argument47 为我所用小组第六次作业

guoshishuoUID: 2467577

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: 446          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2008-3-29 21:30:05

The author concludes that the sudden cooling of the earth in the mid-six century was caused by a volcanic eruption. To support her conclusion, the author provides several evidences. However, I find that this argument includes some logical flaws, which render it unconvincing.
To begin with, the mere face that there was no extant historical records of the time mention a flash which may cause by meteorite collision is little indication that the sudden cooling was not due to this reason. It is entirely possible that the reports of such a flash at that time was lost or have not been discovered yet. What's more, perhaps the collision happened in arctic or other places where no human was living, and thus there were no reports concerning the flash. If one of them is the case, then the author cannot draw the conclusion that the cooling was not caused by meteorite colliding with the earth.
Secondly, the fact that some surviving Asian historical records of the time have mentioned a loud boom could not serve as the evidence to substantiate that the cooling was due to a volcanic eruption. Maybe the loud boom was caused by an earthquake or some other reasons rather than volcanic eruption. Even if the loud boom was caused by a volcanic eruption, it could not lend any credibility that the eruption was related to the cooling of the earth. Perhaps the eruption happened after the earth had suffered a sudden cooling, and thus it was certainly not the reason for cooling. Moreover, because only Asian historical records has mentioned the loud boom, the author overlooks the possibility that it was just a little volcanic eruption in Asia, which could not affect the whole climate of the earth. Consequently, only through the Asian historical records of a loud boom, the author cannot convince me that the sudden cooling was related to volcanic eruption.
Thirdly, according to the author, because she has excluded the possibility that the cooling was caused by meteorite colliding, she reached the conclusion that a volcanic eruption was responsible for it, which suffered from either-or reasoning. Besides meteorite colliding and volcanic eruption, it is entirely possible that there are other reasons that are responsible for the sudden cooling. Perhaps the earth suddenly suffered from months of storms or attacked by creatures from other planets. Without ruling out other possibilities, the author cannot reach the conclusion that it was because volcanic eruption that caused the cooling.
In conclusion, the author's conclusion is dubious. To better bolster it, she should do more investigate and offer better evidence to show that a volcanic eruption actually occurred and affected the earth’s climate. Also, she should learn whether there are any other reasons that are possibly causes of the cooling.

usayaUID: 2374023

Theauthor concludes that the sudden cooling of the earth in the mid-sixcentury was caused by a volcanic eruption. To support her conclusion,the author provides several evidences. However, I find that thisargument includes some logical flaws, which render it unconvincing.
To begin with, the mereface that there was no extant historical records of the time mention aflash which may cause by meteorite collision is little indication thatthe sudden cooling was not due to this reason. It is entirely possiblethat the reports of such a flash at that time was lost or have not beendiscovered yet. What's more, perhaps the collision happened in arcticor other places where no human was living, and thus there were noreports concerning the flash. If one of them is the case, then theauthor cannot draw the conclusion that the cooling was not caused bymeteorite colliding with the earth.
Secondly, the fact thatsome surviving Asian historical records of the time have mentioned aloud boom could not serve as the evidence to substantiate that thecooling was due to a volcanic eruption. Maybe the loud boom was causedby an earthquake or some other reasons rather than volcanic eruption.Even if the loud boom was caused by a volcanic eruption, it could notlend any credibility that the eruption was related to the cooling ofthe earth. Perhaps the eruption happened after the earth had suffered asudden cooling, and thus it was certainly not the reason for cooling.Moreover, because only Asian historical records has mentioned the loudboom, the author overlooks the possibility that it was just a littlevolcanic eruption in Asia, which could not affect the whole climate ofthe earth. Consequently, only through the Asian historical records of aloud boom, the author cannot convince me that the sudden cooling wasrelated to volcanic eruption.
Thirdly, according to theauthor, because she has excluded the possibility that the cooling wascaused by meteorite colliding, she reached the conclusion that avolcanic eruption was responsible for it, which suffered from either-orreasoning. Besides meteorite colliding and volcanic eruption, it isentirely possible that there are other reasons that are responsible forthe sudden cooling. Perhaps the earth suddenly suffered from months ofstorms or attacked by creatures from other planets. Without ruling outother possibilities, the author cannot reach the conclusion that it wasbecause volcanic eruption that caused the cooling.
In conclusion, the author'sconclusion is dubious. To better bolster it, she should do moreinvestigate and offer better evidence to show that a volcanic eruptionactually occurred and affected the earth’s climate. Also, she shouldlearn whether there are any other reasons that are possibly causes ofthe cooling.


我挑不出毛病了.....模板迹象不重,很不错了(我不舍得用outstanding来表扬你...),建议再去看看官方的满分范文


[ 本帖最后由 usaya 于 2008-3-30 23:51 编辑 ]

rienziUID: 2402391

The author concludes that the sudden cooling of the earth in the mid-six century was caused by a volcanic eruption. To support her conclusion, the author provides several evidences. However, I find that this argument includes some logical flaws, which render it unconvincing.
To begin with, the mere face that there was no extant historical records of the time mention a flash which may cause by meteorite collision is little indication that the sudden cooling was not due to this reason. It is entirely possible that the reports of such a flash at that time was lost or have not been discovered yet. What's more, perhaps the collision happened in arctic or other places where no human was living, and thus there were no reports concerning the flash. If one of them is the case, then the author cannot draw the conclusion that the cooling was not caused by meteorite colliding with the earth.
Secondly, the fact that some surviving Asian historical records of the time have mentioned a loud boom could not serve as the evidence to substantiate that the cooling was due to a volcanic eruption. Maybe the loud boom was caused by an earthquake or some other reasons rather than volcanic eruption. Even if the loud boom was caused by a volcanic eruption, it could not lend any credibility that the eruption was related to the cooling of the earth. Perhaps the eruption happened after the earth had suffered a sudden cooling, and thus it was certainly not the reason for cooling. Moreover, because only Asian historical records has mentioned the loud boom, the author overlooks the possibility that it was just a little volcanic eruption in Asia, which could not affect the whole climate of the earth. Consequently, only through the Asian historical records of a loud boom, the author cannot convince me that the sudden cooling was related to volcanic eruption.
Thirdly, according to the author, because she has excluded the possibility that the cooling was caused by meteorite colliding, she reached the conclusion that a volcanic eruption was responsible for it, which suffered from either-or reasoning. Besides meteorite colliding and volcanic eruption, it is entirely possible that there are other reasons that are responsible for the sudden cooling. Perhaps the earth suddenly suffered from months of storms or attacked by creatures from other planets[这个外星生物袭击的原因是不有点太...]. Without ruling out other possibilities, the author cannot reach the conclusion that it was because volcanic eruption that caused the cooling.
In conclusion, the author's conclusion is dubious. To better bolster it, she should do more investigate and offer better evidence to show that a volcanic eruption actually occurred and affected the earth’s climate. Also, she should learn whether there are any other reasons that are possibly[应该是possible吧?] causes of the cooling.