argument47 [0710G ＋U Aug小组] 第11次作业 satanic

SatanicUID: 2362211

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: 463          TIME: 00:37:36          DATE: 2007-08-05 13:34:38

In this analysis, the arguer attempts  to convince us that the significantly cooler  weather was probably caused by a volcanic eruption. To substantiate this conclusion, the author make the assumption that the creation of a large dust which can cause the cooler weather might be result from a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding. Based on the uncovered investigation that  a boom might be consistent with a volcanic eruption, the author supposes that the main cause of cooling. Although his argument has some merits, there are some conspicuous flaws that might seriously undermine the line of reasoning.

With the groundless assumption that either a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding with Earth that could created a large dust which can result in the cooling weather, the author trapped us in to a dilemma. The fact is that other factors can also result in a large dust, like the earthquake, the tornado and even the exploding of a nuclear bomb. And, also, there are other factors that might be reason of weather cooling. Can we imagine that the energy of the sun is less in that period than that in the past? Without abundant sunlight radiating to the surface of the earth, the glacial period might also be coming. If the arguer fails to rule out the evident to exclude also the assumption narrated above, this hasty assumption is groundless and unconvincing.

Another obvious flaw lying in this argument is that the arguer disrupt that corelationship between a loud boom in the records of that time and the phenomenon of a volcanic eruption with a casual relation. How can we accept the assumption that this boom is caused by volcanic eruption rather than incidences which may also cause a boom, for instance, a storm or an earthquake? Even accepting the fact that it happened in that period, we can not convinced that there is a casual relation between the boom and the volcanic eruption.

Last but not least, there lies some other flaws that may decrease the credibility of the reasoning. No extant historical records of the time may support the happening of a sudden bright flash which is a sign of colliding between the earth and a meteorite. In the reason that records are hard to preserve and handed down from the ancient Asia, we can not exclude the possibility of a collision and draw such a hasty conclusion.

In summary, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make it more persuasive, the arguer has to illustrate clearly other supporting things like other factors which may cause the dust and cooling and the casual relationship between the boom and the volcanic eruption. Additionally, he must provide evidence to rule out all the above-mentioned possibilities that might weaken the argument.


今天 感觉思路清晰点，驳论点和驳论思路更合适
请IRIS MICHAEL拍
拼写错误已经全部纠正

IRIS得批改拉下了 不好意思，今天晚上回来改你作业
麻烦两位了 谢谢

icefirekkUID: 2293126

TOPIC: ARGUMENT47 - Scientistsstudying historical weather patterns have discovered that in themid-sixth century, Earth suddenly became significantly cooler. Althoughfew historical records survive from that time, some accounts found bothin Asia and Europe mention a dimming of the sun and extremely coldtemperatures. Either a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteoritecolliding with Earth could have created a large dust cloud throughoutEarth's atmosphere that would have been capable of blocking enoughsunlight to lower global temperatures significantly. A large meteoritecollision, however, would probably create a sudden bright flash oflight, and no extant historical records of the time mention such aflash. 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: 463          TIME: 00:37:36          DATE: 2007-08-05 13:34:38

In this analysis, the arguerattempts  to convince us that the significantly cooler  weather wasprobably caused by a volcanic eruption. To substantiate thisconclusion, the author make the assumption that the creation of a largedust cloud which can cause the cooler weather might be result from a hugevolcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding. Based on theuncovered investigation that  a boom might be consistent with avolcanic eruption, the author supposes that the main cause of cooling.Although his argument has some merits, there are some conspicuous flawsthat might seriously undermine the line of reasoning.  这么长的restate题目，我不发表议论

With the groundless assumption thateither a huge volcanic eruption or a large meteorite colliding withEarth that（去掉that） could created a large dust（） which can result in the coolingweather, the author trapped us in to a dilemma（学习了）. The fact is that otherfactors can also result in a large dust, like the earthquake, thetornado and even the exploding of a nuclear bomb（别举核弹，mid-sixth century还没发明）. And, also, there areother factors that might be reason of weather cooling. Can we imaginethat the energy of the sun is less in that period than that in thepast（好象有辐射特别强的年：太阳黑子年，但特别低的没有，anyway，假设都是合理的）? Without abundant sunlight radiating to the surface of the earth,the glacial period might also be coming. If the arguer fails to ruleout the evident(evidence) to exclude also the assumption narrated above, thishasty assumption is groundless and unconvincing.
论证有力：1、造成冷的原因没考虑仔细 2、造成dust cloud的原因没说仔细。
Another obvious flaw lying in thisargument is that the arguer disrupt that corelationship between a loudboom in the records of that time and the phenomenon of a volcaniceruption with a casual relation重复了. How can we accept the assumption thatthis boom is caused by volcanic eruption rather than incidences whichmay also cause a boom, for instance, a storm or an earthquake? Evenaccepting the fact that it happened in that period, we can notconvinced that there is a casual relation between the boom and thevolcanic eruption.正确：boom和volcanic eruption没必然联系

Last but not least, there lies someother flaws that may decrease the credibility of the reasoning. Noextant historical records of the time may support the happening of asudden bright flash which is a sign of colliding between the earth anda meteorite. In the reason that records are hard to preserve and handeddown from the ancient Asia, we can not exclude the possibility of acollision and draw such a hasty conclusion.正确：没发现不代表不存在

In summary, this argument is notpersuasive as it stands. To make it more persuasive, the arguer has toillustrate clearly other supporting things like other factors which maycause the dust and cooling and the casual relationship between the boomand the volcanic eruption. Additionally, he must provide evidence torule out all the above-mentioned possibilities that might weaken theargument.
论证比以往好多了，还是觉得开头与结尾长了些，不如挪点时间将内容补充的更完善如何？