▶ Your Answer :
The reading and the lecture both talk about
transient lunar phenomena, or TLP. The reading says that there are scores of
interesting and believable hypotheses which explain this phenomenon. However
the lecturer argues that the hypotheses mentioned in the reading are not
convincing. In fact, the clues to describe TLP are wrong.
Firstly, the reading states that the TLP
was attributes to clouds of lunar gas. On the contrary, the lecturer disagrees
with this statement. The lecturer contends that gases are not responsible of
TLP. In addition, detecting TLP at a lunar crater is just coincidence. Indeed,
there are only a small amount of gases are seen.
Secondly, In the reading, the author argues
that TLP is equal with clouds of dust floating above the lunar landscape. On
the other hand, the speaker maintains that the hypothesis in the reading doesn’t
have clear evidence. To be specific, for being visible from the Earth, clouds
must be large, huge, gigantic essentially. However, it can’t occur on the moon.
Furthermore if the particles from the space strike the moon and make dust, then
it can’t be corresponded to the situation when the people walked on the moon
freely from those particles the author states.
Thirdly, the reading goes on to say that
because of solar radiation, the TLP took place. However, the lecturer
contradicts this claim, arguing that it is based on scarce of information. This
is because the solar flares and TLP were systemically matched up.
Unfortunately, however, it didn’t match more often than not occur.
|