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 reading and the lecture offer two opposing views on the skeptics' opinion about existing bees, in hundreds million years ago. Whereas the author of the reading states that many skeptical perspectives are supported by many reasons, the lecturer suggests that these reasons are not compelling. She casts doubt on the main points made in the lecture by providing the three explanations.
First, according to the text, from 200 million years ago, there is no finding about bees' fossils. However, the lecturer asserts that bees need some liquid produced by trees, resine, to have the chance of fossilizing. Therefore, it is possible that in 200 million years ago no trees's resine was produced to fossilize the bees, and there is no meaningful reason that in that time no bees had lived.
Secondly, based on what the author claims, flowering plants were absent in 200 million years ago. Moreover, bees are depended on flowering to live, so there could not be any bees without flowering plants. Nevertheless, the lecturer believes that bees were dependent on other plant species such as pine trees, and after creation of flowering plants, they adapt themselves to forage on them. Hence, there is no convincing reason which shows bees did not live in that time.
Finally, the reading alleges that many structures found are lacking many features respective to actual bees' nests, although, the lecturer says that after analyzing the fossilizied structures, the waterproof chamicals were found, which are the same as presents' bees' nests.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 61, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'skeptics'' or 'skeptic's'?
Suggestion: skeptics'; skeptic's
...lecture offer two opposing views on the skeptics opinion about existing bees, in hundred...
^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 111, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a million'.
Suggestion: a million
...pinion about existing bees, in hundreds million years ago. Whereas the author of the re...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, hence, however, moreover, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, whereas, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => 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: 1284.0 1373.03311258 94% => OK
No of words: 249.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15662650602 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97237131171 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.52904930471 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 144.0 145.348785872 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.578313253012 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 382.5 419.366225166 91% => 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: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.5007392474 49.2860985944 111% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.727272727 110.228320801 106% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6363636364 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.54545454545 7.06452816374 135% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.121428021447 0.272083759551 45% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0554177962449 0.0996497079465 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0924045286691 0.0662205650399 140% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0785132822576 0.162205337803 48% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.085048730855 0.0443174109184 192% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.2 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.6 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25 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.