▶ Your Answer :
The lecturer claims that the reading’s assertion is groundless. This casts doubt on
the reading’s claim that there are proofs that can
explain the cause of TLPs. intro에서 TLP가 무엇인지에 대한 설명이 짧게 들어가면 좋겠습니다
First, the lecturer asserts that clouds of
lunar gas are not responsible for TLPs. To be specific, the occurrence of the
gases and TLPs have no relation, even are just coincidence.무엇이 우연인가요? Scientists don’t
know how much gases are in the lunar atmosphere, and only small amounts of
gases are seen from Earth. ->이 내용이 TLP와 어떻게 관련이 있나요? 좀 더 구체적으로 설명해주세요This
contrasts with the reading’s argument that the
phenomena are caused by clouds of lunar gas.
Second, the lecturer argues that there is no
evidence that clouds of dust cause TLPs. In order to be seen, dust should be
very large, but it isn’t. Also, there are
little amounts of dust above the lunar landscape. This refutes the reading’s insistence that clouds of dust floating above the lunar landscape
illuminate TLPs.
Lastly, the lecturer maintains that there
are insufficient data to consider solar radiation as a factor of TLPs. Through
many observations, scientists found that the periods of solar flares and those
of TLPs sometimes matched, but they didn’t
match more often. Therefore, they do not seem not to have any
correlation. This rebuffs the reading’s
point that solar radiation causes TLPs.
Writing 0–30 score scale
Fair(16-20)
전체적으로 각 포인트 설명이 충분하지 않다는 느낌이 드는데, 강연자가 제시한 상세한 자료까지 모두 언급해주는 것이 좋겠습니다. 문법적인
실수는 많지 않으나 문장과 어휘가 단순한 편이므로 좀 더 다양하게 표현해주시면 더 좋겠습니다. 수고 많으셨습니다^^ |