TPO 44

This article supports three skeptics who argue about a structure that appears to date back 200 million years. However, the professor opposes these statements by giving contradictory statements and examples. He added that none of the arguments presented in the text were acceptable.
According to the text, the lack of fossil remains of real bees is compelling evidence that the structure was not created by bees. However, the professor doubts this idea, and to preserve the fossil remains on the tree, the structures require a special chemical produced by the trees. However, the trees may not produce this chemical, so the actual fossils could not be preserved until now.
In addition, in the case of the reading section, the absence of flowering plants 200 million years ago is another reason that rejects the idea of ​​bees in that period. In contrast, the professor rejects this idea, arguing that the first bees may feed on non-flowering plants, and then, after the emergence of flowering plants, turn them into a reciprocal relationship between bees and flowering plants.
Finally, the reading of the article states that the lack of spiral patterns in fossilized chambers may indicate that the structures were not made by bees. On the other hand, the professor concluded that although their fossilized structures lack these details, they contain waterproof materials found in modern beehives. Consequently, this argument refutes the last argument in the text.