▶ Your Answer :
In the reading passage there is ample support for the author’s claim that there are some causes that make the Venus have a dim light. However, the professor in the lecture gives several reasons as a rebuttal to the author’s point. First, the professor contends that a chemical process cannot be the cause of the Venus’s light. The light that occurs during a chemical combination is so vague that an eminent telescope is necessary to watch the light. However, the illumination of the Venus can be observed by using a general telescope. This casts doubt on the reading passage’s claim that an ashen light of the Venus is the result of a chemical process that when carbon dioxide divides and recombines. Next, the professor insists that it is impossible for cloud to make an ashen light by reflecting the sunlight. The light of the Venus is hardly produced. However, cloud is exposed to the sunlight incessantly. If the sunlight were a cause of an ashen light, it would have been observed more frequently. This counters the reading passage’s assertion that the faint light of the Venus is just a reflection of the sunlight that is made by dense cloud covering the planet. Finally, the professor argues that it is not able to be true that the glow is aurora. Aurora is only formed in magnetic fields. However, the Venus does not have such area. This refutes the reading passage’s suggestion that the illumination of the Venus is just aurora that shows when plasma from the Sun makes an entry into the planet’s atmosphere.
예상점수: 27-30 총평: 별다른 문제가 없어보이네요. 문단도 잘 정리해주셨고 문법적인 오류도 거의 없습니다. 유일하게 aurora의 철자에만 주의하시면 될 것 같아요. 수고 많으셨습니다.
|