whether the private collection of fossils is a good idea or not

Both the reading and the lecture discuss whether the private collection of fossils is a good idea or not. The former argues that this practice is disadvantageous for three reasons, but the lecture contradicts these points. First of all, the author contends that the public will not view the fossils if private collectors own all of them, thus decreasing interest in science. In contrast, the lecturer argues that public exposure to fossils will rise if private collectors purchase them. He stated that low-level institutions and schools will now have the ability to acquire fossils that they could not previously. Second, the writer asserts that scientists will lose access to fossils if private collectors acquire them. However, the professor refutes that scientists have to view the fossils before private collectors accurately value and catalog them. Thus, scientists will always be the people who have first access to the fossils. Finally, the essayist claims that private collectors are not trained scientists and thus damage the fossils when they uncover them. On the other hand, the listening counters that, while private collectors do some damage, this situation is preferable because if they didn't look for fossils, many would remain in the ground undiscovered. He further argues that it's better to have more fossils than let them stay in the environment.