▶ Your Answer :
In the lecture, the speaker mentions that three explanations about the existence of 'will-o'-the-wisp' are not convincing. This contradicts the reading passage's assertion that three hypotheses to explain its source are plausible.
To begin with, the speaker claims that chemical illumination occured by gas emission does not resemble the will-o'-the-wisp. This is due to the fact that the color of chemical illumination is cool and green, wheareas that of the mysterious lights is warm and yellow. This challenges the reading passage's point that the will-o'-the-wisp is not a form of chemical illumination.
Second, the lecturer asserts that fireflies not actually the source of the anomalous lights. The reasons is, the light from fireflies speareads while the will-o'the-wisp does not. Also, flying insects' lights blink, wheares the mysterious lights do not flash or blink at all. This rebuffs the reading passage's claim that the source of the will-o'-the-wisp might be flying insects.
Last, the speaker says that the hypothesis that barn owls may be the cause of the mysterious lights does not make sense. In fact, owls' feathers are not white, so it cannot reflect light brightly. Moreover, the thing is, there cannot be light source around barn owls. This casts doubt on the reading passage's assertion that the cause of will-o'-the-wisp might be barn owls. |