In the reading passage there is ample support for the author's claim that there are several rational explanation on the cause of red rain in Kerala. (여기서 문단 구분 하지 말고) However, the lecturer gives some reasons as a rebuttal to the author's points.
(여기 첫 번째 point가 시작되는 데에서 문단을 끊으세요)
First, the lecturer contends that bats' blood cannot be the cause of red rain being the cause of red rain is far fetched. In order to make rain red produce red rain, large amount of bats' blood is needed. However, that amount of rings (wings?) and bones of bats were not found. This casts doubt on the reading passage's claim that blood of bats that were destroyed by thunder and meteor burst formed the red rain.
Next, the lecturer insists that it is not proven that volcanic eruption in Philippines being is the cause of red rain is not proven. If this was true, red rain should have occurred in Philippines as well, but it did not. Moreover, red rain should fall in countries that are located between the two regions, but that was not the case at all. This counters the reading passage's claim that eruption of Mount Mayon in Philippines is was the cause of red rain.
Finally, the lecturer argues that it is unreasonable that chemical pollution from factories forming forms red rain is unreasonable. There are only few factories in Kerala, thus, not that many enough chemicals are emitted to form red rain. Also, red rain didn't did not occur in cities near the factories. This refutes the reading passage's suggestion that pollutants emitted from factories caused red rain.
Writing 0-30 scale
Fair (23-24)
두 지문의 point를 잘 요약해서 비교했습니다. 다만 일부 문장 구조가 어색한 부분이 있어서 수정했으니 참고하세요. (각 문단의 첫 문장) TOEFL Writing은 academic writing을 평가하는 시험이므로 축약형은 (didn’t) 쓰지 마세요.