argu47 [Smile－B组]第五次作业

vitaminxixiUID: 2159890

Scientists studying historical weather patterns have discovered that in the mid-sixth century, Earth suddenly became significantly cooler. Although few historical records survive from that time, some accounts found both in Asia and Europe mention a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperatures. Either a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding with Earth could have created a large dust cloud throughout Earth's atmosphere that would have been capable of blocking enough sunlight to lower global temperatures significantly. A large meteorite collision, however, would probably create a sudden bright flash of light, and no extant historical records of the time mention such a flash. Some surviving Asian historical records of the time, however, mention a loud boom that would be consistent with a volcanic eruption. Therefore, the cooling was probably caused by a volcanic eruption.

简要翻译：
突然的降温可能是由火山喷发引起的。因为在的火山喷发或是陨石撞地球都有可能导致全球气温明显下降，但陨石撞击可能会产生瞬间的白闪光，但是没有现存的历史记录提到了当时有这样的闪光，而一些现存的亚洲历史记录担到了巨响，那有可能是伴随一次火山喷发


1. 那个时期地球是否真的变冷
2。即使变冷，除了提到的两个可能是否还有其他可能？
3。仅存的数据能说明非陨石是火山吗？

    In this argument, the author claim that it was a volcanic eruption that give rise to the cooling in the mid-sixth century. However the analysis based on the mere record has some critical fallacies, then the credibility of author's conclusion is under doubt.
    Firstly, a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperature recorded in Asia and Europe's accounts couldn't convincingly support the unexpected cooling. All the records hesitated from our ancestors may conclude some uncertain factors. Keeping their shallow knowledge in mind, the descendant should make further embedded research to ensure a  creditable evidence. Then we find that the word 'extremely' is so vague to decide the actual situation in that time, for the temperature can't be accurately depicted by human's feeling, especially when differences between contemporary and ancestor may induce completely definition of this word. After all, it is unimaginable for our ancestor to feel comfortable when the temperature declined below zero wearing one piece of fur. Given that the accounts accurately described the climate in that time, we still hold our opinion whether the few accounts found only in Asia and Europe could represent the whole world's lower temperature. Perhaps the dimming sun and extremely lower temperature may be merely the forecast of a storm in winter happened in the two place while other place sunshine. Lacking more special information in that time, a global cooling is only a unbelievable assumption, and the further reasoning of the arguer seems senseless.
    Secondly, given that in the mid-sixth century earth suddenly became significantly cooler, the arguer induces us an either-or relation of the question by ignoring some alternative factors bring on the phenomena in that time. Temperature might be changed by seism, tsunami or other geological movement. According to the records provided in this argument, a loud boom could be consistent with a strong diastrophism happened in short time. Then the great change of earth crust exerted powerful effect on atmosphere, and finally gave rise to cooling temperature. Admittedly, sunlight is an important power source that temperature in earth is a faction of it. Nevertheless, how much power the earth release could also play a significant role. Just as the global warm now, it is caused by the reflection of released power of earth by carbon dioxide in atmosphere.
    Finally, we still couldn’t draw the conclusion the lower global temperature was caused by a volcanic eruption, even if we only have two choices between volcano and meteorite collision.  The author mentioned that a large meteorite collision would probably create a sudden bright flash of light, but no survival records don't equal to no records about the phenomena. Maybe some crucial accounts are still covered deep and need the archeologists unearth; maybe the important records have weathering during the long period of history. We also should take the possibility that the ancestors didn't have implement to record just when the bright flash of light occur. Unfortunately they forgot to leave some clue about what they had seen.
    In sum, we have no right to censure the ancestors considering the hard condition in that time, but to draw scientific conclusion the author should gather more relative records about the circumstance about the whole globe and take other possibility such as seism into account. Further research is needed to identify what cause the loud boom.

[ 本帖最后由 vitaminxixi 于 2006-7-31 15:21 编辑 ]

zhy5186612UID: 2167373

argu47 [Smile－B组]第五次作业

Scientists studying historical weather patterns have discovered that in the mid-sixth century, Earth suddenly became significantly cooler. Although few historical records survive from that time, some accounts found both in Asia and Europe mention a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperatures. Either a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding with Earth could have created a large dust cloud throughout Earth's atmosphere that would have been capable of blocking enough sunlight to lower global temperatures significantly. A large meteorite collision, however, would probably create a sudden bright flash of light, and no extant historical records of the time mention such a flash. Some surviving Asian historical records of the time, however, mention a loud boom that would be consistent with a volcanic eruption. Therefore, the cooling was probably caused by a volcanic eruption.

