The reading and the lecture are both about fossils, which are being commercialized by private collectors. The writer says that these commercial activities have bad consequences on public and scientists. On the other hand, the lecturer states that the arguments brought by the writer are inaccurate when compared to reality.
First, there is an exaggeration regarding the negative outputs. The writer states that fossils are not exposed to public since nobody makes donations anymore. Conversely, the lecturer says everybody can buy the remains and expose them in the libraries, schools or other institutions. Thus the fossils are more likely to be viewed by a large public. This is a relevant counter-point to the author's point of view.
Second, before being sold, fossils are evaluated by experts. Therefore, scientists can do tests, evaluations and drag conclusions about past animals. In other words, they are able to identify details about their lives, habits and other specific features. So, the experts have the opportunity to examine and analyze the remains in detail, without missing significant points. This is a strong standpoint that directly contradicts the passage.
Third, there are no many scientific teams that work on the field in order to dig up fossils. Even though, people who do diggings are not specialized and although they might cause some damages, the number of pieces they found is impressive. Not to mention that, if it wasn't for them, a large number of fossils would still be hidden in the ground, and consequently people would have less information about animal life in the past. In conclusion the author and the lecturer appear to be in disagreement regarding this topic.