▶ 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 attributesd 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, Iin 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 does not
have clear evidence. To be specific, for being visible from the Earth, clouds
must be large, huge, gigantic essentially. However, it can’t cannot 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 did not match more often than not occur.
[Score] 28-29 [Feedback] - Well Done! 잘 쓰셨습니다. Introduction에서 리딩과 렉쳐의 관계도 잘 설명해주었고, 각 문단에서 각각의 주장들도 잘 짚어주었어요. 다만, 이러한 글에서는 축약형을 삼가주시고 풀어써주시길 바래요~
|