the reading says trading fossils have bad effect for public and science and expresses three evidences for but professor refutes all these and argues again them by clear give some other type of evidences and reasons.
First, author says fossils can be show to public and all people use beneficiary of them but private collector are obstacle. In commercial fossils so many people participate which cause these fossils be visited by more people in some places such as library in an university.
Second, reading states selling and buying fossils has a bad effect on science research because fossil buyer are almost millionaire which scientists, museum and universities haven't enough financial strength to compete with them. As a result fossils as a good information haven't be in the access of scientists. Professor disagrees and says when a fossil is found first a scientist or researcher survey that then set value on.
Finally, according to the reading commercial fossil collectors damaged fossils because of experience and knowledge deficiency so they destroy important part of fossils which can provide a great domain of information for scientist. Professor disagrees and says it's not a good excuse for scientists to abandon fossils finding because there are so many undiscovered fossils that can be founded by scientists.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
the reading says trading fossils have bad e...
^^^
Line 2, column 264, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... rather than not only less but also more Second, reading states selling and buyin...
^^^
Line 3, column 174, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: haven't
...ich scientists, museum and universities havent enough financial strength to compete wi...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 271, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: haven't
... a result fossils as a good information havent be in the access of scientists. Finall...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, second, so, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 12.0772626932 25% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 6.0 22.412803532 27% => OK
Preposition: 15.0 30.3222958057 49% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 867.0 1373.03311258 63% => OK
No of words: 162.0 270.72406181 60% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.35185185185 5.08290768461 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.56762134501 4.04702891845 88% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.65294968884 2.5805825403 103% => OK
Unique words: 103.0 145.348785872 71% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.635802469136 0.540411800872 118% => OK
syllable_count: 265.5 419.366225166 63% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 1.0 8.23620309051 12% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 5.0 13.0662251656 38% => Need more sentences, or put a space between two sentences.
Sentence length: 32.0 21.2450331126 151% => OK
Sentence length SD: 100.288783022 49.2860985944 203% => The lengths of sentences changed so frequently.
Chars per sentence: 173.4 110.228320801 157% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.4 21.698381199 149% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.0 7.06452816374 142% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.27373068433 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.472044639536 0.272083759551 173% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.261315330715 0.0996497079465 262% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0755999124571 0.0662205650399 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.285509921978 0.162205337803 176% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0687913163498 0.0443174109184 155% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 20.0 13.3589403974 150% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.0 53.8541721854 72% => It means the essay is relatively harder to read.
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 11.0289183223 143% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.34 12.2367328918 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.32 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 42.0 63.6247240618 66% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 10.7273730684 168% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 10.498013245 141% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.2008830022 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.