▶ Your Answer : As far as the fossil from the broken T-rex's leg is concerned, the lecturer takes a stand that opposes the thesis of the reading and presents three counterarguments. Specifically, the lecturer does not sympathizes with the reading's view and argues that the findings can be explained by other hypothesis. In the first place, the lecturer points out that the soft substance is not a necessary presence for T-rex's blood vessels. Instead of that, organic materials from dead bacteria could fill the hollow blood channels. This directly contradicts the reading that the soft material in T-rex's leg bone can be evidence of the blood vessels. Secondly, the speaker goes on to say that iron can not be found in other species' fossils in the same place. Also, the spheres probably are probably not iron, but another mineral. This point tarnishes the impact of the reading that the existence of iron in the fossils of T-rex was contained by the spheres in red blood. Last but not least, the lecturer concludes by saying that collagen has not been in fossils from other older animals. Therefore, the remaining collagen could be not from T-rex, but from quite recent animals like human skins. This casts doubt on the reading passage that collagen was found in T-rex's bone. |