In this set of materials, the reading states that there are many doubt about creating discovery structure by bees in 200 million years ago and brings three different hypotheses to support. However, the lecture finds all the ideas not convincing and believes it is perfectly possible for bees to exist in 200 million years ago and provides some evidence to refute them all.
First of all, the author of reading claims that there are no bee's fossil from 200 million years ago and the oldest one is about 100 years ago. In contrast, the lecture argues that it is true that we do not have fossil from that date but maybe there were not any good condition for preserving the fossils on that time. Producing liquid by tree which is resin bring good condition for bee's fossil to preseve and no bee's fossils means no trees that produce that resin and it is not mean no bees on that time.
Furthermore, it is mentioned in the reading passage that flowering plants do not exist on that time so we cannot had bee 200 million years ago. On the contrary, the lecture contends that it is possible for bees on that time to feed on pre-flowering plant such as pine tree and there was adaptation for them to feed on them.
Finally, the author is of the opinion that the lack of some details of bee's nest is the good reason to say this fossile are not belong to bees. Conversely, the lecture explains that there are chemical evidences that show this fossils had same details with today's nest. In fact, in one experiment proved that chamber fossils have water proofing materials same as todays materials.
In this set of materials, the reading states that there are
many doubt
about creating discovery structure by bees in 200
million
years ago and brings three
different
hypotheses to support.
However
, the
lecture
finds all the
ideas
not convincing and believes it is
perfectly
possible for bees to exist in 200
million
years ago and provides
some
evidence to refute them all.
First of all
, the author of reading claims that there are no
bee
's
fossil
from 200
million
years ago and the oldest one is about 100 years ago.
In contrast
, the
lecture
argues that it is true that we do not have
fossil
from that date
but
maybe there were not any
good
condition for preserving the
fossils
on that time. Producing liquid by tree which is resin bring
good
condition for bee's
fossil
to
preseve
and no bee's
fossils
means no trees that produce that resin and it is
not mean no
bees on that time.
Furthermore
, it
is mentioned
in the reading passage that flowering plants do not exist on that time
so
we cannot
had
bee 200
million
years ago.
On the contrary
, the
lecture
contends that it is possible for bees on that time to feed on
pre-flowering
plant such as pine tree and there was adaptation for them to feed on them.
Finally
, the author is of the opinion that the lack of
some
details
of bee's nest is the
good
reason to say this
fossile
are not
belong
to bees.
Conversely
, the
lecture
explains
that there are chemical evidences that
show
this
fossils
had same
details
with
today
's nest. In fact, in one experiment proved that chamber
fossils
have water proofing materials same as
todays
materials.