Argument131【0906G ANap Hand 作文互改小组】第二次作业 by vicky

wwwxwwwxUID: 2186411

131The following appeared in an environmental newsletter published in Tria Island.

错误，狠拍！！

The newsletter concludes that in order to adopt those regulations that ban dumping, offshore oil drilling, and fishing with 10 miles of Tria is the best way to restore Tria’s fish population and protect all of Tria’s marine wildlife. To support that conclusion the newsletter’s author argues that Tria adopt the regulations that ban dumping, offshore oil drilling within 20 miles, but fishing is not banned. The fish population of that area was declining. However, the marine sanctuary on Omni island where has the regulations that not only ban dumping and offshore oil drilling but also fishing within 10 miles, reports no significant decline in its fish populations. I find this conclusion unconvincing in several ways.

First, the result that decline of fish is not due to pollution is a fallacy. It lacks practical researches on the effects on fish in these waters and the author does not give any evidence to prove that how pollutions fail to decrease fish population on Tria Island. Moreover, it is entirely possible caused by migrations of fish or other factors. If so, only ban fishing, dumping and oil drilling is not functional for fish population restore.

Second, the author makes an assumption that the situation on Tria and Omni are the same, however, in fact, it is entirely possible that the situation of sanctuary on Omni Island and on Tria Island are totally different. So the assumption is false and the newsletter’s author also false to analogy Triad and Omni since the two island be distinctively varied in geographic characters, waters quality, population dispersion, climate change so that they are not necessarily comparable in environmental policy making.

Finally, the regulations which adopt on Tria Island ban Tria’s waters within 20 miles that has the restrictions, not the whole waters. The causes of fish population declining may come from the waters which are out of these 20 miles of Triad. For example, maybe the water area which nearby Tria and do not belongs to the 20 miles just be polluted, so the dirty water influences the quality of Tria’s water. And also, since the water is polluted, the population of fish must decrease.

In sum, the argument is logically flawed and therefore unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it the writer must give strong practical research of the effect of pollution influence on fish population; and introduce the situation of Tria’s water and Omni’s water; solute the problem that how to promote people to protect the whole waters.




[ 本帖最后由 wwwxwwwx 于 2009-1-1 01:13 编辑 ]