GRE作文是中国学生比较头痛的，经常准备很多时间最后还是只得到3.5。我之所以得到6分，个人认为我的文风比较淳朴扎实，有科学性，写的思路比较广(正、反、特)，字数也比较多(I800+、A700+)。
Thirdly, the editoral’s conclusion relies partly on the fact that a bank has agreed to fund the
resort’s development. However, this fact alone does not lend support to the assertion that local
merchants will benefit. Common sense tells me that the bank agreed to fund the project
because it believes the resort will be profitable, not because it believes other local merchants
will benefit. In fact, a profitable ski resort might very well draw business away from local
merchants.
In conclusion, the argument is untenable as it stands. To strengthen it, the editorial’s author
must provide clear evidence that the resort would increase business for the town’s merchants
rather than drawing business away from these merchants. To better evaluate the argument,
we would need more information about the bank’s reasons for agreeing to fund the project –
especially whether the bank also lends to existing local merchants whose interests would be
affected by the resort.
Argument 46
The Trash-Site Safety Council has recently conducted a statewide study of possible harmful
effects of garbage sites on the health of people living near the sites. A total of five sites and
300 people were examined. The study revealed, on average, only a small statistical correlation
between the proximity of homes to garbage sites and the incidence of unexplained rashes
among people living in these homes. Furthermore, although it is true that people living near the
largest trash sites had a slightly higher incidence of the rashes, there was otherwise no
correlation between the size of the garbage sites and people's health. Therefore, the council is
pleased to announce that the current system of garbage sites does not pose a significant
health hazard. We see no need to restrict the size of such sites in our state or to place any
restrictions on the number of homes built near the sites.
The Trash-Site Council concludes here that there is no public-health reason to restrict the
size of trash sites or their proximity to homes. The Council cites its recent statewide study
involving five sites and 300 people; in the study the Council observed only a small correlation
between the residents’ proximity to a trash site and unexplained rashes, and only a “slightly
higher incidence” of rashes among people living near larger sites. The study suffers from
certain statistical and other problems, which render the Council’s argument based upon it
unpersuasive.
First, the Council has not convinced me that the five sites in the survery are representative
of trash sites in general throughout the state – in terms of their impact on the health of nearby
residents. Admittedly, the study was a “statewide” one. Nevertheless, it is entirely possible that
the five sites studied are characterized by certain environmental conditions that are not typical
of most sites in the state and which render nearby residents either more or less susceptible to
rashes and other health problems. 感谢您阅读《GRE作文范文大全（113） 》一文，出国留学网(liuxue86.com)编辑部希望本文能帮助到您。