argument59 同主题写作~欢迎互拍

didocatUID: 2156998

59The following appeared in an article in the health section of a newspaper.

"According to the available medical records, the six worst worldwide flu epidemics during the past 300 years occurred in 1729, 1830, 1918, 1957, 1968, and 1977. These were all years with heavy sunspot activity—that is, years when the Earth received significantly more solar energy than in normal years. People at particular risk for the flu should therefore avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
提纲：1，仅凭6次情况不能武断的认为黑子运动导致流感。
            2，医学纪录太模糊，不能有效支持结论。
            3，可能有其他原因导致流感。
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This argument, in general, includes three aspects that we have good reasons to question.
First, the argument fails to establish a casual relationship between the sunspot activity and worldwide flu epidemics. In addition, the argument relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, which render it unconvincing. The arguer also does not consider and rule out other possible explanations. All these flaws make it unpersuasive as it stands and I will discuss each of them in turn.

To begin with, the author unfairly assumes that the heavy sunspot activity is responsible for these worldwide flu epidemics. However, this is not necessarily the case. While it is true that six worst worldwide flu epidemics broke out in 1729, 1830, 1918, 1957, 1968 and 1977 when heavy sunspot activities happened, the author provides no evidence that heavy sunspot activities occurred only in these six years. It is entirely possible that heavy sunspot activities appeared in other certain years when there was no flu epidemic at all. Again, it is also possible that human beings suffered from worldwide flu epidemics when there was no sunspot activity. In either event, the author could not justifiably rely on the mere fact that flu epidemics was coincident with sunspot activities to assume that the heavy sunspot activity gives rise to worldwide flu epidemics.

Furthermore, granted that the heavy sunspot activity can lead to worldwide flu epidemics, the author unfairly assumes that the heavy sunspot activity is the only factor that can exert influence on the result. The medical records presented here are too vague to be informative. Nothing is mentioned about where these six horrible worldwide flu epidemics occurred and what about the weather conditions and life quality there. Perhaps the environmental condition is the main factor that contributes to the result. And it is equally possible that the occurrence of flu epidemics largely depends on the life quality-that is, how well people lead their life and how well the medical conditions are. Lacking such specific information, the medical records accomplish nothing to the assumption that worldwide flu epidemics solely resulted from the sunspot activity.

Last but not least, the author also fails to take into account other possible alternatives which may bring on the happening of flu epidemics. For instance, were there any sudden changes on weather circumstance that may affect people's health and thus lead to flu? Were there any severe pollution events that may result in people debilitated by certain related virus? Were there any wars in which bacterium or virus were used as a weapon for victory and then brought about flu? Any of these scenarios, if true, would cast considerable doubt on the author's suggestion that people should avoid prolonged exposure to the sun.

In summary, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make it more convincing, the author should provide more detailed information concerning the medical records, such as where these flu epidemics happened and what about people's life there. The more concrete evidence provided, the more reliable it is.

[ 本帖最后由 didocat 于 2006-2-4 17:44 编辑 ]

didocatUID: 2156998

自己顶下~

dinddind2003UID: 196353

路过，但是提个意见，开头不用复述论点，我亲眼见到不复述的人作文最后是6分

考试时可没时间给你复述题目。你反驳的越彻底越好

didocatUID: 2156998

嗯~谢拉
不过我开头没有复述论点~呵呵 可能你没看清楚吧
你也加油！

didocatUID: 2156998

欢迎大家互拍~留下链接即可！

yogurt4UID: 198389

哈,我还没有看到你的这篇
先给别人改,留下自己的连接
主动的孩子有糖吃哦;)

yogurt4UID: 198389

我太困了,明天帮你看的说

yogurt4UID: 198389

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... e%3D1#pid1768045804

26楼.

开头和摸版问题,看在这几个帖子:
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=134092
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=175162
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=199905

yogurt4UID: 198389

下次记得把自己作文连接在别人帖子里
我说奇怪怎么没人回拍呢
你自己不留个地址,人家当你客套也是有可能的

Echo_1900UID: 2180165

谢谢你对我文章的修改，你的我尽快帮你改好！

didocatUID: 2156998

谢谢酸奶这么忙还记得我的作文~
也谢谢echo~ 加油加油

Echo_1900UID: 2180165

感谢你上次对我文章的批改，不过你没给我留下链接，刚刚版主提醒了我。
这两天有些事，不过你的我尽快给你改好。

Echo_1900UID: 2180165

59The following appeared in an article in the health section of a newspaper.

"According to the available medical records, the six worst worldwide flu epidemics during the past 300 years occurred in 1729, 1830, 1918, 1957, 1968, and 1977. These were all years with heavy sunspot activity—that is, years when the Earth received significantly more solar energy than in normal years. People at particular risk for the flu should therefore avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun."
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
提纲：1，仅凭6次情况不能武断的认为黑子运动导致流感。
            2，医学纪录太模糊，不能有效支持结论。
            3，可能有其他原因导致流感。
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This argument, in general, includes three aspects that we have good reasons to question.
First, the argument fails to establish a casual relationship between the sunspot activity and worldwide flu epidemics. In addition, the argument relies on a series of unsubstantiated assumptions, which render it unconvincing. The arguer also does not consider and rule out other possible explanations. All these flaws make it unpersuasive as it stands and I will discuss each of them in turn.第一段写的可以

To begin with, the author unfairly assumes that the heavy sunspot activity is responsible for these worldwide flu epidemics. However, this is not necessarily the case. While it is true that six worst worldwide flu epidemics broke out in 1729, 1830, 1918, 1957, 1968 and 1977 when heavy sunspot activities happened, the author provides no evidence that heavy sunspot activities occurred only in these six years. It is entirely possible that heavy sunspot activities appeared in other certain years when there was no flu epidemic at all. Again, it is also possible that human beings suffered from worldwide flu epidemics when there was no sunspot activity. In either event, the author could not justifiably rely on the mere fact that flu epidemics was （were）coincident with sunspot activities to assume that the heavy sunspot activity gives rise to worldwide flu epidemics.

Furthermore, granted that the heavy sunspot activity can lead to worldwide flu epidemics, the author unfairly assumes that the heavy sunspot activity is the only factor that can exert influence on the result. The medical records presented here are too vague to be informative. (这句放在这里也挺恰当，不过个人觉得每段首句最好摆出致命病症，不妨把这句的位置做作调换，你觉得呢？) Nothing is mentioned about where these six horrible worldwide flu epidemics occurred and what about the weather conditions and life（living） quality there. Perhaps the environmental condition is the main factor that contributes to the result. And it is equally possible that the occurrence of flu epidemics largely depends on the life quality-that is, how well people lead their life and how well the medical conditions are. Lacking such specific information, the medical records accomplish nothing to the assumption that worldwide flu epidemics solely resulted from the sunspot activity.

Last but not least, the author also fails to take into account other possible alternatives which may bring on the happening of flu epidemics. For instance, were there any sudden changes on weather circumstance that may affect people's health and thus lead(leading) to flu? Were there any severe pollution events that may result in people debilitated by certain related virus? Were there any wars in which bacterium or virus were used as a weapon for victory and then brought about flu? Any of these scenarios, if true, would cast considerable doubt on the author's suggestion that people should avoid prolonged exposure to the sun.

In summary, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make it more convincing, the author should provide more detailed information concerning the medical records, such as where these flu epidemics happened and what about people's life there. The more concrete evidence provided, the more reliable it is.

认真看完了你的文章，觉得总体不错，用词和用句都较为得体，结构也不错。除了几处笔误还需要再注意一下。