▶ Your Answer :
As far as bike lanes are concerned, the lecturer takes a stand that opposes the thesis of reading passage and presents three counterarguments. Specifically, the lecturer does not sympathize with the author's claim and argues that the advantages of bike lanes have been never occurred.
First, the lecturer discusses the same issue of bike lanes, but makes a rebuttal against the reading passage's view. In the lecturer's opinion, the number of people who commute by bike increased less than 1% because it is too demanding behavior. This argument contrasts with the writer's claim that the increased number of bicycles on the bike lanes would minimize the pollution of environment.
On the second idea of bike lanes in the reading passage, the lecturer takes a different standpoint. According to the lecturer, traffic congestion would not be abated because the drivers would be angry with shortned number of car lanes. This argument runs contrary to the author's view that bike lanes would diminish the traffic jam on the road.
Last but not least, in the lecture, the final point about the bike lanes is regarded as unsubstantiated and groundless. In fact, the lecturer notes that the incidents on the road would not be decreased because bikes assume that the lanes are completely their own lane. This critical argument contradicts the author's claim that accidents colliding with bikes and cars could be avoided.
|