring in Franklin Airport. It is possible that most of the delays are caused by the incompetence of the employees of the airport. Perhaps, they often give inappropriate instructions when several airplanes are going to land at approximately the same time. Then airplanes land at the wrong time or in the wrong position, leaving the airport in chaos, cumbering the landing of posterior airplanes and causing the delays. And the statement says that this airport is near port(on a bay，”bay”并不一定是”port”), the weather must be changefully(changeful). Then the planes may be influenced by weather. If these are true, increasing airport capacity will contribute little to reducing delays and will just be a waste of money. Therefore, before suggesting the Council to approve the plan, the arguer should have to(“should have to”àhas to) prove that most of the delays occur due to lack of airport capacity.

Second, recovering the damaged wetland may not be able to counteract the environmental disruption resulting from the bay-filling. The statement, that the wetlands restoration part of the plan will help to improve the environment problem, lacks concrete statistic as its evidence. As is cited in the argument, filling in the bay will disrupt tidal patterns and harm wildlife, which means a threat to the biological diversification(生物多样性一般用”diversity”，而是”diversification”) and some species may even extinct in the bay. So it is rather doubtful whether just restoring the wetlands can counteract this harmful effect. To better convince the City Council, it is wise for the arguer to provide precise and reliable data to consolidate that this plan will do more good than harm to local environment.

Last but not least, even if the plan can solve the problem of Franklin Airport's delays and at the same time help the environment rather than hurt, the financial situation of Franklin Airport may impede this plan from being carried out. On the one hand, filling 900 acres of the bay and funding the restoration of 1,000 acres of previously damaged wetlands requires(require) a large sum of money. On the other hand, as Franklin Airport is notorious for its flight delays, people in Franklin City may get annoyed and may not travel by airplane very often. In that case, the airport may not be making(be able to make) too much money. So, we have every reason to doubt whether Franklin Airport possesses enough money for such a huge project(or not). Unless the arguer can demonstrate that Franklin Airport can afford such a large sum of money or Franklin Airport will be loaned by banks, he/she cannot convince the Council that such plan can really be carried out.

To conclude, the argument is not very convincing. In order to gain the support of the City Council, the arguer would have to collect more information and consider all-sided(all sides) about this proposal.

______________________________________
kiki太厉害了！
表达方式多样，观点新颖（第三轮攻击中的money问题）
膜拜一个！学习一个！