▶ Your Answer : The
lecturer argues that the scenarios explaining the cause of Venus’s ashen light are
scientifically flawed. On the contrary, the reading passage introduces three possible causes. First, the formation of carbon dioxide from carbon
monoxide and oxygen in Venus’s atmosphere cannot be a cause. While such
recombination may occur, light emission of
such recombination is too faint to match the observed ashen light. The ashen
light was observed by astronomers with normal telescopes which would have been
impossible if the chemical procedure was the cause as suggested by the reading passage.
Second,
the ashen light is doubtful to be the sunlight reflected off clouds abound with
sulfuric acid. As Venus has constant exposure to the Sun, the ashen light must
be more frequently observed than currently recorded if the sunlight were the cause.
This rebuts the reading passage’s argument that ashen light is a mere
reflection by Venus’s clouds.
Lastly,
it is scientifically impossible for the ashen light to be aurorae. As
mentioned by the reading passage, aurorae are formed by the collision of plasma particles
to the atoms in the atmosphere. However, the entrance of the plasma itself is
only possible within the existence of magnetic fields. Frankly, Venus
has no magnetic field, which makes it impossible for Venus to have aurorae. This counters the reading passage’s last scenario of the ashen light being an aurora.
쓰는 방식이 신선하여 좋습니다. 다만 reading이 생각보다 너무 많이 나오고 있습니다. listening이 무조건 주가 되도록 써야하고, 그러기 위해서는 listening정말 자세히 들을 수 있도록 노력해야합니다. 또 뭐가 reading이지 listening인지 제대로 구분이 되어있지 않은 것 같습니다 more detail/ supporting detail이 있어야 할 것 같습니다.
|