tpo24.1

The text and lecturer offer two opposing views on the accuracy of the hypothesis which illustrates some evidences for the remains of Tyrannosaurus rex body tissues. While the reading part presents some reasons to support this belief, the professor counters these specific points and depicts some clues to call into the question for the reading passage.

First of all, the lecturer disapproves the soft and flexible organic surmise. While in the reading part this tissue is named as one of the hints for the blood vessels and cells. The professor states that these soft substances are something else. Based upon his hypothesis these are the residue of bacteria which are lived in the hollow after the dinosaur's death.

Next, although the passage uses the remains of reddish materials and the iron as the clues of this presume, the lecturer casts doubt on the truth of this claim. He asserts that in the sake of the other fossils examination of that region, the dinosaur of that zone did not contain blood. Hence, these iron and the reddish substances should be a reddish mineral other chemical rather than the blood.

Finally, the lecturer argues that the collagen is related to the much more recent resources. Meanwhile, in the reading passage the collagen in considered as an evidence of dinosaur bone tissue. According to the lecturer's claims this substance can be resistance just for 100000 years old; however, these fossils are related to 30 million years ago. Moreover, the human's skin contains this chemical too. Consequently, these materials are related to the researcher hands’ skins which carry the fossils.