argument47 [SJTU-ETB6 10G] 第4次作业

dacgileUID: 2367722

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: 424          TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2007-7-26 0:07:10

The argument obviously suffers from several flaws. First, hint of the absence of records about such a flash is open to question. Second, the inference from accounts of a loud boom is still to be revalued. Also, other possible alternatives that may contribute to the cooling remain to be ruled out.

To begin with, failing to find the records about such a flash doesn't persuasively ensure the exclusion of meteorite collision. Perhaps the records are lost due to the civil war or the migration of the archive keeper. Or it is possible the absence of the recording may led by the reason, for instance, the person who had the duty or the habit of recording phenomenon failed to record the flash when the collision was occurring within his observation; or the meteorite collided with the earth at an area where no people were settled--the Antarctic or the like.

Furthermore, even if there in fact wasn't such a collision, the surviving Asian historical records are questionable. Is the loud boom sure to be the eruption of a volcano? Maybe it is a tremendous earthquake, a destructive tsunami, and the like which can also make the huge sound. In addition, only few records cannot be convincing enough, because there may be only one erupting volcano which was near the record man and the volcano was small--the small one also seems to be a loud boom to the record man when it is close enough to him. Without rolling out these alternatives, the evidence is far not convincing enough.

Last but not least, even if we accept the two evidences are in fact available, only assuming that either a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding with earth is the only reason is not enough. Other possible reasons that the cooling may result from are to be ruled out, such as, the coexistence of the two factors is more powerful and more likely to contribute a effective effect to the cooling, or the inner activities of the earth just slowed down in that time due to its ego-structure. These alternatives are as possible as the only two reasons mentioned by the author, so why not consider these?

In summary, although the argument researching the reason of the cooling, at first glance, seems logical, it suffers from the flaws mentioned above. To improve it, the argument should refer to other scientific possibilities--the more, the better; also, the argument should try to discover more convincing historical accounts which are of great help to the truth.

zhangjunhaoUID: 2276310

The argument obviously suffers from several flaws. First, hint of the absence of records about such a flash is open to question. Second, the inference from accounts of a loud boom is still to be revalued. Also, other possible alternatives that may contribute to the cooling remain to be ruled out.

To begin with, failing to find the records about such a flash doesn't persuasively ensure the exclusion of meteorite collision. Perhaps the records are lost due to the civil war or the migration of the archive keeper. Or it is possible the absence of the recording may led by the reason, for instance, the person who had the duty or the habit of recording phenomenon failed to record the flash when the collision was occurring within his observation; or the meteorite collided with the earth at an area where no people were settled--the Antarctic or the like. (And the like)
这段论述缺乏记录不等于没有发生

Furthermore, even if there in fact wasn't such a collision, the surviving Asian historical records are questionable. Is the loud boom sure to be the eruption of a volcano? Maybe it is a tremendous earthquake, a destructive tsunami, and the like which can also make the huge sound. In addition, only few records cannot be convincing enough, because there may be only one erupting volcano which was near the record man and the volcano was small--the small one also seems to be a loud boom to the record man when it is close enough to him. Without rolling out these alternatives, the evidence is far not convincing enough.（这里的反例举得有点牵强，你是想批驳那个声音不是由火山爆发引起的，但是后来又牵扯到了火山爆发的数量，岂不是自相矛盾吗？）

Last but not least, even if we accept the two evidences are in fact available, only assuming that either a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding with earth is the only reason is not enough. Other possible reasons that the cooling may result from are to be ruled out, such as, the coexistence of the two factors is more powerful and more likely to contribute a effective effect（这样表达好吗） to the cooling, or the inner activities of the earth just slowed down in（at把） that time due to its ego-structure.（我觉得这里这个连字符用的有点牵强，你确定可以这样表达吗） These alternatives are as possible as the only two reasons mentioned by the author, so why not consider these?（这段应该和上一段交换一下顺序，你觉得呢？）

In summary, although the argument researching the reason of the cooling, at first glance, seems logical, it suffers from the flaws mentioned above. To improve it, the argument should refer to other scientific possibilities--the more, the better; also, the argument should try to discover more convincing historical accounts which are of great help to the truth.

这篇文章在论坛上有精华贴，你可以去参考一下别人的详细的分析，这篇文章里面有一连串很明显的逻辑因果顺序，那里都有分析的