The reading passage and the professor both discuss whether a well-known adventurer, Rovert E. Peary, had even been to the North Pole. The passage provides three solid reasons to substantiate that Peary did indeed visit the North Pole. However, the lecturer refuts all viewpoints presented in the article, and his refutations are as follows.
First, the article contends that National Geographic Society had conducted an investigation to proof that Peary did reach the North Pole. Nonetheless, the scholar challenges the idea by mentioning that the declaration from National Geographic Society was not objective. That is to say, the institute and Peary were friends, and the institute even funded Peary for the trip. Also, they only took 2 days to conduct the investigation, and they did not look into records carefully. Therefore, the first point mentioned in the article is not trustworthy at all.
Secondly, the reading passage maintains that a British explorer named Tom Avery made the same trek as Peary did, meaning that Pearly might have reached the North Pole successfully. Nevertheless, the speaker refutes the viewpoint by arguing that in fact, Avery took less way than Peary did. Furthermore, during the trip, some airplane would transport food for Avery. Avery was on the trip that was more favorable than Peary, that is why he could make the trek less that 37 days.
Lastly, the article believes that photos taken by Peary justifies his claim to have approach to the North Pole because the Sun's position was correct. Once again, the professor disagrees with the theory, and he states that those photos' position were primitive and unfocus. Besides, those photos were taken over a long time, and most pictures looked blur and faded. As a result, It's not accurate evidence to support the argument.
To conclude, the professor evidently rebuts all viewpoints presented in the article, that is Peary did actually reach to North Pole.