asteroids
Both the reading and lecture are arguing over the asteroids' colonization. The author claims that sending people to an asteroid is easy and provides three reasons to support it. The lecturer challenges each of the statements made by the author and mentions three reasons why they can not be completely true.
First of all, the author asserts that low gravity makes it possible for spacecraft to land and take off readily from an asteroid surface. This statement is challenged by the lecturer. He points out that although it is easy to land on them, astronauts will suffer from problems like decreasing muscle mass and bone density if they are supposed to have long term colonization.
Secondly, the writer contends that there are some valuable materials on asteroids that are rare on Earth, so it will be beneficial to go there. The lecturer, however, rebuts this statement by asserting this by considering the cost of material transporting to Earth and cast of supporting colonies on there it remains less profit that is not worthwhile to transport the materials. Also by increasing the amount of these materials on Earth
Finally, it is stated in the article that asteroids are accessible readily since their orbit approach to Erath periodically. The lecturer, on the other hand, posits that although it is easy to reach asteroids' surface it would be difficult to return because their routes can be unpredictable. They can move away from Earth that will make the situation problematic for astronauts to come back to Earth.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-12-23 | S M Naimul Mamun | 60 | view |
| 2021-12-23 | S M Naimul Mamun | 60 | view |
| 2021-11-05 | ShayesteTR | 60 | view |
| 2020-03-13 | Harperchan1997 | 60 | view |
| 2020-03-13 | Harperchan1997 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 51, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'asteroids'' or 'asteroid's'?
Suggestion: asteroids'; asteroid's
...eading and lecture are arguing over the asteroids colonization. The author claims that se...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 357, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error -- use past participle here: 'termed'.
Suggestion: termed
...nsity if they are supposed to have long term colonization. Secondly, the writer...
^^^^
Line 9, column 381, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
... worthwhile to transport the materials. Also by increasing the amount of these mater...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, while, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 15.1003584229 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 9.8082437276 71% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 13.8261648746 43% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.0286738351 82% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 43.0788530466 65% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 52.1666666667 75% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.0752688172 62% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1286.0 1977.66487455 65% => OK
No of words: 253.0 407.700716846 62% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.08300395257 4.8611393121 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98822939669 4.48103885553 89% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.76265641403 2.67179642975 103% => OK
Unique words: 146.0 212.727598566 69% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.577075098814 0.524837075471 110% => OK
syllable_count: 393.3 618.680645161 64% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 6.0 3.08781362007 194% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.94265232975 20% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 20.6003584229 53% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 20.1344086022 114% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.6344009683 48.9658058833 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.909090909 100.406767564 116% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0 20.6045352989 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.09090909091 5.45110844103 167% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 11.8709677419 34% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.85842293907 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.88709677419 20% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.24475630439 0.236089414692 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.106612384134 0.076458572812 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.10189100269 0.0737576698707 138% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.152015757612 0.150856017488 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0553652880674 0.0645574589148 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 11.7677419355 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 58.1214874552 83% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 10.1575268817 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.48 10.9000537634 114% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.83 8.01818996416 110% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 86.8835125448 75% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.002688172 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.0537634409 111% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
We are expecting: No. of Words: 350 while No. of Different Words: 200
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
More content wanted.
Rates: 66.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 20.0 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.