The article states that buying and selling fossils is an unfortunate development for both scientists and the general public and provides three reasons for support. However, the professor explains that it is true that selling and buying fossils has some negative impact but it is exaggerating and it has some advantages and she refutes each of the author's reasons.
First, the reading states that the public suffers because fossils that would otherwise be donated to museums where everyone can see them are sold to private collectors who do not allow the public to view their collections. However, the professor refutes this point by stating that private collectors routinely display their commercial fossils to schools and other public.
Second, the article claims that scientists are likely to lose access to some of the most important fossils and thereby miss out on potentially crucial discoveries about extinct life forms. However, the processor contends that it is not realistic and scientists must put a value on these fossils with a lot of tests and so because of this situation they don't miss any important things and they perform their examinations.
Third, the reading avers that commercial fossil collectors often destroy valuable scientific evidence associated with the fossils they unearth. The author claims that most commercial fossil collectors are untrained or uninterested in carrying out careful fieldwork. The lecture opposes this point by saying that many undiscovered fossils find by this collectors and without their work the scientists didn't know about these undiscovered fossils. She states that even though they have a lack of training but if they don't try to find commercial fossils, many of fossils remained undiscovered.