The reading passage and the lecture both have conflicting opinions about whether or not different ways to predict earthquakes are possible. The article strongly postulates that there are several different methods to predict earthquakes. On the other hand, the listening adamantly delineates that these methods of predicting earthquakes may seem valid, but these do not have clear evidence.
First, according to the author of the excerpt, observing animal methods is one way to predict earthquakes, as any bizarre change in animal behavior is an indicator of an earthquake. Nonetheless, the lecturer offsets these points by declaring that these animals reacting to mild shaking and minor movements do not lead to a sign of an earthquake. Therefore, animals' behavior is not the best way to predict an earthquake.
Second, the author contends that headaches can be another way of predicting earthquakes. Moreover, the presence of magnetite makes it possible for animals to adjust to the electromagnetic field of the earth. The professor, however, dissents this claim by explaining that headaches are symptoms of some other problems. In addition to this, the amount of magnetite is small as the sensory system is barely influenced.
The article lastly asserts that measuring radon emission can also be one of the methods to predict earthquakes. The speaker in the listening counters these indications by indicating that radon emission is not a practical way to predict earthquakes. Furthermore, radon emission from rocks does not lead to earthquakes. Earthquakes force landslide, which leads to rock fracture.
In conclusion, while the reading passage discusses ways to predict earthquakes, the lecturer opposes each of the methods mentions by the author using reasons.
The reading passage and the lecture both have conflicting opinions about
whether or not
different
ways
to
predict
earthquakes
are possible. The article
strongly
postulates that there are several
different
methods
to
predict
earthquakes
.
On the other hand
, the listening
adamantly
delineates that these
methods
of predicting
earthquakes
may seem valid,
but
these do not have
clear
evidence.
First
, according to the author of the excerpt, observing
animal
methods
is one
way
to
predict
earthquakes
, as any bizarre
change
in
animal
behavior is an indicator of an
earthquake
. Nonetheless, the lecturer offsets these points by declaring that these
animals
reacting to mild shaking and minor movements do not lead to a
sign
of an
earthquake
.
Therefore
, animals' behavior is not the best
way
to
predict
an earthquake.
Second, the author contends that headaches can be another
way
of predicting
earthquakes
.
Moreover
, the presence of magnetite
makes
it possible for
animals
to adjust to the electromagnetic field of the earth. The professor,
however
, dissents this claim by explaining that headaches are symptoms of
some
other problems.
In addition
to this, the amount of magnetite is
small
as the sensory system is
barely
influenced.
The article
lastly
asserts that measuring radon emission can
also
be one of the
methods
to
predict
earthquakes
. The speaker in the listening counters these indications by indicating that radon emission is not a practical
way
to
predict
earthquakes
.
Furthermore
, radon emission from rocks does not lead to
earthquakes
.
Earthquakes
force landslide, which leads to rock fracture.
In conclusion
, while the reading passage discusses
ways
to
predict
earthquakes
, the lecturer opposes each of the
methods
mentions by the author using reasons.