issue121 fantasy小组23日作业

cxlbread84UID: 184012

121. At various times in the geological past, many species have become extinct as a result of natural, rather than human, processes. Thus, there is no justification for society to make extraordinary efforts, especially at a great cost in money and jobs, to save endangered species."

Whether society should make extraordinary efforts to save endangered species, since they may die out naturally, is a heated debate nowadays. As far as I am concerned, it is necessary for our mankind to do that, even at the cost of so many money and jobs. I would give the reasons as follow.

To begin with, I would differentiate the extinction due to human and just nature process. If some kind animal appeared and it had many advantages compared with its competitors, those competitors may decrease and finally extinct. At the time, the function of this kind in ecosystem can be substituted by the new one, so the ecosystem can function as before. For example, when the horse appeared, other kind of herbivores also lived there. But they did not run as quickly as horses, and diminished year after year while horses increased gradually. One day this kind of herbivores finally disappeared, but horses ate grass as they did, playing the same role in food chain like them. On the contrary, some kind of animals, such as rabbits, were killed by human in a short time, so the foxes, which lived on preying rabbits, were doomed to die out because they can find enough food. Meanwhile, without these rabbits, grass would be extraordinarily rampant, which absorbed too much fecundity thus made the earth poor.

Furthermore, with humans’ influence on the animals stronger, many species become endangered faster than before. A recent report reveals that before 1900, only one species died out every three years and two species went extinct each year between 1900 and 1984, but after 1984, every month one species disappeared from this world. At this rate, by 2050 most species would die out and then our humans should be the only life in this world. It is a terrible phenomenon and no one would like to see. Therefore our humans should take some measures to save those endangered species.

In addition, the money and jobs spent on preventing endangered species are usually worthwhile. Those prevented animals can provide us their own genes, which make up the diversity of genes in this world. And they could ensure the ecosystem function normally, if the balance of ecosystem is damaged, humans should spend even more money to rectify. Take an event in India for example. Several years ago, some frogs were endangered there. Taking many views into account, the government decided to protect these frogs by propagating artificially which cost it eight million dollars. It is a great amount then. However, after that, farmers found that pests decreased because they were eaten by this kind of frogs, so they did not need to buy pesticides which cost them five million dollars totally each year. In the long run, it is wise for the India government to protect these frogs, even at the costs of eight million dollars.

As plants and animals would not survive without solar energy, our humans could not live alone without plants and animals. From this point, it is our obligatory to protect those endangered species, even at a great cost in money and jobs. Only by doing this can our offspring watch the beauty of the diversity the nature gives them.  (535字)

michel_shaoUID: 204704

一点意见

cxlbread84UID: 184012

什么啊，多谢指点啦

wqoplijinUID: 2129167

写得很顺畅，但是我有种轻微的感觉，觉得你前面几段不是很扣题。

lixdUID: 2125367

Should we, human beings, take up the responsibility for the extinction of species? If so what are the limits of our duty to save those endangered animals? The speaker made a blurred assertion on human's duty with an undefined and un-comparable term "extraordinary", which endowed the notion a mist of misleading impression of escaping due responsibility that human beings must shoulder. I firmly believe that human beings are responsible for the vast species extinction, but the responsibility should be confined and not beyond our ability.

First of all, albeit it is a fact that at various geological eras, many species have extinct as a result of natural processes rather human processes, this situation of litter human intervention in natural evolution no longer stands undoubtedly. As a consequence of industry revolution, more materials, resources, energy were consumed and being consumed.....
Secondly, it is also human beings' obligation to protect endangered animals as the only intelligent creatures in the little planet, the earth. Though we are endowed with more intelligence to survival in the atrocious and apathetic survival competition
Thirdly and practically, to save endangered animals will benefit human beings at the same time.
However, human beings have no obligation to salve all endangered species, which is not only a mission impossible but also useless and even harmful.
In sum, as an intelligent species we, human beings have the responsibility to salve some endangered animals, and meanwhile this responsibility should go so far that beyond our ability and even harm our survival and civilization.

lixdUID: 2125367

the structure of the composition.

as a practice made around 5 months ago.

kionaUID: 207479

使用word纠错！
Whether society should make extraordinary efforts to save endangered species, since they may die out naturally, is a heated debate nowadays. As far as I am concerned, it is necessary for our mankind to do that, even at the cost of so many money and jobs. I would give the reasons as follow.

