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.
Perhaps it is true that there is indeed a decline in the population of deer in Canada's arctic region. Yet the writer does not sufficiently provide evidence to substantiate his claim. The writer's conclusion, at once convincing, fails to hold water when looked at critically.
Firstly, the writer explains that reports from local hunters suggest that there is a decline in the population of deer. This is tantamount to hearsay and is not beyond any reasonable doubt. To ascertain the veracity of this claim, the writer should have compared data obtained from a population census carried out say a decade ago and then now. With such irrefutable figures, it will be without a shadow of doubt that there has been an actual decline in the population of deer.
The writer assumes that because sea ice is melting, owing to recent global warming trends, a decline in population is possible as deer have lost their migratory routes. This may well be true. However, Biology has proven that animals evolve and adapt to the changing circumstances of their environment. Who is to say that this has not happened with the Canadian deer? Should the writer be able to prove that the Canadian deer has not adapted to the changing environment, evolved into a swimmer for example, his conclusions remain moot.
Even if there is truly a decline in the population, attributing the decline to an inability of deer to migrate to more conducive climes is not enough. Cases have arisen where almost an entire species is wiped out by a deadly virus or disease. The writer has no evidence to show that this did not happen to the Canadian deer.
To effectively draw a believable conclusion on the decline of deer populations, it behooves the writer to do a proper research by collating data on deer populations and ruling out potential causes of deer disappearances, other than relying on unsubstantiated claims of local hunters.
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.
Perhaps it is true that there is indeed a decline in the population of deer in Canada's arctic region. Yet the writer does not sufficiently provide evidence to substantiate his claim. The writer's conclusion, at once convincing, fails to hold water when looked at critically.
Firstly, the writer explains that reports from local hunters suggest that there is a decline in the population of deer. This is tantamount to hearsay and is not beyond any reasonable doubt. To ascertain the veracity of this claim, the writer should have compared data obtained from a population census carried out say a decade ago and then now. With such irrefutable figures, it will be without a shadow of doubt that there has been an actual decline in the population of deer.
The writer assumes that because sea ice is melting, owing to recent global warming trends, a decline in population is possible as deer have lost their migratory routes. This may well be true. However, Biology has proven that animals evolve and adapt to the changing circumstances of their environment. Who is to say that this has not happened with the Canadian deer? Should the writer be able to prove that the Canadian deer has not adapted to the changing environment, evolved into a swimmer for example, his conclusions remain moot.
Even if there is truly a decline in the population, attributing the decline to an inability of deer to migrate to more conducive climes is not enough. Cases have arisen where almost an entire species is wiped out by a deadly virus or disease. The writer has no evidence to show that this did not happen to the Canadian deer.
To effectively draw a believable conclusion on the decline of deer populations, it behooves the writer to do a proper research by collating data on deer populations and ruling out potential causes of deer disappearances, other than relying on unsubstantiated claims of local hunters.
