Anda di halaman 1dari 2




The reading and the lecturer discuss the issue that the oldest settlers of America inhabited

Monte Verde, Chile 12,500 years ago is true or not. The reading claims that site was not resided

that long ago, the lecturer shows some arguments to prove the opinion is true.

First of all, the reading the earliest people inhabiting that site would be hunter-gatherers

because farming was unknown to them, but there were no primitive weapons for hunting to be

found, proving that no hunter-gatherer society that had ever existed there. The lecture refutes this

point by indicating that many bones with meat in it were found in peat bog of the site, which

proves people had actually hunted animals. He also says that the lack of basic knowledge to make

weapons can explain the absence of hunting tools.

Secondly, according to the reading, agricultural activities such as plowing and planting

crops have disturbed the soil immensely, which compromised archaeological evidences in that site.

But professor reveals that the excavation of the site has never been touched by any farmers, and

other dig sites was disturbed on its upper layers, deeper layers in which evidences were found still

remain intact, so the point in the reading is not compelling.

Finally, the reading shows that the presence of bitumen used for paving roads compromises

the results of carbon dating by affecting a entire dating process, thus the dates of evidences are not

dependable. The lecturer opposes this idea by saying that despite of that, scientists have used

twenty five tests and many dating methods to date the objects found in the sites, and the major

results reveal that these dates are around 12,500 years.

In brief, the reading is convinced that there were no settlers in Monte Verde 12,500 years

ago by proving evidences found in that site are not reliable, the lecturer asserts the opposition by

presenting some arguments against points made in the reading.


Both the reading and the lecturer discuss authenticity of treasure mentioned in the Copper

Scrolls. While the reading asserts that treasure never existed, the lecturer claims there was actually

a treasure as depicted in the scrolls.

Firstly, the reading reveals that language of the scrolls was so old that there is no known

documents to compare with, and there are some errors in the translations if reading closely, thus

the content of translation is not reliable. The lecturer refutes it by saying errors were made on

purpose so that certain people would be able to read them and know where exactly the treasure is.

Secondly, the reading claims the treasure that the scrolls describe is so enormous that it is

impossible for such an enormous treasure to exist. Furthermore, the Qumran who is believed a

creators of these scrolls were ascetic, who never own valuable things. The professor says that was

just a misunderstanding when translators applied Hebrew numbering system, because the Egyptian

one is more proper to apply and the value of the treasure would be significantly smaller if doing

so . This is most likely to be true, since in 1300 B.C, when the scrolls were made, the Egyptian

were populous in Middle East.

Finally, the reading mentions that many people have spent great amounts of time and

money to search for treasure in Israel, where it is believed to be located in, and they did not find

anything. The professor indicates that real location of treasure is Egypt, because the scrolls were

translated inaccurately, and many valuable objects of the treasure might belong to museums or

private collectors now.

In brief, the reading believes the treasure that the Copper Scrolls described is just a hoax,

while the lecturer asserts that it had been actually existed