简要翻译：
突然的降温可能是由火山喷发引起的。因为在的火山喷发或是陨石撞地球都有可能导致全球气温明显下降，但陨石撞击可能会产生瞬间的白闪光，但是没有现存的历史记录提到了当时有这样的闪光，而一些现存的亚洲历史记录担到了巨响，那有可能是伴随一次火山喷发


1. 那个时期地球是否真的变冷
2。即使变冷，除了提到的两个可能是否还有其他可能？
3。仅存的数据能说明非陨石是火山吗？

    In this argument, the author claim that it was a volcanic eruption that give rise to the cooling in the mid-sixth century. However the analysis based on the mere record has some critical fallacies, then the credibility of author's conclusion is under doubt.
   
Firstly, a dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperature recorded in Asia and Europe's accounts couldn't convincingly support the unexpected cooling. All the records hesitated from our ancestors may conclude some uncertain factors. Keeping their shallow [确信可以这样用？] knowledge in mind, the descendant should make further embedded research to ensure a  creditable evidence. Then we find that the word 'extremely' is so vague to decide the actual situation in that time, for the temperature can't be accurately depicted by human's feeling, especially when differences between contemporary and ancestor may induce completely definition of this word. After all, it is unimaginable for our ancestor to feel comfortable when the temperature declined below zero wearing one piece of fur. Given that the accounts accurately described the climate in that time, we still hold our opinion whether the few accounts found only in Asia and Europe could represent the whole world's lower temperature. Perhaps the dimming sun and extremely lower temperature may be merely the forecast of a storm in winter happened in the two place while other place sunshine. Lacking more special information in that time, a global cooling is only a unbelievable assumption, and the further reasoning of the arguer seems senseless [meaningless].
   
Secondly, given that in the mid-sixth century earth suddenly became significantly cooler, the arguer induces us an either-or relation of the question by ignoring some alternative factors bring on the phenomena in that time. Temperature might be changed by seism, tsunami or other geological movement. According to the records provided in this argument, a loud boom could be consistent with a strong diastrophism happened in short time. Then the great change of earth crust exerted powerful effect on atmosphere, and finally gave rise to cooling temperature [这点不是太让人信服]. Admittedly, sunlight is an important power source that temperature in earth is a faction of it. Nevertheless, how much power the earth release could also play a significant role. Just as the global warm now, it is caused by the reflection of released power of earth by carbon dioxide in atmosphere.这段最好再有个小结说等等削弱balabala----   

Finally, we still couldn’t draw the conclusion the lower global temperature was caused by a volcanic eruption, even if we only have two choices between volcano and meteorite collision.  The author mentioned that a large meteorite collision would probably create a sudden bright flash of light, but no survival records don't equal to no records about the phenomena. Maybe some crucial accounts are still covered deep and need the archeologists unearth; maybe the important records have weathering during the long period of history. We also should take the possibility that the ancestors didn't have implement to record just when the bright flash of light occur [有点过了]. Unfortunately they forgot to leave some clue about what they had seen.
   
In sum, we have no right to censure the ancestors considering the hard condition in that time, but to draw scientific conclusion the author should gather more relative records about the circumstance about the whole globe and take other possibility such as seism into account. Further research is needed to identify what cause the loud boom.最后有点乱

总体评介（个人意见哈）
1 词句用的太丰富了，有些单词我都不认识，文中标出的是我感觉有问题 或是没有看懂的地方
2 就这片A我个人看法如下
1）首先，那个16-mid 变冷是事实，后面的acounts只是佐证而不是充要证据；作者的隐含前提‘dimming of the sun导致地球变冷’正是基于其中的一个佐证；再后面的Either a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding with Earth 是揭示什么导致‘dimming of the sun‘的
2）所以逻辑线为：
Either a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding with Earth -----〉dimming of the sun-----〉significantly cooler
因此攻击顺序为 a dimming of the sun导致地球变冷’ 是无效假设
                      b Either a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding with Earth-----〉dimming of the sun是无效假设
                      c boom 和 flash 推出火山有问题

vitaminxixiUID: 2159890

a dimming of the sun导致地球变冷’ 是无效假设
                      b Either a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding with Earth-----〉dimming of the sun是无效假设
                      c boom 和 flash 推出火山有问题


第一个我没考虑到真是最大的弊病
不过我觉得地球那时是否真的变冷也应该考虑的
因为如果作者单纯当作已知的话，就不会说仅有哪两个地方有变冷的纪录，而直接说当时地球变冷

不过我不确定
我再看看前人的贴
有结果了我贴过来