The passage and lecture both talk about DDT--a chemical t which used to kill insects.

In the
reading, the writer believe that the damages caused by DDT out weight its goods, but the speaker
argue that DDT is not as bad as we think but actually brings some benefits.

First of all, THE author state that DDT is a hazard to the environment since it can not be ingested
easily and will continue to accumulate in creatures and then cause death. On the contrary, the
professor argue this claim by saying that a smaller number of it will not cause any problems to
the environment but provide benefit since it will kill the insects which carry disease.

Secondly, from the reading passage, it is said that DDT will harm human health through the
DDT***DON’T REPEAT, MAKE IT SIMPLE*** consumption by raising an example about the US’s
ban. According to the listening, however, the speaker disagree with this possibility. He states that
a little amount of DDT for ingestion will not problems to A/THE? body’s health but is going to kill
the insects which spreads the disease between people. Therefore , in fact USE EITHER IN FACT OR
THEREFORE , YOU DON’T NEED TWO SIGNPOSTING PHRASES.it offers improvement to public
health.

Finally, the passage tells us that DDT is not worked because insects such as mosquitoes can
develop a resistance to this chemical then the disease spread steadily. But the speaker fight
against the view dramatically. He gives the example of a specific disease situation in which there
are 80 thousands of people died at first but then only 7 thousands of people died in the next
period because of the wide use of DDT. In conclusion, a lot of people are survived thanks to the
DDT.
The reading passage and listening lecture both talk about self-driving that soft drives the cars
instead of person. The author believe that it have a positive impact on driving process, while the
speaker argue that it has some disadvantages which we ignore.

First of all, the writer state that the driverless cars reduce the risk of traffic accidents since the
computer and senors will not be able to make mistakes. On the contrary, the professor disagree
with this claim that actually the self-driving cars may also cause errors because the computer soft
is created by human.

Secondly, from the passage the author believes that having a autonomous car is good for the
environment as they can drive more efficiently through communicating with other vehicles to
reduce traffic problems. On the opposite, the speaker points out that it will do cause pollution
because more young teens can use cars if the self-driving thrive, which means there will be a
spike of car quantity on the road; in this case, it is obvious that the pollution will increase.

Finally, in the reading part , the writer view that autonomous cars could offer passengers time
since they don not need to focus on driving. In the listening part, however, debate this possibility.
He says that now it is a kind o relaxing for people to drive while chatting and listening to music. If
people on the car receive a period of time, no one can sure that we won’t work or watch video
on the car , meanwhile, no one prove that we won’t waste time again.