The reading passage contends that T. rex's arms were well-adapted for slashing attacks on its prey and provides several evidences that seem to uphold the claim. However, the lecture disapproves the reading passage by mentioning that it still remains unlikely that slashing would have been the primary purpose for such arms. The points made in the lecture will be elaborated in more detail below.
First of all, the lecture counterpoints the reading passage, which claims that there is existing evidence regarding the structure of the arms, by commenting that slashing would not have been a neccessity for survival. Several fossils show that the arms had initially been broken and have been put together after a long time has passed. T. rex must not have had enough power to perform slashing because it would have been vital to them and could have resulted in death.
Secondly, while the reading passage asserts that the claws of T. rex show an unusual feature which is well-suited to slashing, the lecture disapproves this point by claiming that this is highly irrelevant. The teeth were up to 30 centimeters long and have been proven to have the strongest biting pressure known in the world. Slashing the prey would not have made a significant difference compared to biting a prey because teeth would have caused most of the damage.
Last but not least, the reading passage contends that the length of the arms presents efficiency when slashing a prey. However, the lecture counterpoints this evidence by mentioning that this may be true only for young T. rex. Young T. rex had a relatively longer arm in proportion to the body compared to adult T. rex which would have helped them in catching prey. However, adult T. rex had jaws that were much more powerful than slashing, which led them to having child sized arm because they were no longer needed.
The
reading
passage
contends that T.
rex
's arms were well-adapted for
slashing
attacks on its prey and provides several evidences that seem to uphold the claim.
However
, the
lecture
disapproves the
reading
passage
by mentioning that it
still
remains unlikely that
slashing
would have been the primary purpose for such arms. The points made in the
lecture
will
be elaborated
in more detail below.
First of all
, the
lecture
counterpoints the
reading
passage
, which claims that there is existing evidence regarding the structure of the arms, by commenting that
slashing
would not have been a
neccessity
for survival. Several fossils
show
that the arms had
initially
been broken
and have
been put
together after a long time has passed. T.
rex
must
not have had
enough
power to perform
slashing
because
it would have been vital to them and could have resulted in death.
Secondly
, while the
reading
passage
asserts that the claws of T.
rex
show
an unusual feature which is well-suited to
slashing
, the
lecture
disapproves this point by claiming that this is
highly
irrelevant. The teeth were up to 30 centimeters long and have
been proven
to have the strongest biting pressure known in the world.
Slashing
the prey would not have made a significant difference compared to biting a prey
because
teeth would have caused most of the damage.
Last
but
not least, the
reading
passage
contends that the length of the arms presents efficiency when
slashing
a prey.
However
, the
lecture
counterpoints this evidence by mentioning that this may be true
only
for young T.
rex
. Young T.
rex
had a
relatively
longer
arm
in proportion to the body compared to adult T.
rex
which would have
helped
them in catching prey.
However
, adult T.
rex
had jaws that were much more powerful than
slashing
, which led them to having child sized
arm
because
they were no longer needed.