▶ Your Answer :
Both the lecturer and the writer are
discussing about whether the sale of fossils to private ownership is good or
not. The writer insists that fossil trade among individuals is not a good idea
because it can not only decline public interest in fossils, but also deprive scientists’
chances to access to the important fossils. The writer also worries about destroying
valuable scientific evidence by unearthing. However, the lecturer refutes the
reading passage by arguing that benefits from the trade outweigh the risk.
To begin with, the lecturer claims that selling
fossils to private ownerships enables public to have more chances to have an
experience of fossils. With private trades of fossils, many facilities
including public schools could make a chance to display fossils, and people can
see it easily. This goes against the reading passage’s claim: private trades of
fossils will deprive the chance of donating fossils to museums and this will discourage
public to have an interest on fossils.
Moreover, the lecturer casts doubt on the
writer’s opinion that important fossils would be extinct because of
inconsiderable unearthing by private collectors. The lecturer explains that
because every unearthed fossil has to be identified. All examinations are made
from experts or scientists, thus the writer’s worry about danger of destroying
fossils will not happen.
Lastly, the lecturer says that commercial
fossil collectors’ unearthing to discover fossils would make more chances to
access to unfound fossils. The lecturer thinks that the more people dig the
earth, the more chances of studying valuable scientific evidence come. The
lecturer also mentions that accepting high risk of damaging fossils is worthwhile,
considering that this can increase probability of new discoveries. This
contradict the reading passage’s assertion that commercial fossil collectors’
careless fossil discovery has to be stopped because it will ruin the
development of science by destroying important scientific evidence.
|