The passage provides three possibletheories to explain the purpose of Chaco, while the professor casts doubt oneach of the point.
to(To) begin with, incontrast to the passage that theChaco serves for residential use , the lecturer claims that this view isungrounded. He points out that there has(are) not enoughfireplaces in the house if it was used for living purpose, because eachhousehold require one fireplace to do daily housework. In fact, the largestfireplace could only be utilized for around ten households, thus it isimpossible to hold hundreds of residents in the Chaco.
The second view mentioned in the passage is that these houses are for foodstorage. However, the professor also rejects this point. According to him,later excavation reveals that no trace of maize, the onemain food at that time, or containers have been found in the Chaco, whichcontradicts the expectation that there should have spills of maize or largercontainers there.
In regard to theceremony function, the professor disagrees with it, either. He says that actuallybuilding material have also been found in the mound which is supposed to be aceremony site. This fact means the mound was originally a construction place. Furthermore,the professor explains that the discarded pots might be traces left behind afterconstruction. In this way, the professor not goes(doesn’tgo) along with the reading passage.