To begin with, I would differentiate the extinction due to human and just nature process. If some kind animal appeared and it had many advantages compared with its competitors, those competitors may decrease and finally extinct. At the time, the function of this kind in ecosystem can be substituted by the new one,（new one can substitute the function of this kind in ecosystem对于较活泼或教具劝导性的句子，请考虑主动语态，如：The ball hit Mary） so the ecosystem can function as before. For example, when the horse appeared, other kind of herbivores also lived there. But they did not run as quickly as horses, and diminished year after year while horses increased gradually. One day this kind of herbivores finally disappeared, but horses ate grass as they did, playing the same role in food chain like them. On the contrary, some kind of animals, such as rabbits, were killed by human in a short time, so the foxes, which lived on preying rabbits, were doomed to die out because they can find enough food. Meanwhile, without these rabbits, grass would be extraordinarily rampant, which absorbed too much fecundity thus made the earth poor.

Furthermore, with humans’ influence on the animals stronger, many species become endangered faster than before. A recent report reveals that before 1900, only one species died out every three years and two species went extinct each year between 1900 and 1984, but after 1984, every month one species disappeared from this world. At this rate, by 2050 most species would die out and then our humans should be the only life in this world. It is a terrible phenomenon and no one would like to see. Therefore our humans should take some measures to save those endangered species.

In addition, the money and jobs spent on preventing endangered species are usually worthwhile. Those prevented animals can provide us their own genes, which make up the diversity of genes in this world. And they could ensure the ecosystem function normally, if the balance of ecosystem is damaged, humans should spend even more money to rectify. Take an event in India for example. Several years ago, some frogs were endangered there. Taking many views into account, the government decided to protect these frogs by propagating artificially which (artificially , which 或 artificially that如果所标词组是句子的基本成分，可用“that”来引导该词组，不使用逗号！如果这些单词不影响句义，用“which”，并用逗号隔开，例如：错误例句.did you learn the dance, that is from Guatemala?正确例句.did you learn the dance that from Guatemala?或者did you learn the dance, which is from Guatemala?) cost it eight million dollars. It is a great amount then. However, after that, farmers found that pests decreased because they were eaten by this kind of frogs, so they did not need to buy pesticides which (同上) cost them five million dollars totally each year. In the long run, it is wise for the India government to protect these frogs, even at the costs of eight million dollars.

As plants and animals would not survive without solar energy, our humans could not live alone without plants and animals. From this point, it is our obligatory to protect those endangered species, even at a great cost in money and jobs. Only by doing this can our offspring watch the beauty of the diversity the nature gives them.  (535字)

meteor18_leeUID: 189655

段内逻辑很好，
可是段与段之间～～
这样我读下来并没有摸清全文的主旨，
再想了一下，明白了，那么第二段显得weak了，第一段过于详细了，因为自然原因和人为原因是有常识的人都可以分辨的啊，你可以重点放在举例说人的原因造成了远比自然原因更大的灭绝，使得你的论点：该投入力量保护，更有力啊。

不好意思，每次都来晚了，555

我的issue121
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=325424

西湖龙井UID: 2104345

回去看看，明天写意见

batterflyUID: 196681

[ Last edited by batterfly on 2005-8-24 at 19:12 ]

foreveraUID: 202035

Whether society should make extraordinary efforts to save endangered species, since they may die out naturally, is a heated debate nowadays. As far as I am concerned, it is necessary for our mankind to do that, even at the cost of so many money and jobs. I would give the reasons as follow.

To begin with, I would differentiate the extinction due to human and just nature process. If some kind animal appeared and it had many advantages compared with its competitors, those competitors may decrease and finally extinct. At the time, the function of this kind in ecosystem can be substituted by the new one, so the ecosystem can function as before. For example, when the horse appeared, other kind of herbivores also lived there. But they did not run as quickly as horses, and diminished year after year while horses increased gradually. One day this kind of herbivores finally disappeared, but horses ate grass as they did, playing the same role in food chain like them. On the contrary, 这个例子代表性太不好了。。。人类直接影响物种生存的例子很多的啊some kind of animals, such as rabbits, were killed by human in a short time, so the foxes, which lived on preying rabbits, were doomed to die out because they can find enough food. Meanwhile, without these rabbits, grass would be extraordinarily rampant, which absorbed too much fecundity thus made the earth poor.

Furthermore, with humans’ influence on the animals stronger句式有点乱, many species become endangered faster than before. A recent report reveals that before 1900, only one species died out every three years and two species went extinct each year between 1900 and 1984, but after 1984, every month one species disappeared from this world. At this rate, by 2050 most species would die out and then our humans should be the only life in this world. It is a terrible phenomenon and no one would like to see. Therefore our humans should take some measures to save those endangered species.

