The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine
The decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide clearly indicates the global pollution of water and air. Two studies of amphibians in Yosemite National Park in California confirm my conclusion. In 1915 there were seven species of amphibians in the park, and there were abundant numbers of each species. However, in 1992 there were only four species of amphibians observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. The decline in Yosemite has been blamed on the introduction of trout into the parks waters, which began in 1920 . But the introduction of trout cannot be the real reason for the Yosemite decline because it does not explain the worldwide decline.
Sample Essay
In this argument, the writer of the letter concludes that global pollution of water and air has caused a decline in the number of amphibians worldwide. To support his or her conclusion, the writer cites the results of two studies, seventy-five years apart, that purportedly show that the number of amphibians in one park in California, Yosemite National Park, have drastically declined. Additionally, the writer casts aside a given reason for the decline, stating that the introduction of trout to the park does not explain the worldwide decline in the number of amphibians. This argument defies simple logic and suffers from several critical fallacies.
First of all, the argument is based on only two studies in one specific part of the world, Yosemite National Park in California. It is impossible to pinpoint a worldwide theory for the decline of amphibians based on any number of studies in only one specific location in the world - the specific varieties of amphibians, geographical conditions and other location specific variables prohibit such a sweeping generalization. One very specific location cannot be used as a model for all other locations, even within one particular country, let alone the entire world. The writer provides no evidenced whatsoever that links the Yosemite study with any purported effects anywhere else in the global environment.
Secondly, the two separate studies were done seventy-five years apart. There is no evidence that the two studies were conducted in a similar manner over the same duration of time or even over the same exact areas of Yosemite National Park, or that the exact same study methods were used. For example, perhaps the first study lasted over an entire year and was conducted by twenty-five experts in amphibious biology, resulting in the finding of seven species of amphibians in abundant numbers. By contrast, perhaps the second study was conducted over a period of one week by a lone high school student as a school science project. The writer offers no basis on which to compare the two studies, leaving it open as to whether the two are truly comparable in their breadth, scope and expertise.
Finally, the writer notes that the decline in the amphibian population has been blamed on the introduction of trout into the parks waters in 1920, but then dismisses that argument on the purely specious basis that it does not explain the worldwide decline. This part of the argument blithely dismisses the very relevant fact that trout are known to eat amphibian eggs. This attempt to prove a negative is the last resort of those in search of some vain attempt to prove the truth of the matter that they are asserting. It is basically impossible to prove a negative this is an attempt to shift the burden of proof back on to the nonbelievers of the argument. The global environmental situation and that of Yosemite National Park are not perfectly correlated, and the fact that the trout may very well be responsible for the decline cannot simply be dismissed without further proof.
In summary, the writer fails to establish any causal relationship between global air and water pollution and the decline of amphibious life worldwide. The evidence presented is extremely weak at best and narrowly focuses on one tiny area of the globe, as well as putting forward as proof two studies about which almost nothing is known. For a stronger argument, the writer would need to directly put forth evidence associating air and water pollution with not only the decline at Yosemite but also throughout other areas of the world.
雅思口语“人物描述”应答策略
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-旅途的乐趣
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-黑暗后的黎明
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-追寻
雅思口语考试重在展示自我
雅思口语范文:newspaper
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-智者与天才
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-生活与公平
雅思口语话题素材:儿童节
雅思口语考试中西方有什么差别?
雅思口语素材:关于粽子
雅思口语素材:《西雅图不眠夜》经典台词
雅思口语天天练:无辜的英语表达
雅思口语900句:名字介绍
雅思口语考官最爱问的170个问题
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-神的尘土
雅思口语900句:谈论天气
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-限量版的时光
雅思口语第三部分练习话题(2)
雅思口语第三部分练习话题(3)
雅思口语900句:如此打招呼
雅思口语话题素材整理
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-接受过去
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-好运总会垂青你的
雅思口语第三部分练习话题(1)
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-智者寡言
雅思口语范文:一场演出
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-欺骗的喊声
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-摔倒了又怎样
雅思口语素材:好句推荐-真正快乐的人
不限 |
英语教案 |
英语课件 |
英语试题 |
不限 |
不限 |
上册 |
下册 |
不限 |