The author tells that the selling and buying of the fossils by the private collectors have many disadvantages for both the scientists and the general public. However, the lecture is not in favor of this notion and contraindicates the three theories presented by the author in the reading.
First, the passage says that the fossils do not reach to the museums and thus the public is deprived of seeing them. The professor contraindicates this point and tells that because of the trade of fossils nowadays, it is more feasible for the universities and museums to buy them from the sellers as they are easily available and so the public has better chance to see them.
Second, the passage states that the scientists lose access to some important fossils and thus miss many essential discoveries. Conversely, speaker opposes this idea and explains that even if a private collector wants to buy a fossil, it has to be valued first and to do so; it has to be examined by the expert scientists carefully. Therefore, the scientists do not miss anything crucial.
Third, the author says that many valuable evidences are destroyed in the process of unearthing a fossil by the commercial collectors. But the professor rebuts this theory and argues that not many researches and expedition are conducted by the universities and museums. This leads to many fossils unexplored anyway, it is far better to gain at least some information through these fossils obtained by the commercial collectors than to remain absolutely unaware about these important discoveries. Hence, the speaker has proved that whatever mentioned in the reading passage is not completely true.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 143, Rule ID: GENERAL_XX[1]
Message: Use simply 'public'.
Suggestion: public
...antages for both the scientists and the general public. However, the lecture is not in favor o...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 389, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...cientists do not miss anything crucial. Third, the author says that many valuabl...
^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['anyway', 'but', 'conversely', 'first', 'hence', 'however', 'if', 'second', 'so', 'therefore', 'third', 'thus', 'as to', 'at least']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.224489795918 0.261695866417 86% => OK
Verbs: 0.170068027211 0.158904122519 107% => OK
Adjectives: 0.078231292517 0.0723426182421 108% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0680272108844 0.0435111971325 156% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0272108843537 0.0277247811725 98% => OK
Prepositions: 0.115646258503 0.128828473217 90% => OK
Participles: 0.0374149659864 0.0370669169778 101% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.83041439983 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0374149659864 0.0208969081088 179% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.00154638098197 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.149659863946 0.128158765124 117% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0 0.0158828679856 0% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.00340136054422 0.0114777025283 30% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 1661.0 1645.83664459 101% => OK
No of words: 272.0 271.125827815 100% => OK
Chars per words: 6.10661764706 6.08160592843 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.04852973271 100% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.389705882353 0.374372842146 104% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.297794117647 0.287516216867 104% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.191176470588 0.187439937562 102% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.143382352941 0.113142543107 127% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83041439983 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 145.348785872 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.507352941176 0.539623497131 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 49.0616599629 53.8517498576 91% => OK
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0529801325 84% => OK
Sentence length: 24.7272727273 21.7502111507 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.6237359407 49.3711431718 113% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.0 132.220823453 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.7272727273 21.7502111507 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.27272727273 0.878197800319 145% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 3.39072847682 59% => OK
Readability: 54.506684492 50.5018328374 108% => OK
Elegance: 1.42307692308 1.90840788429 75% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.716574163444 0.549887131256 130% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.164145890966 0.142949733639 115% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.111455277297 0.0787303798458 142% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.676823469421 0.631733273073 107% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.171491886748 0.139662658121 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.376934341473 0.266732575781 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.128376486298 0.103435571967 124% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.473886257841 0.414875509568 114% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0843973900428 0.0530846634433 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.549827681726 0.40443939384 136% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0593138089322 0.0528353158467 112% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.26048565121 0% => More neutral sentences wanted.
Positive topic words: 3.0 3.49668874172 86% => OK
Negative topic words: 7.0 3.62251655629 193% => OK
Neutral topic words: 0.0 3.1766004415 0% => More neutral topic words wanted.
Total topic words: 10.0 10.2958057395 97% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 Out of 30
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.