Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic regions. They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of the year. Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. Unfortunately, according to reports from local hunters, the deer populations are declining. Since these reports coincide with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, we can conclude that the purported decline in deer populations is the result of the deer's being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument
The following argument is flawed for numerous reasons. Primarily, it is based on unwarranted assumption that deer’s in arctic region of Canada are not able to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea, rendering its main conclusion that this has lead to decrease in deer population, invalid. Indeed, there are several unstated assumptions which if do not hold true, argument will totally fall apart.
The argument fails to provide justification that decline in deer population is correctly reported by the local hunters. Deer’s might have found new areas. Where there is abundance of food, as well as favourable climatic conditions. Also, the argument doesn't provide information regarding "what time this report is created" Maybe its created at the time when deer’s have already moved to different region in the search of food. While, using this report, one need to know for how long is this trend. Maybe it showed just two months back. If this is the case, report might not come to correct conclusion. The argument had been strong had it provided information regarding the report, the time duration for which it is created, how they counted the deer population, What was before population what is now. What amount of decline has come. Also, the author need to find information about the deer's, even if the population is decreased, what led to decrease "Have deer’s died or moved to some other nearby favourable places".
Furthermore, the argument assumes that decrease in population is coinciding with global warming. For one, it could be that global warming had no effect in this part of arctic region. The argument had been strong if it mentions about, "what effect the global warming had on this region, even if there is effect, how it affected this region. Maybe, this effect had nothing to do with the deer’s, of that place. For them it could all be same. The argument need to study these factors, to come to right conclusion.
Moreover, the argument assumes that because deer’s have not been able to follow the age-old migration pattern so there is decline. Maybe this migration pattern was not providing ample food opportunity to the deer’s. And they had to change for the better. This change was required for the betterment of their survival. The argument need to find if deer’s are not using this pattern, than what changes they made. What were the reasons for the change. Also the time, since when these changes occurred.
Because argument is based on several unstated assumptions, it failed to provide any convincing case, that decrease in deer population is due to global warming which had direct effect on the age-old migration patterns of deer. To come to correct conclusion, author need to study the effect of global warming arctic region. Moreover, how it affected the deer. Also the report that is submitted by the local people. Author need to thoroughly study all the above.
Comments
Hi Thanks for the comments.
Hi Thanks for the comments.
I have written again, Can you please help with it. Thanks.
The following assumption is flawed for numerous reasons. Primarily, it is based on unwarranted assumption that there is the decline in the deer population rendering its main conclusion that decline is the result of the deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea, invalid. Indeed there are several unstated assumptions which if do not hold true, argument will totally fall apart.
The argument is based on the assumption that the report submitted by the local hunters is 100 percent correct. For one, the report is submitted by local hunters and not by experts. There can be flaws in the observation by local people. Moreover, these local hunters might have provided with the wrong reporting data, they themselves might be involved in the illegal hunting. The argument had been strong if this report is verified for its correctness. Even if the report is correct, the author needs to find certain data like "Since how long the declining trend is prevailing ?" , "Which areas are considered in the report?", "The percentage decline in deer population" and the factors which led to these decline.
Furthermore, without any justification the argument is based on assumption that the report from the local hunters is coinciding with recent global warming trends, that have caused the sea ice to melt. There could be other reasons and not global warming. If global warming was the only reason then, the other animals of that place would have also affected but nothing is mentioned the argument regarding them. Other prominent factors could be increased human intervention the regions of deer, increased number of predators. There could be air or water pollution. Or some epidemic outbreak, which is unknown to the people. The argument had been strong if the author had considered the reasons for the report to be true. There are several factors influencing the life of animals, other than global warming. There could even be the case that global warming had not affected part of the region. Author need to study the affect of global warming on this region before coming to the conclusion.
Finally, the argument assumes that purported decline in deer population is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea. The decline could be due to unavailability of proper food, unfavourable climatic conditions. Moreover, deer might have started to follow another migration route. The route could be more promising to them, providing all the necessary facilities required by the deer to live. Had the argument provided information regarding migration pattern that was followed before and what pattern is being followed now, the assumption had been strong. The author needs to find what led the deer to change their route.
Because the argument is based on several unstated assumption, it fails to provide any convincing case that decline in deer population is due to the fact that deer are unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea. The author should have provided information regarding the new changes observed in deer migration routes, also what factors led to the decline, is it hunting, pollution or unfavourable living conditions.
argument 1 -- not OK. We will
argument 1 -- not OK. We will have to accept all data are correct from the survey or study or report from ETS. We can only say: maybe illegal hunting is one of the reasons.
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- not exactly. and 'The decline could be due to unavailability of proper food, unfavourable climatic conditions' is duplicated to argument 2.
need to say: the ice is melt, but maybe still strong enough to hold deer to move from the frozen sea.
--------------------
argument 1 -- not OK. maybe illegal hunting is one of the reasons for the decline.
argument 2 -- not OK. //maybe there are other reasons to cause the decline not the global warming.
argument 3 -- not OK. suppose it is related to global warming, it is still possible for deer to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.
--------------------
flaws:
In GRE/GMAT, we have to accept all data or evidence are true. It is important to find out loopholes behind surveys or studies. Loopholes mean that we accept all surveys told are true, but there are some conditions applied, for example:
It works for time A (10 years ago), but it doesn't mean it works for time B (nowadays).
It works for location A (a city, community, nation), but it doesn't mean it works for location B (another city, community, nation).
It works for people A (a manager), but it doesn't mean it works for people B (a worker).
It works for event A (one event, project... ), but it doesn't mean it works for event B (another event, project...).
--------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: ? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 31 15
No. of Words: 488 350
No. of Characters: 2357 1500
No. of Different Words: 195 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.7 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.83 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.389 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 174 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 114 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 75 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 43 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 15.742 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.207 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.452 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.278 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.438 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.058 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5