In addition, the money and jobs spent on preventing endangered species are usually worthwhile. Those prevented animals can provide us their own genes, which make up the diversity of genes in this world. And they could ensure the ecosystem function normally, if the balance of ecosystem is damaged, humans should spend even more money to rectify. Take an event in India for example. Several years ago, some frogs were endangered there. Taking many views into account, the government decided to protect these frogs by propagating artificially which cost it eight million dollars. It is a great amount then. However, after that, farmers found that pests decreased because they were eaten by this kind of frogs, so they did not need to buy pesticides which cost them five million dollars totally each year. In the long run, it is wise for the India government to protect these frogs, even at the costs of eight million dollars.

As plants and animals would not survive without solar energy, our humans could not live alone without plants and animals. From this point, it is our obligatory to protect those endangered species, even at a great cost in money and jobs. Only by doing this can our offspring watch the beauty of the diversity the nature gives them.

总体很不错，条理很清晰。。美中不足BODY的第一段，只说了怎么区分2中灭绝的方式。。而没有和人类的责任联系起来。其他的基本赞同meteor MM的观点
有空看看我的issue10
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=325483

[ Last edited by forevera on 2005-8-24 at 10:53 ]

batterflyUID: 196681

Whether society should make extraordinary efforts to save endangered species, since they may die out naturally, is a heated debate nowadays. As far as I am concerned, it is necessary for our mankind to do that, even at the cost of so many money and jobs. I would give the reasons as follow.开头不错，直接了当

To begin with, I would differentiate the extinction due to human and just nature process. If some kind animal (some kinds of animals) appeared and it had many advantages compared with its competitors, those competitors (改为which) may decrease and finally extinct. At the time, the function of this kind in ecosystem can be substituted by the new one, so the ecosystem can function as before. For example, when the horse appeared, other kind of herbivores also lived there. But they did not run as quickly as horses, and diminished year after year while horses increased gradually. One day this kind of herbivores finally disappeared, but horses ate grass as they did, playing the same role in food chain like them. On the contrary, some kinds of animals, such as rabbits, were killed by human in a short time, so the foxes, which lived on preying rabbits, were doomed to die out because they cannot find enough food. Meanwhile, without these rabbits, grass would be extraordinarily rampant, which absorbed too much fecundity thus made the earth poor.举例完了最好阐述一下，和第一个论据呼应一下比较好。总的来说觉得这段例子有点长，因为觉得毕竟这一段是一个引子，重点还是应该分析人类该不该拯救濒临灭绝的动物。

Furthermore, with humans’ influence on the animals stronger, many species become endangered faster than before. A recent report reveals that before 1900, only one species died out every three years and two species went extinct each year between 1900 and 1984, but after 1984, every month one species disappeared from this world. At this rate, by 2050 most species would die out and then our humans should be the only life in this world. It is a terrible phenomenon and no one would like to see. Therefore our humans should take some measures to save those endangered species.既然第一段是是引子，这一段开始不应该和第一段是平行或者递进的作用啊。而且我觉得这一段和第一段合并比较好，因为第一段是比较，最后最好得出一个结论到底动物的灭绝时谁造成的，从楼主的观点，应该同时主要是人类的原因导致动物灭绝。这个铺垫做好了，从下面就可以分析人类却是是应该为动物灭绝承担责任的。

In addition, the money and jobs spent on preventing endangered species are usually worthwhile. Those prevented animals can provide us their own genes, which make up the diversity of genes in this world. And they could ensure the ecosystem function normally, （。）if the balance of ecosystem is damaged（平衡一般是被打破，我的词汇也不好，用个breaked吧：））, humans should（will） spend even more money to rectify. Take an event in India for example. Several years ago, some frogs were endangered there. Taking many views into account, the government decided to protect these frogs by propagating artificially which cost it eight million dollars. It is a great amount then. However, after that, farmers found that pests decreased because they were eaten by this kind of frogs, so they did not need to buy pesticides which cost them five million dollars totally each year. In the long run, it is wise for the India government to protect these frogs, even at the costs of eight million dollars.这段用于阐述保护将灭绝动物的必要性还不错

As plants and animals would not survive without solar energy, our humans could not live alone without plants and animals. From this point, it is our obligatory to protect those endangered species, even at a great cost in money and jobs. Only by doing this can our offspring watch the beauty of the diversity the nature gives them.
总的来说结构不是很好，逻辑有点混乱。题目的重点部分阐述不够，把重点放在了说明人类对动物灭绝造成的重大影响。我觉得这可以作为楼主的分析的前提，重点还是要说动物灭绝对人类的不利，毕竟如果一件事情就算是人类造成的，但是对人类自己并并没有什么损坏，确实也没有必要去拯救。呵呵，不晓得我说清楚了没有哦：）:)
至于遣词造句实在使我的弱项啊~~~~~提不出很多意见，见谅:L
个人意见仅供参考。
好了，完成任务，偶去实验室了：）[/color]