Argument47 weixch球拍

weixchUID: 2104033

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.

前提是亚洲地区记录的巨响的确是来自火山喷发，但论者没有提供任何资料证明那声巨响与火山喷发有关，即使是喷发，程度不知，可能小到不足以影响这么深远
另一个前提是当时没有发生陨石撞地球，但这也不一定被保证成立。首先论者只是说现存资料里没有记录，但是不排除有关记录被毁坏了，或是还没有被发现。另外撞击的白光是否是全球都能看见，论者也没有提供资料，有可能白光是在当时还没有进入文字记录时代的地区，比如南极发生的
论者没有告诉我们是否只有这两种情况会造成全球气温突然下降

The significant temperature decrease in the mid-sixth century is due to a great volcanic eruption, some scientists claim. To better support their conclusion, they insist that such a temperature decrease could only be caused by a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding and without records of bright flash of meteorite colliding, the cooling could only be caused by the former. Closer scrutiny of the statement they show us reveals that it lends to little credible support to the conclusion.

Firstly, a loud boom has been mentioned in the material and regarded as a huge volcanic eruption. However, without further evidence shown in the material to clear the relationship between that sound and a volcano, it is hard to draw the same conclusion as the scientists that a volcanic eruption could happen at that time. Even if there was a volcanic eruption, the degree of the eruption is hard to be measured without further record of the boom’s intensity. Since degree of the eruption is unknown, it is still a question whether it could affect the global atmosphere that much.

Secondly, as no record of meteorite colliding is found out, we cannot assure that there was no meteorite colliding during that period. If the proof or record of a colliding is destroyed in the past centuries, or if the colliding happened in some place without human beings such as Antarctica, it would be nothing surprising that the colliding has no records mentioned. Without further evidence to rule out the possibility, we cannot make sure that the scientists are right.

Thirdly, as the material asserts, the temperature decrease can be caused by the two factors. However, without further proof to support this assertion, it is unconvincing to exclude other possible factors which might also influence the global atmosphere. For instance, location of the moon could influence the global temperature by affecting the tide of earth and the activity of ocean current; and the activity of solar flares or sunspot could also take effect in global atmosphere. So without further reports of other factors, it is really hard to get the same conclusion as the scientists.

In sum, the argument of the scientists is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the viewpoint in the material shown above, the scientist should clarify the causality between the loud loom and a huge volcanic eruption, and offer more evidence to rule out the possibility of a meteorite colliding at that period. To better support the conclusion drawn in the material, the scientists should also provide some reports about other factors which could also influence the global atmosphere in great extent.

Ammmy2000UID: 2265680

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.

前提是亚洲地区记录的巨响的确是来自火山喷发，但论者没有提供任何资料证明那声巨响与火山喷发有关，即使是喷发，程度不知，可能小到不足以影响这么深远
另一个前提是当时没有发生陨石撞地球，但这也不一定被保证成立。首先论者只是说现存资料里没有记录，但是不排除有关记录被毁坏了，或是还没有被发现。另外撞击的白光是否是全球都能看见，论者也没有提供资料，有可能白光是在当时还没有进入文字记录时代的地区，比如南极发生的
论者没有告诉我们是否只有这两种情况会造成全球气温突然下降

The significant temperature decrease in the mid-sixth century is due to a great volcanic eruption, some scientists claim. To better support their conclusion, they insist that such a temperature decrease could only be caused by a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding and without records of bright flash of meteorite colliding, the cooling could only be caused by the former. Closer scrutiny of the statement they show us reveals that it lends to little credible support to the conclusion.开头很简洁，清晰，赞

Firstly, a loud boom has been mentioned in the material and regarded as a huge volcanic eruption. However, without further evidence shown in the material to clearclear做动词有清晰的意思么？ the relationship between that sound and a volcano,火山是没有声音的，只有火山爆发才有声音 it is hard to draw the same conclusion as the scientists that a volcanic eruption could happen at that time. Even if there was a volcanic eruption, the degree of the eruption is hard to be measured without further record of the boom’s intensity. Since degree of the eruption is unknown, it is still a question whether it could affect the global atmosphere that much.

Secondly, as no record of meteorite colliding is found out, we cannot assure that there was no meteorite colliding during that period. If the proof or record of a colliding is destroyed in the past centuries, or if the colliding happened in some place without human beings such as Antarctica, it would be nothing surprising that the colliding has no records mentioned. Without further evidence to rule out the possibility, we cannot make sure that the scientists are right.

Thirdly, as the material asserts, the temperature decrease can be caused by the two factors. However, without further proof to support this assertion, it is unconvincing to exclude other possible factors which might also influence the global atmosphere. For instance, location of the moon could influence the global temperature by affecting the tide of earth and the activity of ocean current; and the activity of solar flares or sunspot could also take effect in global atmosphere. So without further reports of other factors, it is really hard to get the same conclusion as the scientists.

In sum, the argument of the scientists is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the viewpoint in the material shown above, the scientist should clarify the causality between the loud loom and a huge volcanic eruption, and offer more evidence to rule out the possibility of a meteorite colliding at that period. To better support the conclusion drawn in the material, the scientists should also provide some reports about other factors which could also influence the global atmosphere in great extent.

我自己的ARGUMENT写得也不好，所以看不出什么问题，恩，不过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，这个话很有问题，很少有历史记录我们就要怀疑文章后面给出的记录的准确性，同时亚洲欧洲的情况可不可以代表全球的情况呢？呵呵