The reading and the lecture both discuss about Moai.

While, The Reading passage states that

according to researchers Moai led to the decline of Easter Island. The lecture cast doubts this
idea by saying that Moai did not cause this decline, but other factors.

First of all, the reading claims that the obsession of Easter Island’s people with Moai generates
a deficient use of natural resources. Easter island people use tracks made of trees in order to
move Moais so they cut a huge amount of this resource just to move the moais.The lecture
refutes this idea by saying that Moais were not related with the deforestation of Easter Island
because Moais did not use tracks made of trees to move, but in fact Easter island people use
ropes to make the movement.

Secondly, the reading argue that the deforestation created by moais impact in different animal
habitats. For example, Migratory bird did not come back to the island and also there was a
reduction in the fish industry of the island because of the lack of palm trees. The lecture
oppose this idea by saying that the reduction in trees in the island was due to the fact that rats
brought by the first settlers affect the palm trees causing these to decrease.

Finally, the reading points out that the construction of Moais has an indirect effect in the
reduction of the population because of the decrease of food supply. However, the lecture says
that the number of people living in Easter Island did not exceed two thousands at that time
since there is a scientific evidence that Easter Island civilization started around twelve
thousand A.D and not four thousands so there were no enough time for population to increase
up to twelve thousands as it says in the reading.
 Most people are aware of the Moai of Easter Island, as thousands of tourists flock
to see them every year. Fewer people know, however, about the people who built
them and of the rise and fall of their civilization. The reading suggests that society
on the island collapsed as a result of the construction of the Moai, but recent
research suggests that this was not the case at all.

The first issue suggested in the reading passage, that the islanders cut down
their valuable forests to build tracks to move the Moai, is simply not true. More
recent research suggests that the Moai were moved using a series of
ropes. Teams consisting of dozens of men fastened ropes to either side of the
Moai and, well, walked them to their places by tilting them from side to side as they
walked forward. This method required no trees to be cut down and has actually
been replicated by modern teams using actual Moai from the period.

Further, the reading passage notes that the construction of the Moai
eventually led to the complete deforestation of the island. While it is true that the
island was completely lacking trees by the time the first European explorers arrived,
this was not the result of Moai construction. Recently, palm seeds have been
excavated which date from the period when the island was heavily forested and all
of them show signs of having been gnawed on by rats. Coincidentally, the first
settlers on the island, who arrived by boat, brought rats with them as food. It has
been theorized that over the years the rats had a deadly effect on the island’s palm
trees and THAT was the cause of the deforestation.

Finally, the claim that the population of the island was in decline when
Europeans arrived is also faulty. While the author suggests that the population
peaked at twenty thousand, this figure is just an old guess based on the
assumption that the island was first settled in 400 AD. Recent carbon dating
indicates that the island was actually settled at around 1200 AD. If this is the case,
there simply would not have been time for a population of twenty thousand to be
established. It is likely that the two thousand people encountered by European
arrivals was the largest population that the island ever supported.