▶ Your Answer : In this given set of materials, there is some discrepancy between the views of the lecturer and the author over the issue of genetic modification, a process used to change an organism's genes and hence its characteristics. With three cogent explanations, the lecturer raises objections to the alleged benefits of genetically modified trees. To start with, the lecturer debunks that the author's first conjecture since genetic modified trees can induce problems. To elaborate in detail, the lecturer claims that gentically modified trees could not survive from another conditions. She adds that they are gentically uniform to specific conditions so that if climate is changed, they will all die. This view is in direct opposition to the author's claim that genetically modified trees can survive well than nature trees. In addition, the lecturer also indicates dissent over the author's idea on economic profits. The lecturer sounds convinced that the author is making a manifest error about genetically modified trees since farmers should pay more to plant them. However, the author clarifies that genetically modified trees can bring benefits to farmers because of various advantages of them. Thirdly, the lecturer goes on to expound that the author's final point on preventing overutilization is flawed. The lecturer mentions that genetically modified trees are harmful on nature trees. She explains that they can become outcompeting over nature trees rather saving them. However, this counters the author's theory that people can satisfy their demand for wood because genetically modified trees can be replaced nature trees. Therefore, with these three convincing explanations the lecturer posits, the author's assumptions are all rendered invalid. |