ProfessorIt's perfectly possible that the nests found inside the fossilized trees were made by bees 200 million years ago. The arguments used by the skeptics are not convincing.First, it's true we have no fossil remains of actual bees that date to 200 million years ago, but maybe the reason for that is that bees could not be preserved as fossils at that time. Fossil bees have typically been preserved in fossilized tree resin, a sticky liquid produced by trees. However, trees with this type of resin were very rare 200 million years ago. Such trees became common much later. So the fact that we have no bee remains that are 200 million years old doesn't mean that bees did not exist at that time. Maybe bees existed, but since there were almost no trees producing the right kind of resin, the bees could not be preserved.Second, while it's true that bees have a close mutual relationship with flowering plants today, it's quite possible that bees existed before flowering plants appeared on Earth. Those very early bees might have been feeding on non-flowering plants that preceded flowering plants during evolutionary history. The early bees could have fed on non- flowering plants such as ferns or pine trees. Later when flowering plants evolved, bees may have adapted to feeding on them! And this new relationship between bees and flowering plants may have remained stable ever since.Third, even though the fossilized chambers lack spiral caps, there's chemical evidence that supports the theory that bees built the chambers. Modern bees protect their nest chambers against water by using a special waterproofing substance that has a distinctive chemical composition. When the fossilized chambers were chemically analyzed, it turned out that they contain the same kind of waterproofing material that's used by modern bees.
According to the reading passage, there has been a theory about the existing bees as early as 200 million years ago and finding a nest-like structure in the state of Arizona, the United State, have strengthened this theory, but there have been a great many of doubtful idea about this theory. However, the professor finds all the ideas unconvincing and brings some facts to refute them all.
First, it has been sown that no fossil remains of actual bee have been ever found with a date of 200 million years. In contrast, the professor states that the bees' body must be fossilized and preserved in special materials, called Resin, which have been secreted by plants and about 200 years ago, these types of plants and especially Resin might have not been developed.
Moreover, another doubtful reason is that there is a close, mutual relationship between bees and flowering plants which about 200 million years ago, these types of flowering plants have not been evolved. Conversely, the professor underlies that in that period, bees might have fed on other type of plans like ferns and pine trees, which have not got any flowers and after the evolution of flowering plants on earth, bees might have changed their feeding resources and adapted to them.
Finally, the fossilized chambers which have been found in Arizona, have not any chambers of modern nests that closed with caps. On the contrary, the speaker dismisses this issue due to the fact that there has been some evidence which have been found in the fossilized nest which bees to protect their nests against water have used waterproofing materials. The same substances have been found in modern nests by chemical analyses.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-09-19 | fff | 75 | view |
| 2020-11-07 | yasy.j728@gmail.com | 80 | view |
- The benefits claimed for electronic medical records are actually every uncertain First the costs savings are unlikely be as significant as the reading suggests For example there probably won t be any savings related to record storage You see doctors who a 76
- Do you agree or disagree with following statement it is more important for government to spend money to improve internet access or improving public transportation 90
- Professor There should definitely be stricter rules adopted for handling and disposing of coal ash First the regulations we have now for example those that require companies to use liner are not really sufficient Under the current regulations liner has to 85
- The truth is we don t know what the main cause of extinction of Steller s sea cow was There are problems with each of the theories that you read about First the sea cows were massive creatures They were up to nine meters long and could weigh over ten tons 80
- Now listen to part of a lecture on the topic you just read about Each of the arguments about the benefits of cigarette and other such taxes can be challenged First these taxes don t necessarily lead to healthier behavior For instance high cigarette taxes 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 203, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Conversely,
...flowering plants have not been evolved. Conversely the professor underlies that in that pe...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 483, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... feeding resources and adapted to them. Finally, the fossilized chamber which ha...
^^^
Line 4, column 423, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...d in modern nests by chemical analyses.
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, however, moreover, so, then, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 22.412803532 76% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1389.0 1373.03311258 101% => OK
No of words: 279.0 270.72406181 103% => OK
Chars per words: 4.97849462366 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08696624509 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.37467031557 2.5805825403 92% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.530465949821 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 417.6 419.366225166 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 13.0662251656 69% => 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: 31.0 21.2450331126 146% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 79.2816513887 49.2860985944 161% => OK
Chars per sentence: 154.333333333 110.228320801 140% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.0 21.698381199 143% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.11111111111 7.06452816374 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.280510820481 0.272083759551 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.14239289917 0.0996497079465 143% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0943335207797 0.0662205650399 142% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.186864520209 0.162205337803 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0717317821017 0.0443174109184 162% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.5 13.3589403974 131% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.47 53.8541721854 90% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.0289183223 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.2 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.57 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 60.0 63.6247240618 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 10.498013245 137% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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.