The reading and the listening materials have a debate on the age of a special kind of insects that has lived on the earth. The penman puts forward 3 main theories which are disapproved by the following orator.
To begin with, the author argues that the bees weren't living 200 million years ago because of recent researches and discoveries. this specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. he claims that it is possible for the bees to be alive 200 million years ago. additionally, he says that the provided facts by the experts are unconvincing and doubtfull.
Secondly, the writer suggests that the absence of plants which flourish in some periods of time is another fact to cast doubt about life of bees. In the article, it is said that, duality of bee and flowering plant isn't out of sight. The lecturer, however rebuts this by mentioning that changes during the time can take place to any creature such as bees. he elaborates on this by bringing up the point that there are possibilities of other kinds of plants to be food for early beed.
Finally, the author posits that founded sturctures in Arizona hasn't some details to prove being for bees. Moreover, in the article it is stated that modern nests of bees has special pattern but the fossilized founded chambers doesn't have. In contrast, the lecturer position is that there are chemical evidence to proof that this structures were made by bees. he notes that chemical analyzes of modern and historical nest of bees help scientist to be sure about the theory.
The reading and the listening materials have a debate on the age of a special kind of insects that has
lived
on the earth. The penman puts forward 3 main theories which
are disapproved
by the following orator.
To
begin
with, the author argues that the bees weren't living 200 million years ago
because
of recent researches and discoveries.
this
specific argument
is challenged
by the lecturer.
he
claims that it is possible for the bees to be alive 200 million years ago.
additionally
, he says that the provided facts by the experts are unconvincing and
doubtfull
.
Secondly
, the writer suggests that the absence of plants which flourish in
some
periods of time is another fact to cast doubt about life of bees. In the article, it
is said
that, duality of bee and flowering plant isn't out of sight. The lecturer,
however
rebuts this by mentioning that
changes
during the time can take place to any creature such as bees.
he
elaborates on this by bringing up the point that there are possibilities of other kinds of plants to be food for early
beed
.
Finally
, the author posits that founded
sturctures
in Arizona hasn't
some
details
to prove being for bees.
Moreover
, in the article it
is stated
that modern nests of bees has special pattern
but
the fossilized founded chambers doesn't have.
In contrast
, the lecturer position is that there are chemical evidence to proof that
this
structures
were made
by bees.
he
notes that chemical analyzes of modern and historical nest of bees
help
scientist to be sure about the theory.