The material discusses possible solutions that businesses can use to prvent injuries to birds. While the reading mentions three solutions of this problem, the listening challenges all these solutions and states that they are not effective to stop birds being injuried.
First, the writer posits that using one-way glass rather than regular glass could help. On the other hand, the professor opposses this and states that one-way glass could reflect like mirrors, and mirrors are as bad as regular glass. The lecturer explains that birds do not understand mirrors, so if these mirrors reflect the sky or trees, birds could fly right into them. As a result, this solution could not work.
Second, the author states that painting window glass with colorful lines could prevent birds from flying through glass. On the contrary, the speaker refutes this and contends that painting glass with coloful lines should have opening to keep inside people see outside. The professor states that birds could consider these opens as holes and fly through them. The lecturer adds that if window glass are painted with extremely small holes, the rooms of the building will be too dark.
Third, the reading suggestes to create an artificial magnatic field to guide birds away from buildings. Conversely, the speaker contradicts this and claims that birds could use their magnatic sense when they travel long distances. When birds migrate from a cold countery to a warm one during winter. Nevertheless, the lecturer mentions that birds just use their eyes and the bright of light to travel short distances in a city. Consequently, using an artificial magnatic field is not a proper solution
The material discusses possible
solutions
that businesses can
use
to
prvent
injuries to
birds
. While the reading mentions three
solutions
of this problem, the listening challenges all these
solutions
and
states
that they are not effective to
stop
birds
being
injuried
.
First
, the writer posits that using one-way
glass
rather
than regular
glass
could
help
.
On the other hand
, the professor
opposses
this and
states
that one-way
glass
could reflect like mirrors, and mirrors are as
bad
as regular
glass
. The lecturer
explains
that
birds
do not understand mirrors,
so
if these mirrors reflect the sky or trees,
birds
could
fly
right into them.
As a result
, this
solution
could not work.
Second, the author
states
that painting window
glass
with colorful lines could
prevent
birds
from flying through
glass
.
On the contrary
, the speaker refutes this and contends that painting
glass
with
coloful
lines should have opening to
keep
inside
people
see
outside. The professor
states
that
birds
could consider these opens as holes and
fly
through them. The lecturer
adds
that if window
glass
are painted
with
extremely
small
holes, the rooms of the building will be too dark.
Third, the reading
suggestes
to create an artificial
magnatic
field to guide
birds
away from buildings.
Conversely
, the speaker contradicts this and claims that
birds
could
use
their
magnatic
sense when they travel long distances.
When
birds
migrate from a
cold
countery
to a warm one during winter.
Nevertheless
, the lecturer mentions that
birds
just
use
their eyes and the bright of light to travel short distances in a city.
Consequently
, using an artificial
magnatic
field is not a proper
solution