Argument59 同主题写作，欢迎拍砖

nknobackUID: 2175779

TOPIC: ARGUMENT 59 - The 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."
WORDS: 428          TIME: 0:30:00          DATE: 2006-2-6

The author recommends that , in the consideration of preventing those who at particular risk for the flu falling ill, people should avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun. After careful scrutiny of the evidence cited by the author, we may find several logical flaws in the recommendation.

To begin with, the author cited a medical records show that the six worst worldwide flu epidemics during the past 300 years were coordinated with heavy sunspot activity, which the Earth received significantly more solar energy than other years. However, because the conclusion is based on the available records and the unclear evidence of the "worst worldwide flu epidemics", we cannot evaluate the relationshiop between the flu epidemics and the heavy sunspot activity. It is likely that other medical records recorded more worst worldwide flue epidemics which show that there are no coordinate with the heavy sunspot activity. And it is also possible that a little alter of the definition of the "worst" would lead to a totally opposite answer. Therefore, lacking of the overall medical records concerning the happens of worst flu epidemics, we cannot accept the causal relation between  epidemics and heavy sunspot activity.

Secondly, even assuming that there exist a causal relation between the epidemics and sunspot activities, the author does not provide solid evidence that it is the exposure to the Sun that would cause flu to spread and suffer people's health. As we know, there exist many factors which would help flu to spread. For example, the function of spread of the multiplied population of the insects which taking the virus, such as flys and so on. Consequently, without ruling out other possibilities, the author recommendation is unwarranted.

Thirdly, even assuming that the prolonged exposure to the Sun is the root reason that makes people suffer from the flu. There may other methods to reduce the risk for the flu for those people who have to work in the Sun. For example, taking medicine and nitrience which may improve the body's resistance. As a consequence, without evaluate other methods, we cannot accept the author's recommendation.

To sum up, the author's recommendation is not persuasive, because it is lack of logical supports. To strengthen the recommendation, the author need to provide the overall medical records and make a clear definition of the "worst worldwide flu epidemics", we cannot evaluation the relationship between the worldwide flue epidemics and the heavy sunsport activity. Moreover, without ruling out other possibilities which caused the flu to spread and other methods to reduce the risk for flue, we cannot accept the recommendation.

leedgenUID: 160823

The author recommends that , in the consideration of preventing those who at particular risk for the flu falling ill, people should avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun. After careful scrutiny of the evidence cited by the author, we may find several logical flaws in the recommendation.

To begin with, the author cited a medical records show that the six worst worldwide flu epidemics during the past 300 years were coordinated（这个词用在这里是不是不太准确， coincidence?） with heavy sunspot activity, which the Earth received significantly more solar energy than other years. However, because the conclusion is based on the available records and the unclear evidence of the "worst worldwide flu epidemics", we cannot evaluate the relationshiop between the flu epidemics and the heavy sunspot activity. It is likely that other medical records recorded more worst worldwide flue epidemics which show that there are no coordinate with the heavy sunspot activity. And it is also possible that a little alter of the definition of the "worst" would lead to a totally opposite answer. Therefore, lacking of the overall medical records concerning the happens of worst flu epidemics, we cannot accept the causal relation between  epidemics and heavy sunspot activity.开始我也想这么攻击来着，后来我看了酸奶jj的分析，我就放弃了，呵呵，不过available medical records我觉得确实也是个
可以攻击的点。
有一点，这段的最后一句有点不准确，因为你全段在写worst和medical records的问题，怎么结尾突然来了个the causal relation between  epidemics and heavy sunspot activity？段中句子的顺序最好调整下，思路就更清晰了：先讲明worst再说明medical records的完整性，就是这句It is likely that other medical records recorded more worst worldwide flue epidemics which show that there are no coordinate with the heavy sunspot activity，然后结尾衔接是不是好点。见笑了，呵呵:)

Secondly, even assuming that there exist a causal relation between the epidemics and sunspot activities, the author does not provide solid evidence that it is the exposure to the Sun that would cause flu to spread and suffer people's health. As we know, there exist many factors which would help flu to spread. For example, the function of spread of the multiplied population of the insects which taking the virus, such as flys and so on. Consequently, without ruling out other possibilities, the author recommendation is unwarranted.

