▶ Your Answer :
There is an ample support to the author's claim that Carolina Bays originated from meteorite crash. However, the professor in the lecture gives several reasons as a rebuttal to the author's point.
First of all, the professor contends that it is not proved that the oval shape is a critical sign of meteorites crash. Mostly, when meteorites strike the ground, it makes a circular shape. This is because, at the moment they hit the ground, they give off a enormous energy, and so dissipate particles of the ground into every direction equally. This casts doubt on the reading passage's assertion that the oval figure of formations indicate that they were made by meteorites because the elliptical crater is similar to the shape in a Carolina Bay.
Next, the professor insists that the data of field research in the 1930's are not credible. (What does this research indicate?) The devices used in figuring out the magnetic data was primitive ones in the today's perspective. This would made make the study inaccurate or wrong due to the malfunctioning of the machines. (Why's that?) This counters the reading passage's claim that the unusual irregularities around the area, which is detected in research in the past, showed that it stems from meteorite collision because it often change the magnetic features near the rock.
Finally, the professor argues that the presence of nanodiamonds are not a conclusive evidence to that the bays were created by meteorites. Specifically, the nanodiamonds are materials which originate from a various sources, such as dusts in cosmos and fire. This refutes the reading passage's suggestion that the existence of nanodiamonds indicate that the meteorites made the bays, because the nanodiamonds are sufficient in meteorites.
채점기준표
|
Grammar
|
Contents
|
Example
|
Coherence
|
점수
|
3
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
Score
|
Fair 19-21
|
California bay가 meteorite crash에 의해 기원했다는 근거 세가지로 서술된 첫 번째 바디의 내용은 괜찮은 편이에요. 다만 두 번째 리서치와 세 번째 nano diamond포인트들은 각기 다른 내용만을 설명해주셨네요. 어떻게 주제문과 연계가 되는지 연결성을 밀접하게 설명해주셔야 합니다.
|
|