The lecture and reading section both discuss about animal’s dimension in past time and these days. The reading part provided three assumption to hold up this hypothesis that animal were larger than they are now. In contrast, the lecture disagrees and mentions 3 counterarguments.
First, the passage posits that based on biologists research oxygen-rich environment in past helped animals to grow larger in dimension. However, the speaker opposes this and illustrates that in ancient time there was volcanic activities, therefore it was hard for these creatures to breathe easily. Besides, the air was poisones. So they did not have enough amount of oxygen to breathe.
Second, the article claims that adequate nutrition is necessary for animal to grow. In fact, if the food is great in amount the size of animals grow more. Consequently, abundant plant life in early time provided nutrition for them to get bigger in dimension. On the other hand, the professor refutes this idea and states that fossils show that they suffered from lack of nutrition. The amount of carbon dioxide not only was low but also there was a bad gas condition.
Third, author indicates that in early time weather was warmer than now. In addition, animals generally grow bigger in warm weather more. So, we can understand that as a result of hot weather in ancient time they had larger bodies. The lecture rejects this fact and claims that small animals are growing in warm weather well. Furthermore, the large animals tend to spend their heat consuming more food. That is why they maintain their body temperature.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 79, Rule ID: PAST_TIME[1]
Message: Did you mean 'pastime'?
Suggestion: pastime
...iscuss about animal's dimension in past time and these days. The reading part provid...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 137, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'assumption' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'assumptions'.
Suggestion: assumptions
...e days. The reading part provided three assumption to hold up this hypothesis that anima...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 174, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ee assumption to hold up this hypothesis that animal were larger than they are n...
^^
Line 1, column 180, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...umption to hold up this hypothesis that animal were larger than they are now. In...
^^
Line 1, column 244, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...n they are now. In contrast, the lecture disagrees and mentions 3 counterargument...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, consequently, first, furthermore, however, if, second, so, therefore, third, well, in addition, in contrast, in fact, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1347.0 1373.03311258 98% => OK
No of words: 263.0 270.72406181 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1216730038 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.02706775958 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62284113858 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 157.0 145.348785872 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.596958174905 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 410.4 419.366225166 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.116997792494 0% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.3495328494 49.2860985944 64% => OK
Chars per sentence: 74.8333333333 110.228320801 68% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.6111111111 21.698381199 67% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.33333333333 7.06452816374 132% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.345903293632 0.272083759551 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104539134477 0.0996497079465 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0684301561607 0.0662205650399 103% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202284264414 0.162205337803 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0332056337809 0.0443174109184 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.0 13.3589403974 75% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.27 53.8541721854 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.8 11.0289183223 80% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.82 12.2367328918 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 63.0 63.6247240618 99% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.