一篇argument关于balmer island的~求大神看看，求踩

ashley2922

主要想让大神看看模版OK不？还有语言什么的需要怎么改进~11月10号考，希望作文能上4.0~~

5.The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Balmer Island Gazette.

OnBalmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, thepopulation increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the numberof accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of BalmerIsland limit the number of mopeds rented by the island`s moped rental companiesfrom 50 per day to 25 per day during the summer season. By limiting the numberof rentals, the town council will attain the 50 percent annual reduction inmoped accidents that was achieved last year on the neighboring island of Seaville,when Seaville`s town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals.

592words, 30 minutes

Inthis argument, the author advocates that Balmer Island`s town council willattain the 50 percent annual reduction in moped accidents with the limitation ofmoped`s rentals. Although this argument may seem reasonable at first glance, itis in fact ill-conceived. The reasons are stated as follows.

Inthe first place, in this argument, it is true that the population increasesduring the summer months and mopeds are popular transportation on BalmerIsland. The author assumes that accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians areall due to fallacy of mopeds. However, it is possible that the accidents betweenmopeds and walkers happen mostly owing to the fact that the walkers not obeyrules well and they always compete with mopeds for road. Then it is useless tolimit the number of mopeds rented since those accidents have nothing to do withmopeds. Although it is entirely possible that the accidents involving mopeds andpeople are because of mopeds, the author offers no evidence to substantiatethis crucial assumption. The author`s reasoning is definitely flawed unless theauthor can convince me that these and other possible scenarios are unlikely.

Inthe second place, the author presumes the limitation on rentals of mopeds canlargely circumscribe the number of mopeds on the island.  Nevertheless, there is no guarantee that itis necessarily the case and the author does not supply any evidence to confirmthis presumption. It is quiet likely that most mopeds on Balmer Island are notrental ones. To illustrate this point clearly, let us take a look on arepresentative possibility. There is a chance that most mopeds on Balmer Islandbelong to its residents and the rental ones are only a small fraction of it.Consequently, limiting the number of rental mopeds could not any influence onthe mopeds` accidents. Without accounting for or ruling out these and otheralternatives, the author cannot bolster this recommendation.

Thelast but not the least important, even if the evidence that the limitation onthe rental companies can reduce the mopeds turns out to support the foregoingconjectures, the author just simply supposes that the mopeds` accidents willdecreased like Seaville`s and neither any conclusive scientific evidence norany anecdotal evidence is provided to affirm this supposition. It is reasonableto doubt what the author hypothesis will not happen in reality. It is justpossible that even the number of mopeds decreases, the accidents of them willnot decrease or will not decrease as Seaville`s. Since there is no informationabout the similarity of Balmer Island and Seaville, it is not pellucid toconclude the same result will come from the same action. Even if Seaville has achieved50 percent reduction on mopeds accidents by this identical circumscription,Balmer Island may have different case that the number of mopeds on Balmer istoo many that limiting rental companies to rent mopeds from 50 per day to 25per day would not reduce the total number of mopeds effectively. Thus, thecouncil of Balmer will not attain the 50 percent reduction on the number ofmopeds accidents. To reach the cited conclusion, the author must explain eitherwhy none of these and other alternatives is available or why none of them isable to sustain.

Tosum up, the author`s argument mentioned above is not based on valid evidence orsound reasoning, neither of which is dispensable for a conclusive argument. Todraw better conclusion, the author should reason more convincingly, cite someevidence that is more persuasive, and take every possible consideration intoaccount.