TPO 36 integrated writing

In the reading material, the author cites three reasons to support cloud seeding (spraying the chemical silver iodide on storm clouds) is an effective method to protect crops from hail in the United States. Nevertheless, the lecturer argues in the listening material that cloud seeding effectiveness is unclear and opposes the reading material's reasons accordingly.
First and foremost, the author argues that laboratory experiments have already proved that cloud seeding eliminates hail effectively. However, the lecturer offers the opposite point: the silver iodide prevents any precipitation at all forms forming in the clouds, snow, rain, and hails. It could raise the risk of draughty when all the clouds get seeded in areas that do not rain very often, causing damage to the crops for another reason, lack of water.
The lecturer also casts doubt on the author's other reason that in some Asian counties, cloud seeding has controlled precipitation in urban areas successfully. The lecturer demonstrates that it might not work the same in the United States since the severe air pollution in cities provides a favorable condition( for silver iodide to interact with the clouds and seeding chemicals), which may not happen in the United States' fields and farms.
Finally, the author's third reason that local studies in the central United States attained a satisfying result is also counteracted by the lecturer. The lecturer claims that the evidence is unconvincing because the hail damage decrease sees where the cloud seeding took place and sees in the surrounding areas. Consequently, the result is more likely to be caused by a natural variation in the local climate than cloud seeding.