argument137 今天拍了两个，谁拍我，我还拍回去

claymanUID: 2102470

Argument 137     共用时间：30分2秒     507 words
从2005年7月4日21时33分到2005年7月4日22时30分
------题目------
The following appeared in an editorial in the Mason City newspaper.
'At present, Mason City residents seldom use the nearby Mason River for any kind of recreational activity, even though surveys of the region's residents consistently rank water sports (swimming, fishing, and boating) as a favorite form of recreation. Since there have been complaints about the quality of the water in the river, residents must be avoiding the river because they think that it is not clean enough. But that situation is about to change: the agency responsible for rivers in our region has announced plans to clean up Mason River. Therefore, recreational use of the river is likely to increase, so the Mason City council will need to increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River.'
------正文------
The arguer call for more budgets for public owned lands along the Mason River because he/she believe that people of Mason City will use the river more for recreational sports. It sounds as if the arguer is trying to serve the public, but when it comes to budget, we need a more careful scrutiny which may prove such argument groundless.

Firstly, all the words are based on a false assumption that people will use Mason River more for recreational sports and the only reason they are not doing so right now is the water quality. However, no evidence has proved that people want to have recreational sports in this river. On the one hand, Even we accept the result of the survey that the region's residents regard water sports as a favorite form of recreation, there is the possibility that Mason River is not suitable for such sports at all because the river is too deep and the water is running too fast. On the other hand, even Mason River is a good place for recreational activities, the reason that people do not use it at present would merely be a recent flood. Although the arguer have mentioned complaints about water quality, but no further information is given to suggest that the water is so contaminated that it is not suitable for human.

Forget about all doubts above, and accept the arguer's arbitrary assumptions, yet the call for budget is still not well supported as we do not know how long will take relevant agencies to accomplish their mission as to clean up Mason River. If the water is polluted so badly that nobody can swim in, the contamination should be quite serious. Therefore, it must need a long time before the river returns to its original status according to common sense. Budgets is precious resources in many fields as education and medical services, if the arguer fails to give any evidence of the urgency of improvements in public lands, we should use money on more important affairs rather than such a silly suggestion.

The final question lies in whether the publicly owned lands along the Mason River really needs improvements even we accept that people will have recreational sports latter on Mason River. For the first thing, we do not know how much improvement is needed. Although the people list water sports as their favorite forms of recreation, but apparently, there are other more popular activities on the list-- if not so, the arguer would point it out as "the most favorite form" but not "a favorite form". For the second thing, we do not know how does current lands serve people and is there really complaints about it. The arguer do not mention such supportive evidence useful for him/her, so I believe there is no such needs.

In all ,the arguer's call for budget is undermined because of many logical flaws and false assumptions. If the arguer really want to do something for the public, it is more reasonable to listen to the public other than imagine such reasons abruptly.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-5 at 02:51 ]

执着UID: 191613

The arguer calls for more budgets for public owned lands along the Mason River because he/she用一个he或she就可以，北美范文常用she believes that people of Mason City will use the river more for recreational sports. It sounds as if the arguer is trying to serve the public, but when it comes to budget, we need a more careful scrutiny which may prove such argument groundless.这句话怪怪的，直接说the argument is flawed in several respects 更好吧
Firstly, all the words are based on a false assumption that people will use Mason River more for recreational sports and the only reason they are not doing so right now is the water quality. However, no evidence has proved that people want to have recreational sports in this river. On the one hand, eEven we accept the result of the surveys that the region's residents regard water sports as a favorite form of recreation, there is the possibility that Mason River is not suitable for such sports at all because the river is too deep and the water is running too fast. 深和水流快可以划船漂流啊，应该再加上句这河危险应该更好些On the other hand, even Mason River is a good place for recreational activities, the reason that people do not use it at present would merely be a recent flood. Although the arguer have mentioned complaints about water quality, but no further information is given to suggest that the water is so contaminated that it is not suitable for human.

Forget about all doubts above, 这种说法第一次见，不知是否地道或口语化？要不用Admittedly。。。and accept the arguer's arbitrary assumptions, yet the call for budget is still not well supported as we do not know how long will take relevant agencies the agency就这一个吧 to accomplish their mission as to clean up Mason River. If the water is polluted so badly that nobody can swim in, the contamination should be quite serious. Therefore, it must need a long time before the river returns to its original status according to common sense. BudgetsMoney is precious resources in many fields as education and medical services, if the arguer fails to give any evidence of the urgency of improvements in public lands, we should use money on more important affairs rather than such a silly suggestion.感觉最后一句话是在写issue，不如说也许现有的技术还解决不了污染问题

The final question lies in whether the publicly owned lands along the Mason River really needs去掉 improvements even we accept that people will have recreational sports latter on Mason River. For the first thing, we do not know how much improvement is needed. Although the people list water sports as their favorite forms of recreation, but apparently, there are other more popular activities on the list-- if not so, the arguer would point it out as "the most favorite form" but not "a favorite form". For the second thing, we do not know how does current lands serve people and is there really complaints about it. The arguer do not mention such supportive evidence useful for him/her去掉, so I believe there is no such needs.so such needs is open to doubt.
In all, the arguer's call for budget is undermined because of many logical flaws and false assumptions. If the arguer really want to do something for the public, it is more reasonable to listen to the public other than imagine such reasons abruptly.
总体不错，还能限时成功，羡慕！
拍拍我的argument137： https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... ght=%2B%D6%B4%D7%C5