TOPIC: ARGUMENT150 - 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 park's waters, which began in 1920 (trout are known to eat amphibian eggs). But the introduction of trout cannot be the real reason for the Yosemite decline because it does not explain the worldwide decline." WORDS: 274 TIME: 0:38:42 DATE: 2009-1-18

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the decline in the numbers of amphibians in Yosemite National Park in California indicates the global pollution of water and air. In addition, the arguer reasons that two studies shows that the number of species of amphibians in this park were drastically reduced between 1915 to 1992. This line of reasoning is flawed in several aspects. First of all, as the arguer claimed, the decline in Yosemite has been blamed on the introduction of trout into the park's waters in 1920. However, the aruger unfairly assumes that the introduction of trout brought no influence about the species reduce. It is possible that the trout ate much amphibian's eggs in these years and badly affects this area's eco-balance. In addition, the arguer attempts to establish a causal relationship between two matters: the amphibians reduced in Yosemite park and the global pollution of water and air. What's more, the evidence which the arguer used is the one prviousely used as a conclusion. Finally, the aruger omits several other concers that should be addressed. For example, the data about the park's temperture and humility changed between 1915 to 1992, the number of the trout in the recent years, the number of amphibians in other park between 1915 to 1992. In summary, the conclusion reached in this argument is invalid and misleading. To make the argument more convicing, the arguer would have to prove that the number of the amphibians in other park shows the same decline trendency. Moreover, I wolud suspend my judgement about the credibility of the recommendation until the arguer can provide concrete evidence that I notice before.

最近学习jsp，今天用jsp+jdbc写了一个比较简陋的留言板 有兴趣去看看吧。http://www.quake0day.com/guestbook

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits. To support the conclusion, the arguer point out that a follow-up study shows that the Leeville citizens checked out of each of the public libraries in Leeville was the mystery novel, not the literary classics as Leeville respondents claimed before.This argument suffers from serveral critical fallacies. First of all, aruger fails to provided the details of the respondents. How the researchers found these respondents? The author assumes that the first respondents may respondented the whole Leeville citizens. In fact, with no solid evidence, this assumption is weak. Maybe, there are many dissimilarities between the respondents and the Leeville residents. In addition, the arguer fails to rule out the possibility that the most frequently checked out books may not be the type of book citizens preffered. It is possible that there are more mystery novels in these libraries in Leeville than other type of book. Thus it has much more probabilits to be checked out. Finally, the argument omits serveral other concerns that should be addressed. For example, which group of people lived nearby the public libraries, how long time the next study continue. To conclude, this argument is not persuasive as it stands. Before we accept the conclusion, the arguer must present more facts to prove that the two studies has a utterly link. To solidify the argument, the arguer wolud have to provide more evidence concering about the details in these two studies.

人总是有惰性的。我就算再努力，也没法保持一整天精力充沛。有的时候脑袋还是得要休息一下子的......

今天购买了godaddy的空间，这几天测试一下新空间的速度。之后就要开始进行项目B/S系统的设计开发了。不过在此之前，我应该先把以前答应邹云开发的农研会的网站给搞定~~都已经答应了快1年了.........汗

今天开始英语写作，恩...很有挫折感，和牛人们的差距再一次体现出来。

学习flex有一种感觉——看书的时候看什么都觉得自己已经会了，不用看了，等到真正开始做的时候，又不知道从何做起。眼高手低也许就是这个样子吧...或许应该再踏实一些，心不能这么浮躁..

今天早点休息。

TOPIC:Statistics collected from dentists indicate that three times more men than women faint while visiting the dentist. This evidence suggests that men are more likely to be distressed about having dental work done than women are. Thus, dentists who advertise to attract patients should target the male consumer and emphasize both the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff to nervous or suffering patients.

W:

The arguer attempts to convince us that the advertisement of dentists should target the male consumer and emphasize both the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and should focus on the effectiveness of anestheitc technique and the sensitivity to patients suffering from pain caused by dental work. The major assumptions underlying this argument are the statistics collected from dentists which show that three times more men than women faint while visiting the dentist. While this argument has some merits, several critical flaws seriously undermine the line of reasoning.

In the first place, samples for the survey should be statistically reliable. Unfortunately, from the survey we find little sign of such procedures for sampling--the arguer does not provide enough information on the basic number of this statistics form dentists, ohterwise a disproportionate number of male patients contribute to the statistics, thus doubting whether the respondents constitute a sufficiently large sample so as to be representative of the overall population of the dental patients. Unless the author can substantiate this assumption that advertisement should target the male patients, he cannot merely rely on such stattistics to draw the conclusion about dental patients.

In the seconde place, the author commit a fallacy of hasty generalization. Even if man are easier faint than women, it does not follow that men are more likely to be distressed about having dental work done than women are. It is highly possible other factors may have contributed to this phenomenon, such as light of dentist's office, or comfort of bed. The reason fewer women faint than men just probably is that they could sooner acclimate to the enviroment of dental clinic rather than men far from that the female patients are more difficultly suffering from pain or less sensitive to dental work than male patients. Without ruling out these possibilities, I can't hard-pressed agree with the author on the effectiveness of anesthetic techniques. For instance, men are tend to tolerant while suffering from pain. Women, however, are more likely yelp and may tell the dentist to stop. Thus, prevent them from suffering excessive pain.(bad example)

What further weakens the argument is the importance of advertisement may be not the same as which is accepted by dentists. Actually, the arguer provides no evidence that proposed advertising techniques is of help to attract more male patients, perhaps it is more likely that it is the female patients think a lot of the sensitivity of clinic staff to nervous or suffering patients. Maybe fewer men than women notice the advertisement of dentist player in TV or certain billboards in avenue.

To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have to provide more evidences about the possibilities mentioned above.

The arguer attempts to convince us that dentists should target the male consumer and emphasize both the effectiveness of their anesthetic techniques and the sensitivity of their staff to nervous or treat patients. The major assumptions underlying this argument are: statistics shows that three times more men than women faint while visiting the dentist. While this argument has some merits, several critical flaws seriously undermine the line of reasoning. In the first place, samples for the survey should be statistically reliable. Unfortunately, from the survey we find little sign of such procedures for sampling, thus doubting whether the respondents constitute a sufficiently large sample so as to be representative of the overall population of the circumstance. In the seconde place, the author commit a fallacy of hasty generalization. Even if man are easier faint than women, it does not follow that men are more likely to be distressed about having dental work done than women are. It is highly possible other factors may have contributed to this phenomenon. For instance, men are tend to tolerant while suffering in pain. Women, however, are more likely yelp and may tell the dentist to stop. Thus, prevent them from suffering excessive pain. What further weakens the argument is: it is more likely that it is the women think a lot of the sensitivity of clinic staff to nervous or suffering patients. To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have to provide more evidence concerning how statistics collected from the dentists. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information regarding the connection between the faint of patients and the distress they suffered.