argument71 同主题写作 炼铜 狠拍！

xmbjowlUID: 2182375

TOPIC: ARGUMENT71 - Copper occurs in nature mixed with other minerals and valuable metals in ore, and the proportion of copper in the ore can vary considerably. Until fairly recently, the only way to extract pure copper from ore was by using a process that requires large amounts of electric energy, especially if the proportion of copper in the ore is low. New copper-extracting technologies can use up to 40 percent less electricity than the older method to process the same amount of raw ore, especially when the proportion of copper in the ore is high. Therefore, we can expect the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly.
WORDS: 469        TIME: 上午 12:22:08          DATE: 2006-7-16

In this argument, the arguer claims that the total amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry would decline significantly. To support this claim the arguer points out that the new copper-extracting technologies are more energy-efficient, compared the traditional method. Careful examination of this supporting evidence, however, reveals that it lends little credible support to the arguer's claim.

First of all, the evidence cited in the argument is statistically unreliable as it stands. The comparison between the new technology and old one is under potential different conditions, thus leads to the result which cannot convince me. The arguer provides no evidence that the detailed proportion of copper in the ore under the two technologies resepectively. In view of this aspect, we need statistics that whether the proportions are equal. Also, given the same content of copper in the ores studied, what about the amount of copper extracted? It is entirely possible that the amount of copper being extracted using the new techonologies is much less than that using the old. If so, who can accept the so-called energy-efficient of the new technologies?

Moreover, the assumption upon which that the new methos would be broadly adopted isunsounded. After all, the arguer fails to convince me that the new copper-extracting technologies would be prevailing in the industry. Perhaps few factories would adopt the technologies because of its vague prosperity. Or perhaps the total amount of electricy in this industry would increase, since extracting the pure copper is just one stage of the holistic process of copper-extraction. Or perhaps replacing the old machines would require considerable cost which would deter most factories. Lacking such evidence it is entirely possible the new method exist temporarily and is doomed to fade out in the industry.

Given the extensive usage of the new methos in the industry, we cannot expect the amount of electricity used by copper-extraction industry to decline significantly. First, the output in the industry may experience a significant increase, thus leads to a larger consumption of eletric power inevitably. Besides, it is entirely possible that other phases during the whole course would require more electric power. If so, the expectation that the amount of declined electricity consumed in the industry is open to doubt. Also, other respects regarding a factory’s electricity consumption should also be taken into consideration. Such as the relative safety measures, improving the worker’s working environment, as well as their domitory. All these aspects of a factory’s functioning require electricity.

In conclusion, the arguer's claim is not persuasive as it stands. To bolser it he must provide more information regarding the comparison between the old and the new technologies under the equal conditions. To better assess the argument, I would also need clearer evidence that whether the new technologies would be accepted commonly by most factories in the industry.

xmbjowlUID: 2182375

up!

xmbjowlUID: 2182375

upupup

xmbjowlUID: 2182375

upupup!!!要沉了啊

yhyrobertUID: 208875

Tomorrow is the day for my composition test, I pray that God will bless it .I am nevous because I am not well prepared .

xmbjowlUID: 2182375

我晕～这哥们儿咋发这儿了呢？不过我还是祝福你吧，呵呵～

mayaUID: 199038

cause you have said that "God is in your heart" in your personal signature, hehe
bless that nervous guy

xmbjowlUID: 2182375

哈哈，原来如此啊～

mayaUID: 199038

此帖要顶，早上模考发挥的不错
莫非是传说中的“喜帖”？？:O

xmbjowlUID: 2182375

哈哈，欣然同意～那发发善心帮偶看看文章吧～怎么可能只用一堆up把文章顶起来呢？

mayaUID: 199038

TOPIC: ARGUMENT71 - Copper occurs in nature mixed with other minerals and valuable metals in ore, and the proportion of copper in the ore can vary considerably. Until fairly recently, the only way to extract pure copper from ore was by using a process that requires large amounts of electric energy, especially if the proportion of copper in the ore is low. New copper-extracting technologies can use up to 40 percent less electricity than the older method to process the same amount of raw ore, especially when the proportion of copper in the ore is high. Therefore, we can expect the amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry to decline significantly.
WORDS: 469        TIME: 上午 12:22:08          DATE: 2006-7-16

