▶ Your Answer : Both of the author of the reading passage and the lecturer are talking about the origin of Carolina Bays. The author argues that meteorites impacts are responsible for their creation, whereas the lecturer argues that these attempts can be made to explain the origin coming up short. First of all, the lecturer claims that the oval shape of Carolina Bays do not explain its origin. This is because the strike of a meteorite has a circular effect on the surrounding area. The impact of the crash is dispersed equally to all directions, just like a bomb. This casts doubt on the author's assertion that oval shape of Carolina Bays indicates that they were made by meteorites. Next, the lecturer maintains that magnetic irregularities are not reliable evidences to support meteorites striking on Carolina Bays. According to the speaker, the magnetic irregularities were detected long time ago. The thing is that experts asserted that the inaccurate equipment in 1930s resulted in the discovery. This counters the author's argument that the detected magnetic irregularities are evidences for meteorites striking in Carolina Bays. The final point made by the lecturer is that the presence of nano-diamonds are not creditable evidence. This is because nano-diamons originates from a wide varieties of sources such as dust, rain, and fire. Fire here includes both forest fire and small fire caused by a candle. This contradicts the author's statement that the presence of nano-diamonds implies the fact that meteorites once struck the Earth.
Writing 0–30 score scale: Limited (1-16) / Fair (17-23) / Good (24–30)
ADDRESSING TOPIC
|
ORGANIZATION
|
PROGRESSION AND COHERENCE
|
LANGUAGE USE
|
GRAMMAR
|
GOOD
|
GOOD
|
FAIR
|
FAIR
|
GOOD
|
각 카테고리별 SCORE: LIMITED / FAIR / GOOD
|
- Spelling error 주의해주세요.
|