In this argument, the arguer advocates that [main idea].
Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, it is in fact ill-conceived.
The reasons are stated as follows.
In the first place, the arguer assumes that [fallacy 1].
Although this is entirely possible, the arguer offers no evidence to
substantiate this crucial assumption. It is very likely that [reason 1].
An appropriate example is not very far to seek. [example 1].
The arguer's reasoning is definitely flawed unless the arguer can convince me
that these and other possible scenarios are unlikely.
In the second place, the arguer assumes that [fallacy 2].
Nevertheless, there is no guarantee that it is necessarily the case, and the arguer does not
supply any evidence to confirm this assumption. It is quite possible that [reason 2].
To illustrate this point clearly, let us take a look at the following representative example.
Without accounting for and ruling out these and other alternative explanations,
the arguer cannot bolster the recommendation.
The last but not the least important, even if the evidence turns out to
support the foregoing assumptions, the arguer just simply assumes that [fallacy 2]
and neither any conclusive scientific evidence nor any anecdotal evidence
is provided to affirm this assumption.
It is reasonable to doubt that what the arguer assumes will not happen in reality.
It is just as possible that [reason 3].
For example, [example 3].To reach the cited conclusion,
the arguer must explain either why none of these alternatives is available
or why none of them is able to sustain.
To sum up, the arguer’s argument mentioned above is not based on valid evidence or sound reasoning,
neither of which is dispensable for a conclusive argument.
In order to draw a better conclusion, the arguer should reason more convincingly,
cite some evidence that is more persuasive, and take every possible consideration into account.