The author states that many scientists believe that the condition on Venus are not hospitable to maintain a permanent human presence. As opposed to, the professor who counter-argues that viewpoint trying to prove that these three conditions do not seem convincing.
First and foremost, the writer mentions that the atmosphere pressure at Venus' surface is greater than the pressure at Earth's surface. This means that humans cannot land on Venus surface. On the contrary, the lecturer cannot disagree more, reasoning that the atmosphere pressure is high in certain level which do not effect the spacecraft. If they use a spacecraft like a balloon instead, it will work better than landing on surface.
The second argument the author gives is the lack of water. They can find others chemical components such as carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and hardly any oxygen and water vapor. Consequently, humans cannot survive without water. However, the professor repudiates the declaration by illustrating that with all these components they can produce water, so, the do not need to supply water from Earth.
Lastly, on one hand, the reading passage points out that the very little sunlight reaches the planet's surface. As a result, humans cannot collect enough electricity for their machines and equipment. Nevertheless, the lecturer declares that 60 percent of the sunlight reflect from those clouds back into space. Therefore, humans can collect enough energy.
The author states that many scientists believe that the condition on Venus are not hospitable to maintain a permanent human presence. As opposed to, the professor who counter-argues that viewpoint trying to prove that these three conditions do not seem convincing.
First and foremost, the writer mentions that the atmosphere pressure at Venus' surface is greater than the pressure at Earth's surface. This means that humans cannot land on Venus surface. On the contrary, the lecturer cannot disagree more, reasoning that the atmosphere pressure is high in certain level which do not effect the spacecraft. If they use a spacecraft like a balloon instead, it will work better than landing on surface.
The second argument the author gives is the lack of water. They can find others chemical components such as carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and hardly any oxygen and water vapor. Consequently, humans cannot survive without water. However, the professor repudiates the declaration by illustrating that with all these components they can produce water, so, the do not need to supply water from Earth.
Lastly, on one hand, the reading passage points out that the very little sunlight reaches the planet's surface. As a result, humans cannot collect enough electricity for their machines and equipment. Nevertheless, the lecturer declares that 60 percent of the sunlight reflect from those clouds back into space. This means that humans can collect enough energy.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 317, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT[6]
Message: Did you mean 'affect'?
Suggestion: affect
...e is high in certain level which do not effect the spacecraft. If they use a spacecraf...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 371, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...cecraft. If they use a spacecraft like a balloon instead, it will work better tha...
^^
Line 6, column 350, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
... components they can produce water, so, the do not need to supply water from Earth. ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, first, however, if, lastly, nevertheless, second, so, such as, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 10.4613686534 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1239.0 1373.03311258 90% => OK
No of words: 230.0 270.72406181 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.38695652174 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.89432290496 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6351162079 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 145.0 145.348785872 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.630434782609 0.540411800872 117% => OK
syllable_count: 368.1 419.366225166 88% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.7424137532 49.2860985944 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.5 110.228320801 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.4285714286 21.698381199 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.5 7.06452816374 106% => 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 : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.314334399106 0.272083759551 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107174474473 0.0996497079465 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.194981265949 0.0662205650399 294% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.26629500925 0.162205337803 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.385719859105 0.0443174109184 870% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.2 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.69 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.89 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 10.7273730684 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.