- UID
- 741716
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2012-3-26
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
"Two studies of amphibians in Xanadu National Park confirm a significant decline in the numbers of amphibians. In 1975 there were seven species of amphibians in the park, and there were abundant numbers of each species. However, in 2002 only four species of amphibians were observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. One proposed explanation is that the decline was caused by the introduction of trout into the park's waters, which began in 1975. (Trout are kown to eat amphibian eggs.)
Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative expalnatons that could rival the proposed explanation and explain and explain how your expalnation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.
In the argument, the author concludes that there is a decline of amphibians in Xanadu National Park from 1975 to 2002 by the studies of amphibians in 1975 and 2002.The decline, the editor points out, is due to the introduction of trout into the park’s waters, statement that is unilateral, however.The speaker overlooks some other elements which can explain the decreased of amphibians.So, frankly, I don’t think the argument has enough explanation to elucidate the phenomenon of amphibians’ incline.
Indeed, according to the surveys of amphibians in Xanadu National Park, there has a significant decline in the numbers of amphibians, but can this represent the real situation of amphibians?Absolutely it can be explained by many other reasons.On one hand, Amphibians may change their habitats so that we cannot find them out easily in the previous habitat.On the other hand, Amphibians may change their life-style because of the changes in the environment, such as they appear only at night instead of coming out during day. In the circumstance, we cannot conclude that amphibians are really reduced, maybe it is just an illusion of incline.
Furthermore, although the numbers of amphibians are really reduced, we cannot conclude that it is only the trout, which are known to eat amphibian eggs, that contributes to the decline of the amphibians’ number.It is perhaps the natural reasons that the climate of this area has changed a lot during this period of time, such as the huge increase of temperature; a deadly disease increase the death rate of amphibians.It is also the human reasons that the pollution of the local area due to the mining factories built on the bank of this area’s rivers; many amphibians are killed because people can gain much benefit by selling their leather, teeth and meats.In these situations, number of amphibians can also be drastically reduced.
In addition, the speaker must provide evidences that the two surveys’ design and the implementation are in strict accordance with the scientific process; the conclusion is objective and neutral; the people who in charge of these surveys have no influence on other benefit relations.Moreover, the interval of the surveys is 27 years, which may have quite different conditions between the present Xanadu National Park and the past Xanadu National Park.Perhaps some animals are transferred to a new national park which has been built recently.If this situation exists, the consequence made by the two surveys is seemingly invalid.
In sum, in order to make the argument more convincing, the author should take into every possible consideration and provide more explanations to account for the facts presents in the arguments.
求版主狠拍了。。。。。。。。。。。。时间还是卡不下去。。。哎。。不过尽量没有查词了。。还有我觉得正文第三段写的很牵强附会呀。。我是硬要往explanation里扯的。
|
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-5-3 17:58:43
收藏
收藏
楼主
