▶ Your Answer : The lecturer argues that the hypotheses to explain the phenomenon of "will-o'-the-wisp" are not convincing. This casts doubt on the reading passage's claim that there are several scientific explanations for the existence of the will-o'-the-wisp. First, the lecturer asserts that the lights exerted from the chemical reaction of gases do not resemble the appearance of the will-o'-the-wisp at all. To support her saying, the lecturer provides one research done on the chemical illumination; the chemical illumination displayed a cool, greenish look, while the will-o'-the-wisp generally shows warm yellow or white color. This contradicts the reading passage's claim that the chemical illumination and the glow of will-o'-the-wisp look alike. Next, the lecturer contends that the abdomens of flying insects such as fireflies cannot be a reasonable explanation for the phenomenon. In fact, the reverse is the truth. While fireflies are often spread across a large area, emitting lights here and there, the light of will-o'-the-wisp is almost always found at one specific place. This opposes the reading passage's claim that people often misconceive fireflies as the will-o'-the-wisp. Lastly, the lecturer explains that barn owls have nothing to do with the will-o'-the-wisp. She claims that the feathers of barn owls are not entirely white; therefore, the light reflected by the feathers looks nothing like will-o'-the-wisp. In addition, there are no light sources around barn owls' habitat. This proves that the reading passage's claim that barn owls are the source of the mysterious glow lack evidence. |