The main idea of both the passage and the lecture is about selling fossils in the commercial market. In this line of thought, the reading states that selling specimens to some fossil collector has some disadvantage such as the data public and scientists’ shortage, and damaged fossils. The lecturer, on the other hand, casts doubt on all the three episodes of arguments mentioned in the passage, believing that none of these strategies are practical and lead to the real world. In the rest of the passage, a comparison between them is provided.
First of all, the reading and the listening materials talk about the data public shortage. The author explains that it can make public hard to see their collections in the museums; therefore, it might be declined by the public and make people favorable lessen. Thus, the author contends that sell each fossil have some unfortunate impact on the people’s paleontology. On the contrary, the lecturer believes that fossil hunters hold some specimens to trade the fossils to the common institution such as schools, library etc. consequently, the lecturer believes that there are specimens assortment which people can use them. This directly contradicts what the passage indicates.
Second, both the text and the talk discuss if fossils market to the collectors, scientists may lose some valuable data about ancient. The author elaborates that if someone can purchase specimens, undoubtedly one is the specimen expertise because finding whether one fossil is fake is not an easy job; thus, the buyer should be a powerful biologist. This was another place where experience contradicted the theory.
Eventually, fossil damaging is discussed by both the passage and the lecture. The author mentions that the valuable specimens damaged by commercial fossils' connoisseur because they are untrained and uninterested for carrying out the fossils carefully. The lecturer rebuts this argument and states that even if some specimens are destroyed, many of them are not discovered until now, and scientists and university institutions can lead them to improve their biological knowledge. This opinion directly contradicts the presented passage and making it infeasible.
Sum up, although the passage provides some reasons to deprive selling specimens to the fossil collectors, the lecture opposes about the effectiveness and possibility of those reasons.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 149, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'fossils'' or 'fossil's'?
Suggestion: fossils'; fossil's
...aluable specimens damaged by commercial fossils connoisseur because they are untrained ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, if, may, second, so, therefore, thus, such as, first of all, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2036.0 1373.03311258 148% => OK
No of words: 373.0 270.72406181 138% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.45844504021 5.08290768461 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.39467950092 4.04702891845 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.87181052217 2.5805825403 111% => OK
Unique words: 196.0 145.348785872 135% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.525469168901 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 629.1 419.366225166 150% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 14.0 8.23620309051 170% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.621170092 49.2860985944 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.111111111 110.228320801 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.7222222222 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.72222222222 7.06452816374 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 4.45695364238 247% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.360103739454 0.272083759551 132% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.111968333265 0.0996497079465 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0860191624269 0.0662205650399 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.208137958716 0.162205337803 128% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0528578491685 0.0443174109184 119% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.6 13.3589403974 109% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 53.8541721854 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.39 12.2367328918 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.78 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 98.0 63.6247240618 154% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.