The article asserts that Edmontosauruses migrated to south in order to survive hard conditions of winters. The professor, on the other hand, overthrows this premise and believes that the explanations of the author are not convincing. In the following, her justifications, used to shed light on this controversial issue, will be explained thoroughly.
First of all, the reading claims that these huge dinosaurs had a satisfactory diet which easily supports the migration hypothesis. However, the lecturer insists that they did not have to migrate, mainly because the conditions in the north slope were not so bad to force them to move. During the peak of the summer, as the educator said, there was 24 hours of sunshine which made it possible for plants to grow well. In the winter, there were scores of dead vegetations from which these animals could consume.
Secondly, the passage upholds that numerous skeletons have been discovered in that location which approves the hypothesis. Nonetheless, the educator declares that many animals used to live in herds for many other reasons, such as protecting them selves from their predators. This approach was practical and plausible for the whole year, so they were not urged to migrate. This inclination has also been found in other ancient animals like Rosovelt Elks - large plant eaters - which did not migrate for no reason.
Tertiary, from the perspective of their physical capabilities, the essay posits that those creatures could undergo long-distance migrations. The teacher, however, opposes this idealization since she assumes that only large and mature Edmontosauruses could tolerate hard conditions of long migrations. Juvenile ones could not follow other bigger dinosaurs in the same pace; therefore, they could have slowed down the herd and stopped them from reaching their destination. Moreover, adults could not live small ones behind owing to the fact that they did not have the ability to live by them selves.
The article asserts that
Edmontosauruses
migrated to south in order to survive
hard
conditions of winters. The professor, on the
other
hand, overthrows this premise and believes that the explanations of the author are not convincing. In the following, her justifications,
used
to shed light on this controversial issue, will be
explained
thoroughly
.
First of all
, the reading claims that these huge dinosaurs had a satisfactory diet which
easily
supports the migration hypothesis.
However
, the lecturer insists that they did not
have to
migrate,
mainly
because
the conditions in the north slope were not
so
bad
to force them to
move
. During the peak of the summer, as the educator said,
there was 24 hours
of sunshine which made it possible for plants to grow well. In the winter, there were scores of dead
vegetations
from which these animals could consume.
Secondly
, the passage upholds that numerous skeletons have
been discovered
in that location which approves the hypothesis. Nonetheless, the educator declares that
many
animals
used
to
live
in herds for
many
other
reasons, such as protecting
them selves
from their predators. This approach was practical and plausible for the whole year,
so
they were not urged to migrate. This inclination has
also
been found
in
other
ancient animals like
Rosovelt
Elks
-
large plant eaters
-
which did not migrate for no reason.
Tertiary, from the perspective of their physical capabilities, the essay posits that those creatures could undergo long-distance migrations. The teacher,
however
, opposes this idealization since she assumes that
only
large and mature
Edmontosauruses
could tolerate
hard
conditions of long migrations. Juvenile
ones
could not follow
other
bigger dinosaurs in the same pace;
therefore
, they could have slowed down the herd and
stopped
them from reaching their destination.
Moreover
, adults could not
live
small
ones
behind owing to the fact that they did not have the ability to
live
by
them selves
.