The discussion over the topic of endotherms seems argumenting and contradicting in the listening lecture while in the reading section it seems supporting. In the article, written about mammals being endotherms depicts that mammals are endotherms using dinasaurs as an example. The article uses three main things to support the answer.
First, polar regions. According to it skulls of dinasaurs found in the polar region act as an evidence that they are endotherms because only endotherms can survive polar regions while keeping their internal temperature warm. Secondly, leg structureand movement as the dinasaurs have legs under their body justifies them being endotherm as non endotherms have legs positioned on the sides of the body.
Third, bone structure that is haversian canal, allowing endotherms body to grow quickly like dinasaurs.
But, the audio lecture completely disagrees with relating endothermy to any of the above mentioned three reasons. According to it, the polar regions in which fossils were found had very high temperature than today. Thus, not necessarily endotherms denies the first fact stated in article. On account of second reason leg structure, the leg structure of diansurs supports more weight of the body and help in growing large makes independent of second reason mentioned. Lastly, the third key factor haversian canal again is not a vital part in the growth of diansaurs as they grew more slowly during cool period.
All these factors points that dinasaurs were not endotherms just like mammals are not endothermic. Thereby, completely denied of fact that mammals are endotherms like humans, which actually are because of maintaining their inner temperature in the cold climate unlike diansaurs and othe mammals family.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 565, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... a vital part in the growth of diansaurs as they grew more slowly during cool per...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, third, thus, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1491.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 274.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.44160583942 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.0685311056 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.69064253454 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 161.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.587591240876 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 455.4 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.45192162 49.2860985944 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.5 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.5714285714 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.28571428571 7.06452816374 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.308488917449 0.272083759551 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0980092921068 0.0996497079465 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0627033432116 0.0662205650399 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.172384854893 0.162205337803 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0557521496174 0.0443174109184 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.3589403974 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 43.73 53.8541721854 81% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.27 12.2367328918 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.07 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 63.6247240618 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.