Summarise the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they case doubt on specific points made in the reading passage.

The article and the lecture are both about the possibility of the existence of feathers in Sinosauropteryx. While the author of the paper argues that it is unlikely that this kind of dinosaur had feathers, the lecturer disputes the claims represented by the article. Her position is that the evidence supports the existence of feathers in this dinosaur. According to the reading, the lines in the Sinosauropteryx fossil are not possibly related to the feather. The article mentions that the lines may have formed after animal death due to fibers' decomposition. This argument is challenged by the lecturer. She claims that it isn't plausible that the lines in the fossil are related to fiber decomposition because paleontologists have not seen a similar process for other fossils. Additionally, she points out that the fossil's lines clearly exhibit that they are related to feathers. Secondly, the author suggests that if the lines on the fossil are related to a part of this dinosaur, they cannot understand to which part it is related. In the article, it is said that many dinosaurs had frills, and the lines may be relevant to that. The lecturer, however, asserts a chemical difference between feather and frill. She goes on to say that the feathers in the dinosaurs consisted of Beta Carotene, seen in the fossil. Finally, the author puts forth the idea that the position of the lines on the fossil is not in line with the function of feathers. The writer contends that the lines were located along the animal's backbone and tail, which is not functional for thermoregulation and flying. In contrast, the lecturer's stance is that some other birds, like peacocks, have feathers on their tail. She notes that the application of these feathers is to attract the male gender, and the colorful feathers in this kind of dinosaur support this assumption.
What to do next: