Whether a fossil is connected to the ancient bees or not.
Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific points made in the reading passage.
The passage and the talk both discuss the possibility of associating a fossil nest, found in a tree in the America, to the ancient bees. The writer contends that it can not be for the bees. The lecturer, however, refutes the author's assessments. She demonstrates three reason to cast doubt on the claims made in the reading.
The first allegation of the script against which the orator argues is that no fossils have been found related to the actual bees from 200 million years ago. In contrast, the professor highlights the fact that maybe the fossils of the ancient bees could not be preserved to this time. She further assets that these nests need a sticky substance, secrete by some trees, to be maintain and do not deteriorate, but at that time that kind of trees were rare. So, it stands to reason that there is no fossil of ancient bee's nest from that time.
Second, according to the text, since bees are associated with the flowering plants and feed on them, the absence of flowering plants is another reason to prove that this fossil can not be for bees; although, the speaker finds this idea debatable. She bolsters her opinion stating that early bees could have fed on non flowering plants and after the emergence of this plants they changed their diet and today they mostly feed on this kind of plants.
Lastly, the lecture contradicts this fallacy of the passage that lack of some finer details of the modern bees' nests like spiral pattern caps explains that this fossil can not be for the ancient bees, saying that there is a mounting evidence that shows this fossil is for the bees. There is a distinctive chemical composition that modern bees utilize to make their nest water-proof. This chemical substance has been found in the fossil nest. So, it must be for the ancient bees.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-16 | Manjushree | 3 | view |
| 2019-12-15 | fafar | 90 | view |
| 2019-12-11 | NIMA SAEEDI | 80 | view |
| 2019-12-11 | NIMA SAEEDI | 3 | view |
| 2019-12-10 | NIMA SAEEDI | 80 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Teacher were more appreciated and valued by society in the past than they were nowadays.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 90
- Some exclusive features of elephants 75
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement In the past young people depended too much on their parents to make decisions for them today young people are better able to make decisions about their own lives Use spe 73
- Ways to eliminating the destructive effect of the glass architectures for the flying birds. 80
- Some parent offer their school age children money for each high grade mark they get in school Do you think this is a good idea Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 191, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ntends that it can not be for the bees. The lecturer, however, refutes the authors ...
^^^
Line 3, column 362, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...ering plants and after the emergence of this plants they changed their diet and toda...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, lastly, may, second, so, in contrast, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 16.0 12.0772626932 132% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 22.412803532 165% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1482.0 1373.03311258 108% => OK
No of words: 316.0 270.72406181 117% => OK
Chars per words: 4.68987341772 5.08290768461 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21620550194 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.33558882602 2.5805825403 91% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.506329113924 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 432.0 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 73.1290444547 49.2860985944 148% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.857142857 110.228320801 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5714285714 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.71428571429 7.06452816374 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => 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: 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: 0.166559279459 0.272083759551 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0656070857153 0.0996497079465 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0412132859167 0.0662205650399 62% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106422423412 0.162205337803 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0251874104409 0.0443174109184 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.3589403974 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 66.07 53.8541721854 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.22 12.2367328918 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.83 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 62.0 63.6247240618 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.