Your Answer ▼
The lecturer
argues that the speculations about the will-o'-the-wisp are not convincing.
This contradicts the reading passage's claim that there are plausible
hypotheses behind the phenomenon.
First, the
lecturer points out that chemical reactions are not responsible for the
will-o'-the-wisp. Scientist implemented experiments to explain the phenomenon.
The results determined that chemical reactions did not resemble the
will-o'-the-wisp. They showed cool and greenish colors, which are unlike with
the will-o'-the-wisp of warm and yellow ones. This casts doubt on the reading
passage's argument that the lights are a form of chemical illumination.
Next, the
lecturer suggests that the insistence that flying insects are the cause of the
phenomenon are not viable. This is because the flying insects are detected
large area, while the phenomenon seems like small ball of light. Moreover, they
blink on and off, but the phenomenon shows steady glow. This opposes the
reading passage's claim that flying insects may be the source of the
will-o'-the-wisp.
Lastly, the
lecturer discusses that the claim mentioned in the reading does not make sense.
The reason is that barn owls are not entirely white, so their feathers are not
enough to reflect lights.
This refutes the
reading passage's argument that barn owls might be the cause of the
will-o'-the-wisp. |