1-

The reading passage explains the extinction of the dodo species as a direct consequence of
human overhunting. More specifically, the writer develops three reasons to maintain that this
extinction process was a result of human hunting. The lecturer in the listening passage
disagrees with these three reasons. He believes that scientists can explain better the extinction
of this specie through other causes.

In the first place, the author begins defending that dodos should have been easy prey for
humans because they were not able to fly. The lecturer, however, disagrees with this
viewpoint. Although he agrees that dodos should have been an easy option to hunt and eat, he
also adds that this kind of specie was not a desirable option to eat as a consequence of its
horrible taste.

The second reason proposed by the author to defend his/she idea is the fact that dodos used
to be curious and innocent animals with a lack of fear related to humans. As a result of this
behavior, dodos did not run or hide from humans. Again, the lecturer maintains that there are
flaws in the writer's argument. More specifically, he thinks that this kind of behavior could
have been an issue for dodos not in a relationship with humans, but in relationship with other
kinds of predators introduced by humans in the dodo's environment.

In the third place, the author sustains that there is a lot of evidence that we can use to
conclude that humans killed dodos in a mass quantity. Again, the professor in the listening
passage is doubtful that this is accurate. He suggests that this evidence can be interpreted
through a different and more likely explanation: dodos were killed in a mass quantity by the
predators introduced by humans, but not by humans.
2-

No one can deny that there are both positive and negative aspects releted to the idea that pets
should be trated like family members. But, I were forced to choose, I would definetly sustaint
that we should make a clear disctintion between our family and our pets. It is my firm belief
that if we traet our pets as our family, we will face a large number of problems in our future. I
defend this idea for a several reasons, and I will develop these in the subsequent paragraphs.

In the first place, I maintain that there are a lot of helth problems that we can cath living in the
same spaces that our pets. I have to admit that my opinion on this matter has been profundly
influenced by my own experience. You now, when my mother was pregnant of my little sister,
we used to live with a cat named lulu. This cat used to be a member of our family. We used to
do all our staff with the cat and it also used to live with us inside our home. As a consequence
of living with the cat all the time during her pregnat process, my mother cathed a sick that
puted in risk her life and my sister`s lifes. For this reasons, I strongly believe that if we can
avoid catching dangerous sicks, we should make a clear disctintion betweem the human's
space and the pet's space in our homes.

In the second place, I sustain that there are also metal problems that we can cath if we do not
make a clear disctintion betwemn human's space and pet's space in our homes. Drawing from
my own experience, when I was young, I used to be so close to our cat lulu. In fact, I used to
say that lulu was my best friend. In this time, I used not to be a social person, and I used not to
have friends. But, when my mother catched a sick during her pregnant process, we gave our
cat to our uncle. That was a relly difficult situation for a young girl without friends. You see, in
this moment of my life, I felt that I just lossed my best friend. As a consequende of that, I
cathed a depression for 1 year. I definitely thinks that if my family had not trated our cat as a
family member, I would have avoided this mental sick.

In light of these two reasons, I strongly believe that we should not treat our pets as a family
members.