參考范文：

　　In the lecture, the professor proposed several evidences to argue against the statements in the reading passage that the fact ancestors of mammals reached Madagascar from 60 million to 20 million years ago have some problems. On the contrary, she contends that there are sound reasons to support mammals’ true existence on Madagascar by migrating, and she finds the reading passage unconvincing.

　　Firstly, professor believes that those mammals on Madagascar were not came there by chances, such as flooding or natural disasters mentioned in the reading. In fact, according to a genetic research, there are at least four kinds of species are of the same genes with continental mammals, proving that if the reading is real, there would not be so much species. Therefore, the reading passage proved to be not convincing.

　　Secondly, the listening part counters the point made in the reading that the sea current would not bring mammals to Madagascar since it is unable to flow to that direction. To be exactly, the sea current is now flowing to the south due to some climate or slightly landform change, making it possible for the sea to carry animals to Madagascar. This contradicts what the passage indicates.

　　Last but not least, the reading holds that there is quite a long distance between Africa continent and Madagascar, making it hard for mammals to survive. However, the professor explains that mammals would lessen their basic metabolism during long journey, showing characteristic of torpor. Therefore, there is no need to worry about that they would dying of thirsty or starvation. Clearly, the reading passage has been contradicted again. (267 words)