The article and lecture both discuss about mass extinction at the end of Triassic period. The article suggest that right after the Triassic period many animals were eliminated and provides the three plausible theories. The professor opposes this point by saying that these explanations seems acceptable but not a good explanation for mass extinction of animals after the Triassic period and provide three reasons to support his idea.
First and foremost, the reading says that decline in sea level leads to death of animals who were dependent on it such as costle and shallows species. As all animals are connected through food chain, death of these animals caused mass extinctions. The professor, however, refutes this point by saying that though sea level fluctuate but it was for such a long period of time that animals got time for adaptation. Plus, he mentions that this process takes around millions of years. He notes that sudden change would not lead to a mass extinction.
Second, the reading mentioned that Triassic period is followed by volcanic activity and that leads to increase in sulfur dioxide in an atmosphere. Moreover, this sulfur dioxide could a causative factor for freezing the world and eventually that leads to a mass extinction. The professor claims that sulfur dioxide could leads to a decrease in temperature but that is for short period of time only. As sulfur dioxide can combine with the water and fall back again as a rain. So, at the end of Triassic period sulfur dioxide was present in atmosphere but did not have a role in mass extinction.
Third, the article posits that asteroid strike often collides with Earth. And that could displaced the great amount of rock and soil. Eventually, this debris make its way to block the sunlight, that leads to death of plants and its supporting animal. The professor counteract this point by saying many scientist do believe about asteroid strike but there is no any crater found on Earth’s surface. There was a crater found but that was millions years before the mass extinction. And this much old crater do not have any effect on recent mass extinction.
2 Likes
Both the article and the lecture discuss mass extinctions at the end of the Triassic period. The article suggests that many animals became extinct immediately after the Triassic and posits three plausible theories. The professor disagrees, saying that while these explanations seem acceptable, they are not good explanations for the mass extinction of animals after the Triassic, and gives three reasons to support his idea.
First, the reading states that sea level decline leads to the extinction of animals that depended on it, such as coastal and shallow-water species. Since all animals are connected through the food chain, the death of these animals led to a mass extinction. However, the professor refutes this by saying that the sea level does fluctuate, but over such a long period of time that the animals had time to adapt. He also mentions that this process takes about millions of years. He states that a sudden change would not cause a mass extinction.
Second, the reading mentions that the Triassic period was followed by volcanic activity that led to an increase in sulfur dioxide in the atmosphere. Furthermore, this sulfur dioxide could be a causative factor in the freezing of the world, eventually leading to mass extinction. The professor claims that sulfur dioxide could lead to a decrease in temperature, but only for a short period of time. This is because sulfur dioxide can combine with water and fall back as rain. So at the end of the Triassic period, sulfur dioxide was present in the atmosphere but played no role in the mass extinction.
Third, the article claims that asteroid impacts frequently collide with Earth. This could cause the large amount of rock and soil to shift. Finally, this debris blocks sunlight, causing the death of plants and the animals that support them. The professor contradicts this point by saying that many scientists believe in an asteroid impact, but not a single crater has been found on the Earth’s surface. A crater has been found, but it was millions of years before the mass extinction. And such an old crater has no influence on the recent mass extinction.
3 Likes
What do you think for overall essay?
any advise?
2 Likes
For starters, I suggest you check the difference between advice and advise. As for your essay, I would need to know a little more about yourself. Who are you, where are you from, why did you write this essay, who do you think will read it any why?
Regards,
Torsten
1 Like
Hello Torsten,
I am Bansari. I am from india. I am preparing for TOEFL Examination and my target score is 100.
3 Likes
Hi Bansari, thanks for your swift response. So, why do you want a TOEFL score of 100?
1 Like
I am planning to apply for Master in public health. My target university has minimum required score 100.
2 Likes
what will you say about my essay?
2 Likes
I can understand what you are trying to say, but the text itself is not very useful for me for several reasons. A text should always have value for the reader, and unfortunately your text does not have that. I understand that you want to prepare for the TOEFL, and I have said so many times here in this forum that I don’t think the TOEFL is a useful goal because there are much better alternatives.
3 Likes
Nevertheless, Torsten, you have found time and taken pains to modify the essay. Appreciable!
2 Likes