The reading discusses a fascinating topic pertaining to incapability of Pterosaurs which is an ancient time reptile and provides three reasons of support. However, the professor explains that pterosaurs are indeed capable of fly and opposes each of the author's reasons.
First, reading passage mentions that assuming pterosaurs had cold-blooded anatomy as today's reptiles. Thus, cold-blooded reptiles have slow mechanism induce them to be unable to produce high energy which is essential to fly. In contrary, the professor provides information that recent research on fossil revealed that these animal had dense hair covered body and fur which are normally found on animal whose are warm-blooded. Clearly, a disparity exists between the article and the evidence exhibited by the professor. As a result, we can safely assume that, indeed the pterosaurs were capable of flying owing to they were warm-blooded animals.
Second, the article pushes forth the idea that limitation existed on their weight. Since, they were as large as a giraffe, they cannot flapping the wing to take off. Nonetheless, the professor contends that their anatomic features approved that they had hallow bone which were light weighted bones so they were quite light to take off. Consequently, we can argue that indeed the claim made in the reading is unsubstantiated.
Finally, the reading posits that to lift off from ground animals need to use their legs in order to jump, run and so on. On contrary, old times winged reptiles had small legs and not much muscles that were concurred by a fossil. The professor refutes this point by explaining that actually the pterosaurs had 4 limbs which were capable of producing necessary energy so as to run or jump compared to two limped bird.
In summary, while both the reading and the lecture provide interesting information with regard to ancient group of winged reptile, a significant amount of evidence supports that the professor presented much more legitimate and tangible factors. Thus, the reading passage fails to justify the claim toward stand points of the professor.
The
reading
discusses a fascinating topic pertaining to incapability of
Pterosaurs
which is an ancient time reptile and provides three reasons of support.
However
, the
professor
explains
that
pterosaurs
are
indeed
capable of
fly
and opposes each of the author's reasons.
First
,
reading
passage mentions that assuming
pterosaurs
had
cold
-blooded anatomy as
today
's reptiles.
Thus
,
cold
-blooded reptiles have slow mechanism induce them to be unable to produce high energy which is essential to
fly
. In contrary, the
professor
provides information that recent research on fossil revealed that these animal had dense hair covered body and fur which are
normally
found on animal whose are warm-blooded.
Clearly
, a disparity exists between the article and the evidence exhibited by the
professor
.
As a result
, we can
safely
assume that,
indeed
the
pterosaurs
were capable of flying owing to they were warm-blooded animals.
Second, the article pushes forth the
idea
that limitation existed on their weight. Since, they were as large as a giraffe, they cannot
flapping
the wing to take off. Nonetheless, the
professor
contends that their anatomic features approved that they had hallow bone which were light weighted bones
so
they were quite light to take off.
Consequently
, we can argue that
indeed
the claim made in the
reading
is unsubstantiated
.
Finally
, the
reading
posits that to lift off from ground animals need to
use
their legs in order to jump, run and
so
on. On contrary,
old
times winged reptiles had
small
legs and not
much
muscles that
were concurred
by a fossil. The
professor
refutes this point by explaining that actually the
pterosaurs
had 4 limbs which were capable of producing necessary energy
so as to
run or jump compared to two limped
bird
.
In summary, while both the
reading
and the lecture provide interesting information with regard to ancient group of winged reptile, a significant amount of evidence supports that the
professor
presented much more legitimate and tangible factors.
Thus
, the
reading
passage fails to justify the claim toward stand points of the
professor
.