Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenged the specific theories presented in the reading passage.

The article states the use and purpose of carved stone balls and provides three possible theories. However, the professor explains that none of these theories are convening and refutes each of the author's points.

First, the reading claims that carved balls were used as weapons in hunting and fighting because holes have been found on them, which would have allowed people to throw them. The professor refutes this point by saying that the carved stone balls did not have signs of wear. He states that they were not crack on the surface, yet they were well preserved. Therefore, if the carved ball were used as weapons, they should have had sign of damaging or break into pieces, but they did not.

Second, the article posits that the carved stone balls were used as a primitive system of weight and measures because they were so uniform inside that they could have measured grains or food. However, the professor says that the carved stone balls were made with different kind of stones, so the same stone could weight different because of their composition. According to the professor, the carved balls were not used as a weight system by ancient people.

Third, the reading says that carved stone ball had a social purpose because they designs were well-elaborated. The professor refutes this point by explaining that although some of the carved balls had elaborate designs, others were pretty simple. Moreover, if they played an important role, they would have been buried with the people. Nevertheless, any possession or evidence of carved stone balls has been found in people’s tombs.