In this argument, the arguer claims that the total amount of electricity used by the copper-extraction industry would decline significantly. To support this claim the arguer points out that the new copper-extracting technologies are more energy-efficient, comparedwith the traditional method. Careful examination of this supporting evidence, however, reveals that it lends little credible support to the arguer's claim. 开头被人用滥了，建议换个自己的模板吧

First of all, the evidence cited in the argument is statistically unreliable as it stands. The comparison between the new technology and old one is under potential different conditions, thus leads to the result which cannot convince me. The arguer provides no evidence that the detailed proportion of copper in the ore under the two technologies resepectively 语法。和后面连起来写，no evidence that the detailed proportion of copper in each of the ores is equal.. In view of this aspect, we need statistics that whether the proportions are equal. Also, given the same content of copper in the ores studied, what about the amount of copper extracted (extraction)而且这句话有问题，想说铜含量不同需要不同的提取方法吗？? It is entirely possible that the amount of copper being extracted using （with） the new techonologies is much less than that using the old （one）. If so, who can accept the so-called energy-efficient of the new technologies?

Moreover, the assumption upon which that ？？the new methods would be broadly adopted isunsounded. After all, the arguer fails to convince me that the new copper-extracting technologies would be prevailing in the industry. Perhaps few factories would adopt the technologies because of its vague prosperity. Or perhaps the total amount of electricy in this industry would increase, since extracting the pure copper is just one stage of the holistic process of copper-extraction. Or perhaps replacing the old machines would require considerable costexpense which would deter most of the factories. Lacking such evidence it is entirely possible the new method exist temporarily and is doomed to fade out in the industry.

Given the extensive usage of the new methos in the industry, we cannot expect the amount of electricity used by copper-extraction industry to decline significantly. First, the output in the industry may experience a significant increase, thus leads to a larger consumption of eletric power inevitably. Besides, it is entirely possible that other phases during the whole course would require more electric power. If so, the expectation that the amount of declined electricity consumed in the industry is open to doubt. Also, other respects regarding a factory’s electricity consumption should also be taken into consideration. Such as the relative relevantsafety measures, improving the worker’s working environment, as well as their domitory. 扯的有点远了。说铜矿就好 All these aspects of a factory’s functioning require electricity.

In conclusion, the arguer's claim is not persuasive as it stands. To bolser it he must provide more information regarding the comparison between the old and the new technologies under the equal conditions. To better assess the argument, I would also need clearer evidence that whether the new technologies would be accepted commonly by most factories in the industry.
词汇、句子有点问题，写多自然就会好的
我说一下逻辑：前提是新技术能省电，然后用论据（与旧方法的比较）支持此前提，最后导出结论利用此技术可省大量电
所以你的攻击顺序应该考虑一下：1、是否运用此技术真的能省电？如果没有被广泛使用那说明其效率本身并不高（你的B2）
     2、然后才是你的B1，即即使此技术能够省电，但是与原先老方法相比有何优势？是否真能如论据说的那样？
     3、其实2论据基本可以批两段，而你的B3实质上是批了小错误，即此技术的成本问题，而这点在B1 的前提中已经说明
     4、另外一个是看了同主题中才知道的，即up to 40 percent，这里也是一个逻辑错误点，说明并不是每次利用新技术都能省40％的点
    5、就是模板痕迹太重
              最近一直在反思自己Argu的逻辑问题，所以批的狠了点。加油！
这是我今天的Argu，有时间就拍拍吧，没时间就算了，没关系https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1

xmbjowlUID: 2182375

太谢谢maya了，大家很少互改argu，你的建议很有用！我好好推敲一下～

mayaUID: 199038

有些地方可能说的不对，参考一下这两个帖子，别把你也给害了
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... e%3D1#pid1768851358
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... e%3D1#pid1768851365