argument47 [desperado小组]我的第五篇by harberside

harbersideUID: 2151376

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.

            

结论：地震引起气候降温

1，在当时亚洲的历史记载中，一声巨响有可能和地震有关。有可能不是地震引起，而是陨石相撞造成的，只不过人们没有看到强光而已；如果有地震，但是我们不知道这次地震的威力有多大，是否能造成大量灰尘挡住阳光，引起全球降温；还有巨响以后是否紧随气候下降，还是气候已经下降了，这就不能说明他们有联系；

2，在那段时间没有记载关于陨石相撞，所以陨石被排除在外-没有不等于没有，只不过没有发现而已，或是记载被破坏了；

3，或者根本不是地震和陨石相撞造成气温下降，而是其它原因（与太阳黑子macula,maculae, sunspot的活动有关，也有可能与当时动物和人类的活动有关。

            

The arguer professed that scientists studying historical weather patterns have discovered that in the mid-sixth century, Earth suddenly became significantly cooler. Furthermore, a final conclusion-the cooling was probably caused by a volcanic eruption-is reached by the facts that there are no extant historical records of the time about a large meteorite collision and a loud boom recorded in some surviving Asian historical accounts of the time would be consistent with a volcanic eruption. This argument seems sound and reasonable, but further analysis some critical flaws are surfaced as follows.

            

The threshold point of the argument is that the arguer did not provide enough information to establish strong connections between a loud boom and a volcanic eruption. Firstly, it is highly possible that a loud boom was caused in that time not by volcanic eruption but by a large meteorite collision which may not result in a sudden bright flash of light or people may not see it. Secondly, Even if the volcanic eruption took place as some surviving Asian historical records mentioned, we did not know exactly how strong the volcanic eruption was and whether it could create a large amount of dust cloud throughout Earth's atmosphere. Thirdly, another uncertainty is whether the cooling weather happened before or after the volcanic eruption. Thus, further background information is required otherwise the argument will be invalid, not mention the conclusion.

            

Adding to the vulnerability of the argument is to exclude a large meteorite collision from considering as a potential reason of the cooling weather. In this argument, the arguer asserted that because of no extant historical records of the time about a flash, so that meteorite collision would not be took into consideration. In fact, it is highly possible that with time went by, some historical records were broken without leaving any clue. Or at that time people might not see the flash caused by meteorite collision and not record this event. So, the arguer for no reason excluded a meteorite collision from consideration which make this argument questionable.

            

Last bu not the least, the arguer may overlook or ignore some other potential factors that brought about the cooling weather. To begin with, It is knowledgeable that macula or sunspot may result in the temperature declining around the world. In addition, human and animal activities at that time may have negative impacts on the weather, as a result the world weather decline. Thus, the argument may be of little use without further information to rule out other possibilities.

                 

In sum, the facts the arguer provided seems superficially sound and convictive at the first glance but several critical flaws are finally revealed. To bolster the argument, the arguer should establish strong connection between a loud boom and a volcanic eruption. Further more, a confirmed information about the existence of a large meteorite collision is urgently required otherwise this argument beg question. Finally, the arguer should role out other possibilities which result in the world temperature decline.