Correção: TOEFL Writing
- j.monteiro.b
- Membro desde: 22 Ago 2018, 14:32
- Perfil · 1 Mensagem
Olá, pessoal. Gostaria de saber se estou fazendo uma salada com os tempos verbais, ou se estou indo no caminho certo. Alguém poderia corigir esse essay que eu fiz, por gentileza?
The lecture and the reading are both about the Ordovician Extinction. More specifically, both author and professor debate the possible theories that would had caused this massive extinction and their validations. The author provides three possible explanations. The professor, however, challenges each one of them, therefore, disagreeing with the author.
Firstly, the author argues that the massive extinction would have been a result of a significant change in the temperature. He notes that the temperature got colder causing some species to struggle with the changes in their habitat, thus, disappearing. The Professor, notwithstanding, challenges this assertion by explaining that the ice age actually took several thousands of years to be completed. Moreover, the transition would not have been as drastic as stated in the passage, which would have given some time for the animals to adapt.
Secondly, the author points out the extinction could have been caused by a meteorite collision on Earth. He mentions that this would have caused a huge dust cloud in the sky, blocking the sunlight, thus causing harm to the living creatures. The professor, on the other hand, casts doubts on this arguments by claiming that if that would have happened, some residual substances of this meteorite would have been found, which have not happened so far.
Thirdly, the author posits that the Super UV rays would have killed the sea creatures that lived in the ocean surface. He states that fossils that could prove this theory had been found already. This argument, nevertheless, is challenged by the professor, who explains that these fossils are actually from species that still can be found on Earth.
The lecture and the reading are both about the Ordovician Extinction. More specifically, both author and professor debate the possible theories that would had caused this massive extinction and their validations. The author provides three possible explanations. The professor, however, challenges each one of them, therefore, disagreeing with the author.
Firstly, the author argues that the massive extinction would have been a result of a significant change in the temperature. He notes that the temperature got colder causing some species to struggle with the changes in their habitat, thus, disappearing. The Professor, notwithstanding, challenges this assertion by explaining that the ice age actually took several thousands of years to be completed. Moreover, the transition would not have been as drastic as stated in the passage, which would have given some time for the animals to adapt.
Secondly, the author points out the extinction could have been caused by a meteorite collision on Earth. He mentions that this would have caused a huge dust cloud in the sky, blocking the sunlight, thus causing harm to the living creatures. The professor, on the other hand, casts doubts on this arguments by claiming that if that would have happened, some residual substances of this meteorite would have been found, which have not happened so far.
Thirdly, the author posits that the Super UV rays would have killed the sea creatures that lived in the ocean surface. He states that fossils that could prove this theory had been found already. This argument, nevertheless, is challenged by the professor, who explains that these fossils are actually from species that still can be found on Earth.
TESTE DE VOCABULÁRIO
1 resposta
- Telma Regina
- It's time to learn English!
- Localização: Campinas, SP
- Membro desde: 19 Fev 2012, 23:37
- Perfil · 24.2k Pontos · 2.8k Mensagens
My corrections and changes to your text are shown below:
The lecture and the reading are both about the Ordovician Extinction. Specifically, both author and professor debate the possible theories that would have caused this massive extinction and their validations. The author provides three possible explanations. The professor, however, challenges each one of them, therefore, disagreeing with the author.
Firstly, the author argues that the massive extinction would have been a result of a significant change in the temperature. He notes that the temperature got colder causing some species to struggle with the changes in their habitat, thus, causing their disappearance. The Professor, notwithstanding, challenges this assertion by explaining that the ice age actually took several thousands of years to be completed. Moreover, the transition would not have been as drastic as stated in the passage, which would have allowed some time for the animals to adapt.
Secondly, the author points out the extinction could have been caused by a meteorite collision on Earth. He mentions that this would have caused a huge dust cloud in the sky, blocking the sunlight, thus causing harm to the living creatures. The professor, on the other hand, casts doubts on this arguments by claiming that if that would have happened, some residual substances of this meteorite would have been found, which have not been discovered so far.
Thirdly, the author suggests that the Super UV rays would have killed the sea creatures that lived on the ocean surface. He states that fossils that could prove this theory have been found already. This argument, nevertheless, is challenged by the professor, who explains that these fossils are actually from species that still can be found on Earth.
The lecture and the reading are both about the Ordovician Extinction. Specifically, both author and professor debate the possible theories that would have caused this massive extinction and their validations. The author provides three possible explanations. The professor, however, challenges each one of them, therefore, disagreeing with the author.
Firstly, the author argues that the massive extinction would have been a result of a significant change in the temperature. He notes that the temperature got colder causing some species to struggle with the changes in their habitat, thus, causing their disappearance. The Professor, notwithstanding, challenges this assertion by explaining that the ice age actually took several thousands of years to be completed. Moreover, the transition would not have been as drastic as stated in the passage, which would have allowed some time for the animals to adapt.
Secondly, the author points out the extinction could have been caused by a meteorite collision on Earth. He mentions that this would have caused a huge dust cloud in the sky, blocking the sunlight, thus causing harm to the living creatures. The professor, on the other hand, casts doubts on this arguments by claiming that if that would have happened, some residual substances of this meteorite would have been found, which have not been discovered so far.
Thirdly, the author suggests that the Super UV rays would have killed the sea creatures that lived on the ocean surface. He states that fossils that could prove this theory have been found already. This argument, nevertheless, is challenged by the professor, who explains that these fossils are actually from species that still can be found on Earth.