argument47 Smile-B组 第五次作业，欢迎批评，谢谢！

smiles11UID: 2232631

TOPIC: ARGUMENT47 - 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.
WORDS:          TIME: 12:30:00 AM          DATE: 7/31/2006

While the historical weather patterns in the mid-sixth century suddenly became cooler is admitted, the possible cause has left to be conjecture. The connection between the volcanic eruption and the cooling weather is just like a myth because of the arguer's clumsy reasoning and absence of accurate information.

What comes first is that the connection of the dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperature is problematic. There are complicate factors will lead to cold weather aside from the dimming of the sun, such as the decrease or increase of cloud,  the changing speed of sun's rotation,  the motion of  sea fluid. Any of factors may cause the cooler weather. Provided that the connection of the dimming of the sun, it does not follow that it is the volcanic eruption and meteorite collision lead to the dimming. It is entirely possible that global deforest and persuasive dry weather beget the sand storm which cover the sun. It is still possible that the large fire of grassland had happened which lasted for such a long time that the giant fumes lead the sun dimmed. Moreover, there are only some accounts found only in Asia and Europe, which were open to doubt that the global colder weather were stemmed from. If the arguer fails to convince us with only two factors which caused the dimming of the sun, and providing records such phenomenon in other places other than Asia an Europe, the conclusion is ungrounded.

Even if the eruption and collision leads the dimming of the sum and then cause the cooler weather, the arguer failed to rule out the other one that is the meteorite colliding with Earth. The arguer only addresses that the collision would probably create the bright flash. However, it does not mean it must produce the flash. After all, possibility differentiated from necessity. Given colliding with Earth will produce flash, the arguer merely asserts that there are no extant record about the flash. It is not in the case that the flash did not happen. It is highly possible that the flash happened in the South Pole area where few people live; then it is reasonable that there is no record. It is also possible that the ancient people did not write down the flash because they did not know what it was due to absent of relative knowledge. Or the record written this kind of flash has been damaged or still could not be found by archeologists.

Still more, the arguer makes a false relation among the loud boom, the eruption, and the colder weather. There is no evidence to verify that the loud boom comes from the eruption of volcano. Actually, it may just a deafening thunder, the earthquake, or the bombast used to quarry stone from the mountain. Even if we concede that the loud boom was from the eruption, is there any other evidence to substantiate that the eruption did exist besides the record of Asia? How long did the eruption last? How about the size and scope of eruption area, just one mountain in Asia or several mountains eruption about the same time? If the latter, then maybe there are more than one loud boom. It the former, then we may wonder whether the eruption had enough influence of power to lead the changing of global temperature significantly. Was the dust produced by the eruption so much that it could be throughout the atmosphere to cover the sun? Definitely, maybe it could not unless most of volcanic erupted at that time, but there was no information to record such astonishing thing. On the contrary, as the eruption of the volcanic, giant heat would create and the temperature may be heightened in that place in a specific period. If so, the conclusion that the eruption lead to the global cooler weather is weakened greatly.   

In sum, based on what has discussed and analyzed above, it is clear that the argument is invalid and misleading. To make it more believable, the arguer should rule out other possibilities that may lead the cooler weather, as well as provide evidence to prove that the boom comes from the eruption which was powerful enough to change the global weather into ferocity.

dychangfengUID: 2216148

TOPIC: ARGUMENT47 - 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.
WORDS:          TIME: 12:30:00 AM          DATE: 7/31/2006

While the historical weather patterns in the mid-sixth century suddenly became cooler is admitted, the possible cause has left to be conjecture（d). The connection between the volcanic eruption and the cooling weather is just like a myth because of the arguer's clumsy reasoning and absence of accurate information.

What comes first is that the connection of the dimming of the sun and extremely cold temperature is problematic. There are complicate factors will lead to cold weather aside from the dimming of the sun, such as the decrease or increase of cloud,  the changing speed of sun's rotation,  the motion of  sea fluid. Any of factors may cause the cooler weather. Provided that the connection of the dimming of the sun, it does not follow that it is the volcanic eruption and meteorite collision lead to the dimming. It is entirely possible that global deforest(动词，用的不合适） and persuasive dry weather beget the sand storm which cover the sun. It is still possible that the large fire of grassland had happened which lasted for such a long time that the giant fumes lead the sun dimmed. Moreover, there are only some accounts found only in Asia and Europe, which were open to doubt that the global colder weather were stemmed from. If the arguer fails to convince us with only two factors which caused the dimming of the sun, and providing records such phenomenon in other places other than Asia an Europe, the conclusion is ungrounded.（这段展开的很好。一般来说，一段攻击一个漏洞，结构清晰些）Even if the eruption and collision leads the dimming of the sum and then cause the cooler weather, the arguer failed to rule out the other one that is the meteorite colliding with Earth. The arguer only addresses that the collision would probably create the bright flash. However, it does not mean it must produce the flash. After all, possibility differentiated from necessity. Given colliding with Earth will produce flash, the arguer merely asserts that there are no extant record about the flash. It is not in the case that the flash did not happen. It is highly possible that the flash happened in the South Pole area where few people live; then it is reasonable that there is no record. It is also possible that the ancient people did not write down the flash because they did not know what it was due to absent of relative knowledge. Or the record written this kind of flash has been damaged or still could not be found by archeologists.

Still more, the arguer makes a false relation among the loud boom, the eruption, and the colder weather. There is no evidence to verify that the loud boom comes from the eruption of volcano. Actually, it may just a deafening thunder, the earthquake, or the bombast used to quarry stone from the mountain. Even if we concede that the loud boom was from the eruption, is there any other evidence to substantiate that the eruption did exist besides the record of Asia? How long did the eruption last? How about the size and scope of eruption area, just one mountain in Asia or several mountains eruption about the same time? If the latter, then maybe there are more than one loud boom. It the former, then we may wonder whether the eruption had enough influence of power to lead the changing of global temperature significantly. Was the dust produced by the eruption so much that it could be throughout the atmosphere to cover the sun? Definitely, maybe it could not unless most of volcanic erupted at that time, but there was no information to record such astonishing thing. （语法）On the contrary, as the eruption of the volcanic, giant heat would create and the temperature may be heightened in that place in a specific period. If so, the conclusion that the eruption lead to the global cooler weather is weakened greatly.   （火山爆发造成一时高温，与太阳的能量还是没法比的吧）
In sum, based on what has discussed and analyzed above, it is clear that the argument is invalid and misleading. To make it more believable, the arguer should rule out other possibilities that may lead the cooler weather, as well as provide evidence to prove that the boom comes from the eruption which was powerful enough to change the global weather into ferocity.
总体来说，这是篇写得比较成功的作文，最大的优点是每个点都分析的很开，这也正是ets所要球的，自己是对这方面了解太少，所以展开的旧不好）
还有就是最好一段一个ts,诈佯清晰
个别句子，注意一下就行了。
加油！

smiles11UID: 2232631

原帖由 dychangfeng 于 2006-8-1 22:43 发表
TOPIC: ARGUMENT47 -火山爆发造成一时高温，与太阳的能量还是没法比的吧

-------那个我写的是在那个地区，在一段时间内，当时写的时候也稍微注意了一下，还是被你抓住了！

zhy5186612UID: 2167373

你写了好多东西啊，PF。
关于你说的我2，3段合并问题，你看一下我下面的意见吧

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
即从最靠近结论的那个推理依次往前，这样只要前面的能服人(比如a)就可以证明结论不成立了，后面b,c即时正确也没有用。

eyemeiUID: 205999

nod,nod
smile真是实力派啊，羡慕哦，口水~~