tpo 45

In thisset of materials ,the writer denied the existence of bees fossils 200millionyears ago,  emphasizing his point of viewwith 3 main reasons ,whereas , the woman in the lecture  assert the existence of such  bees fossil during that time .

First and foremost , the writer contends that there is no chaanceto preserve a species for all this time so its illogic for him ,howsoever thewoman in the lecture refutes that ,and says that there is a sticky liquidinside specific kinds of trees which allow to preserve the fossils all thistime ,but the trees producing this kind of chemical liquid is very rare .

NEXT, the writer contends that ,there are no floweringflowers ,which is the main source of food for the bees ,moreover there  is a mutual benefit relation between them ,incontrast, the woman in the lecture refutes that ,by saying that the bees werefed during that time on non flowering  plants offering an example of pin trees afterwards,they developed and switched to flowers.

Lastly, the writer wrap his arguments  by emphasizing the pattern  and structure of the fossil is quite differentthan the usual bees champers and might be related to other kinds of insects ,onthe other hand the woman insists that bees are capable to build different stylesof champers which lack spiral caps and distinctive chemical substances