Raynor 's first prescription is to remember that persuasive storytelling requires that the storyteller leave out the weeds .

雷诺的第一个处方是：务必记住，有说服力的故事需要讲故事的人忽略杂音。

But the reasoning in the australian case is persuasive .

然而，此案中的论证推理却很有说服力。

Neither of these arguments is even close to persuasive .

但这两种论证均无法令人信服。

On the face of it his claim appears persuasive still .

基本上，他的观点仍是有说服力的。

Can all this repetition really be persuasive ?

如此重复果真有说服力吗？