The reading and the lecture are about likely disadvantages of booming business of selling fossils to the private sellers. The author provides three theories about the negative outcomes of selling fossils to the wealthy private buyers. On the other hand, the professor is not convinced of this and is of the opinion that selling fossils not only is not really terrible but also overweight not selling them.
To begin with the author argues that by selling fossils the public access to them will be blocked and fewer people can view these valuable materials. This specific argument is challenged by the lecture. According to the professor, trading fossils will keep them in touch for wider group of people such as schools or researchers.
Secondly, the writer disputes that scientists will lose access to the outstanding discoveries camouflaged in fossils by selling them to collectors. To delineate, scientists and laboratories are not able to compete collectors and grab fossils for research. In contrary, the lecturer opposes this notion by asserting that scientists have access to fossils first in order to evaluate and put value on them. The lecturer elaborates on his opinion by bringing up the point that nothing can be missed out during this time that fossils are available to researchers.
Finally, the author averts that commercial collector demolish vital evidence laid on the fossils during unearthing them. Moreover, it is stated in the article that researchers can come to important scientific proofs by filed work and studying fossils in their bed and surrounding. In contrast, the lecturer stance is that commercial sellers can find out more fossils than scientist and it is more important to unbury and find out more valuable fossils than just conducting research on the location of these fossils.
The reading and the lecture are about likely disadvantages of booming business of
selling
fossils
to the private sellers. The author provides three theories about the
negative
outcomes of
selling
fossils
to the wealthy private buyers.
On the other hand
, the professor is not convinced of this and is of the opinion that
selling
fossils
not
only
is not
really
terrible
but
also
overweight not
selling
them.
To
begin
with the author argues that by
selling
fossils
the public access to them will
be blocked
and fewer
people
can view these valuable materials. This specific argument
is challenged
by the lecture. According to the professor, trading
fossils
will
keep
them in touch for wider group of
people
such as schools or researchers.
Secondly
, the writer disputes that
scientists
will lose access to the outstanding discoveries camouflaged in
fossils
by
selling
them to collectors. To delineate,
scientists
and laboratories are not able to compete collectors and grab
fossils
for research. In contrary, the lecturer opposes this notion by asserting that
scientists
have access to
fossils
first
in order to evaluate and put value on them. The lecturer elaborates on his opinion by bringing up the point that nothing can
be missed
out during this time that
fossils
are available to researchers.
Finally
, the author averts that commercial collector demolish vital evidence laid on the
fossils
during unearthing them.
Moreover
, it
is stated
in the article that researchers can
come
to
important
scientific proofs by filed work and studying
fossils
in their bed and surrounding.
In contrast
, the lecturer stance is that commercial sellers can find out more
fossils
than
scientist
and it is more
important
to
unbury
and find out more valuable
fossils
than
just
conducting research on the location of these
fossils
.