Thirdly, even assuming that（可以换一下句型 even if we concede that等等） the prolonged exposure to the Sun is the root reason that makes people suffer from the flu. There may other methods to reduce the risk for the flu for those people who have to work in the Sun. For example, taking medicine and nitrience which may improve the body's resistance. As a consequence, without evaluate other methods, we cannot accept the author's recommendation.

To sum up, the author's recommendation is not persuasive, because it is lack of logical supports. To strengthen the recommendation, the author need to provide the overall medical records and make a clear definition of the "worst worldwide flu epidemics", we cannot evaluation the relationship between the worldwide flue epidemics and the heavy sunsport activity. Moreover, without ruling out other possibilities which caused the flu to spread and other methods to reduce the risk for flue, we cannot accept the recommendation.

句式有点单调，语法错误很少
限时写这么多，很不错了，我连400字还都很难写到

百分百好牛UID: 2140976

俺才开始写Argument(CET6 都没有过), 改一段试试,还请兄弟们见谅.

To sum up, the author's recommendation is not persuasive, because it is lack of logical supports.(我觉得这样写更好: To sum up, because of the lack of logical supports, the author's recommendation is not persuasive) To strengthen the recommendation, the author need to provide the overall medical records and make a clear definition of the "worst worldwide flu epidemics", we cannot evaluation (evaluate ? ) the relationship between the worldwide flue epidemics and the heavy sunsport activity. Moreover, without ruling out (这个用得好,我没想到这个词) other possibilities which caused the flu to spread and other methods to reduce the risk for flue, we cannot accept the recommendation.

还有, recommendation是不是用得太多了. 可以换个字吧

nknobackUID: 2175779

谢谢大家的意见，这是修改后的文章。:)

The author recommends that, in the consideration of preventing people who at particular risk for the flu falling ill, those should avoid prolonged exposure to the Sun. After careful scrutiny of the evidence cited by the author, we may find several logical flaws in the recommendation.

To begin with, the author cited a medical records show that the six worst worldwide flu epidemics during the past 300 years were coincidence with heavy sunspot activity, which the Earth received significantly more solar energy than other years. However, because the conclusion is based on the available records and the unclear definition of the "worst worldwide flu epidemics", we cannot evaluate the relationship between the flu epidemics and the heavy sunspot activity. It is likely that there exist other undiscovered medical records noted worse worldwide flue epidemics which show that there is no coincidence with the heavy sunspot activity. And it is also possible that a little alteration of the definition of the "worst" would lead to other conclusions, such as most of the years having worst worldwide flu epidemics do not have the heavy sunspot activity. Therefore, lacking of the overall medical records concerning the happening of worst flu epidemics and a clear definition of the “worst flu epidemics”, we cannot accept the relationship between epidemics and heavy sunspot activity argued by the author.

Secondly, even assuming that there exist a causal relation between the epidemics and sunspot activities, the author does not provide solid evidence that it is the exposure to the Sun that would cause flu to spread and suffer people's health. As we know, there exist many factors which would help flu to spread. For example, insects which take the virus, such as flies, could spread the flu in a district. Consequently, without ruling out other possibilities, the author recommendation is unwarranted.

Thirdly, even if we concede that the prolonged exposure to the Sun is the root reason resulting in people suffering from the flu. There may other methods to reduce the risk for the flu for those people who have to work in the Sun. For example, taking medicine or nutrient substances may improve the body's resistance. As a consequence, without evaluate other methods, we cannot accept the author's recommendation.

To sum up, because it is lack of logical supports, the author's recommendation is not persuasive. To strengthen the argument, the author need to provide the overall medical records and make a clear definition of the "worst worldwide flu epidemics", we cannot evaluation the relationship between the worldwide flue epidemics and the heavy sunspot activity. Moreover, without ruling out other possibilities which caused the flu to spread and other methods to reduce the risk for flue, we cannot accept the recommendation.