argument47 寄托4人组 8.30 还有TWO天!

meautoUID: 2116250

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.
------正文------
这篇超时了:L

In this article, the arguer attributes a volcanic eruption for the cause of the global cooling in the mid-sixth century. Close scrutiny of the cited evidence, however, reveals it lends little support to the arguer's conclusion.

To begin with, we are not told the specific time when the dimming of the sun happened and that of extremely cold temperatures. If the cold temperatures happened before the dimming of the sun, then the arguer could not convince me that it is the dimming of the sun, possibly caused either by volcanic eruption or by meteorite colliding with Earth, that accounts for the global cooling in the mid-sixth century.

Even granted that the extremely cold temperatures occurred after the dimming of the sun, a myriad of factors aside from volcanic eruption and meteorite colliding with Earth may result in the cold temperatures as well. For example, geographical movements of the earth, such as unusual ocean currents patterns and earthquakes at a large scale might equally lead to the sudden decrease of temperatures at a worldwide range. Unless the arguer can rule out these alternative explanations for the cooling phenomenon, she cannot credit volcanic eruption or meteorite colliding with the earth for the worldwide cold temperatures.

Further assuming that the global cooling can be explained either by volcanic eruption or meteorite accident, the arguer unfairly dismisses the latter to be the cause of cooling---and for two reasons. For one thing, perhaps the collision happened in the midnight, or in wilderness areas, which was remote to any accessibility of humans. In these cases, probably no one would witness and record the meteorite accident. For another, even if many people saw the bright flash of light created by the meteorite collision, they may not record it as the sign of meteorite colliding with the earth, for that they could not explain what they saw, or contributed it to other reasons, due to their limited knowledge. Given each of these scenarios, the arguer could not naively rule out the meteorite collision as the cause of the extremely cold temperatures.


Additionally, the arguer unfairly assumes volcanic is to be credited for the cooling merely according to some Asian historical records, mentioning a loud boom. However, it is highly possible that the loud boom was caused by an earthquake, or even by the meteorite collision, other than a volcanic eruption. Absent such evidence, the presumed causal-and-effect relationship between the volcanic eruption and the cooling could not be taken seriously.

In conclusion, more evidence is needed to bolster this argument. This evidence might include: the respective time when dimming of the sun and cooling occurred, and detailed information to ensure that volcanic eruption, rather than meteorite collision, or other reasons, is the cause of the global cooling.

tangjihedeUID: 2107695

zhan!

tangjihedeUID: 2107695

argument47 寄托4人组 8.30 还有TWO天!

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.
------正文------
这篇超时了

In this article, the arguer attributes a volcanic eruption for the cause of the global cooling in the mid-sixth century. Close scrutiny of the cited evidence, however, reveals it lends little support to the arguer's conclusion.

To begin with, we are not told the specific time when the dimming of the sun happened and that of extremely cold temperatures[according to the record]. If the cold temperatures happened before the dimming of the sun, then the arguer could not convince me that it is the dimming of the sun, possibly caused either by volcanic eruption or by meteorite colliding with Earth, that accounts for the global cooling in the mid-sixth century.

Even granted that the extremely cold temperatures occurred after the dimming of the sun, a myriad of factors aside from volcanic eruption and meteorite colliding with Earth may result in the cold temperatures as well. For example, geographical movements of the earth, such as unusual ocean currents patterns and earthquakes at a large scale might equally lead to the sudden decrease of temperatures at a worldwide range. Unless the arguer can rule out these alternative explanations for the cooling phenomenon, [she尽量避免] cannot credit volcanic eruption or meteorite colliding with the earth for the worldwide cold temperatures.

Further assuming that the global cooling can be explained either by volcanic eruption or meteorite accident, the arguer unfairly dismisses the latter to be the cause of cooling---and for two reasons. For one thing, perhaps the collision happened in the midnight, or in wilderness areas, which was remote to any accessibility of humans. In these cases, probably no one would witness and record the meteorite accident. For another, even if many people saw the bright flash of light created by the meteorite collision, they may not record it as the sign of meteorite colliding with the earth, for that they could not explain what they saw, or contributed it to other reasons, due to their limited knowledge. Given each of these scenarios, the arguer could not [naively感情色彩略重吧] rule out the meteorite collision as the cause of the extremely cold temperatures.


Additionally, the arguer unfairly assumes volcanic[/eruption] is to be credited for the cooling merely according to some Asian historical records, mentioning a loud boom. However, it is highly possible that the loud boom was caused by an earthquake, or [even by the meteorite collision这个上面提到了，为了避免意思上的重叠可以换别的，比如tsunami], other than a volcanic eruption. Absent such evidence, the presumed causal-and-effect relationship between the volcanic eruption and the cooling could not be taken seriously.[GG老师曾提出了很好的一点，即，即使是火山的声音，这次爆发也未必足以影响整个环境 啊]

In conclusion, more evidence is needed to bolster this argument. This evidence might include: the respective time when dimming of the sun and cooling occurred, and detailed information to ensure that volcanic eruption, rather than meteorite collision, or other reasons, is the cause of the global cooling.

[en，整体结构很棒。我给6分。]

meautoUID: 2116250

这两天动不动超时给我的想法是:
每个错误都能写,可是时间不允许
是写标准而又明显的3个错误,带个漂亮的结尾?
还是写4个错误,结尾一笔带过?
很想选择后者,不过又有点不放心ING~

嘶喊的牧歌UID: 197463

3个深入具体的论证＋漂亮的结尾

我的个人意见。