1.

The author claims that the woven baskets, which were believed
to have been unique to the Palean people, are not unique to
Palea. The author claims that the Brim river is very deep and
board so that Palean people can only cross the river with boats,
and there are no evidence of boat was found in village. However,
he presents insufficient evidence to support his argument.
Firstly, the author fail to provide evidence Pelean people do not have
the technique on making boat. Boats have not found may because
of the technique of archaeology is not mature, the boat is totally
damaged so that archeologist cannot identify the boat, the boat is
embamed under the river. In fact, Pelean people can simply use a
big tree trunk to across the river.
Secondly, Brim River is very deep and broad now, but there are not
mentioned about what is the geography of the river. Brim river could
be just a narrow and shallow river, or even was not a river, so that
Palean people could cross the river by simple technique and
transferred the Palean baskets to Lithos in the past. Without giving
the evidence on the geography of the river, the author cannot claim
the Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean.
Thirdly, the Palean baskets may not only transferred by people. For
that reason, the basket could be transferred to Lithos by flooding,
Palean people throw it into the river, and it was drift by the water
flow.
There is not supportive evidence to show the assumption the author
make. So that he is failed to conclude the Palean baskets were not
uniquely Palean.

1. In this argument, the author claims the Palean baskets were not
uniquely to Palean by considering the circumstances of the Brim
River and failure to find the Palean boats. At first glance, the
authors claim appears to be convincing, but further reflection
reveals that there are insufficient evidence to support his claims.
The reasons are stated as follows.
First and foremost, the argument is based on a false analogy. By
considering no evidence of Palean boat had been found, the author
simply they could not make their own boat. However, a Palean boat
had not been found may contributed by many reason. For example,
the ancient Palean boat was totally worn out so that no evidence
could be found. Even the Palean boat had not totally worn out, the
archeologist may not recovery and analysis the redidest of the boat.
Furthermore, the archeologists may not have the advance tools and
technique to investigate the Palean, so that no evidence of Palean
boat had been found. Also, Lithos could have the ability to making
boat so they could transfer the baskets. But no evidence have
provided that Lithos could not make boat. To strengthen his
argument, the author would benefit by providing supportive
evidence that Palean people had not the boat making technique.
Apart from that, the author points out the river is deep and board,
Palean people could not crossed it without an boat. However, the
river could be another case in the past. It could be just a shallow
and narrow river, so that Palean people could pass the river simply.
The river might not exist in the ancient time. The Palean and Lithos
were simple connected by ground. To strengthen his argument, the
author should provide evidence that the landform of the Brim River
in the ancient time.
Finally, the author implies the basket can only transfer to Lithos by
human. However, it could be transferred by other methods. Such as
Brim River suffer from flooding, so the Palean baskets drift by the
water flow. Or the basket was transferred by typhoon, so it is found
in Lithos.
To sum up, the claims reached in this argument support by
insufficient evidence. To make a logically acceptable, the author
should have to provide supportive evidence that Palean and Lithos
people had not the ability to make boat. Also, author should provide
the geographical information of the Brim River in the ancient time.