From a draft textbook manuscript submitted to a publisher.
"As Earth was being formed out of the collision of space rocks, the heat from those collisions and from the increasing gravitational energy of the planet made the entire planet molten, even the surface. Any water present would have evaporated and gone off into space. As the planet approached its current size, however, its gravitation became strong enough to hold gases and water vapor around it as an atmosphere. Because comets are largely ice made up of frozen water and gases, a comet striking Earth then would have vaporized. The resulting water vapor would have been retained in the atmosphere, eventually falling as rain on the cooled and solidified surface of Earth. Therefore, the water in Earth's oceans must have originated from comets."
The author augues that the water in the Earth's ocean is produced from the comets that originated. To justify the argument he reasons that as comets are largely made of the ice that is frozen water and gases when string with the surface they must have vporised, but due to gravitation would have remained in the atmosphere, falling as rain. However, the careful scrutiny provides evidence that the argument of the author is full of loopholes and they provide little credible support to the conclusion. Thus, the argument of the author is unsubstantiate.
Firstly, there is an assumption that the heat produced due to the collisions and from the gravitational energy of the planet made the entire planet to molt and thus any water would evaporated into the space. There is no proof or study that provides any kind of resemblance to the above statement. Even more, it might be possible that the evaporated water would be retained in the earth's atmosphere due to gravitational pull. However, it also not clear whether there was presence of water or not before the collision took place?
Also, there is an assertion that when the planet reached its size its grvitational pull was strong enough to hold the gases and water vapour. This, statement also raises many querries whether, the gravitational pull was absent when the planet was not about its current size? Also, the author should provide the research and the basis of this assertion that he made with the proof of it. It is also possible that the planet was retaining the water vapour and the gases even before it came to its size. Possibly, the size of the planet might be the same since the collision took place.
Although, there is another assumption that the raining water is responsible for the oceans that are present. Well, it is a statement without any evidence supporting it, possibility is that oceans were present at the time of the collision and they have been there since. Therefore, the author should provide the credibility it requires so that the argument can be assessed thoroughly. It is also possibility that the earth's formation of its current shape might have been incomplete and thus there could be a gravitational anomaly, due to which the evaporated particles from the commet just went off earth's atmosphere. Thus, there can be many hypothesis available. But, rendered proof only justifies it.
To sum it up, the argument of the author that the rainfall is responsible for the formation of the ocean lacks several evidences. To bolster it further, the author must present clear and concrete evidence, perhaps by the way of detailed analysis of the formation of the earth. Finally, to better evaluate the argument futher information is required.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 182, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'would' requires the base form of the verb: 'evaporate'
Suggestion: evaporate
...planet to molt and thus any water would evaporated into the space. There is no proof or st...
^^^^^^^^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'finally', 'first', 'firstly', 'however', 'if', 'so', 'therefore', 'thus', 'well', 'kind of', 'by the way']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.217307692308 0.240241500013 90% => OK
Verbs: 0.142307692308 0.157235817809 91% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0769230769231 0.0880659088768 87% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0653846153846 0.0497285424764 131% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0423076923077 0.0444667217837 95% => OK
Prepositions: 0.101923076923 0.12292977631 83% => OK
Participles: 0.025 0.0406280797675 62% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.71389220701 2.79330140395 97% => OK
Infinitives: 0.025 0.030933414821 81% => OK
Particles: 0.00384615384615 0.0016655270985 231% => OK
Determiners: 0.134615384615 0.0997080785238 135% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.025 0.0249443105267 100% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0173076923077 0.0148568991511 116% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2749.0 2732.02544248 101% => OK
No of words: 459.0 452.878318584 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.98910675381 6.0361032391 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62863751936 4.58838876751 101% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.339869281046 0.366273622748 93% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.252723311547 0.280924506359 90% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.202614379085 0.200843997647 101% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.122004357298 0.132149295362 92% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71389220701 2.79330140395 97% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 219.290929204 91% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.435729847495 0.48968727796 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
Word variations: 48.2190403177 55.4138127331 87% => OK
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6194690265 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.8636363636 23.380412469 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 54.2002904753 59.4972553346 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.954545455 141.124799967 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8636363636 23.380412469 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.590909090909 0.674092028746 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.94800884956 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.21349557522 19% => OK
Readability: 46.1359675183 51.4728631049 90% => OK
Elegance: 1.37692307692 1.64882698954 84% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.580516306898 0.391690518653 148% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.161869233558 0.123202303941 131% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0977002895143 0.077325440228 126% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.627895793612 0.547984918172 115% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.175665554684 0.149214159877 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.280950103575 0.161403998019 174% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.144783883602 0.0892212321368 162% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.568085779754 0.385218514788 147% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0439409791617 0.0692045440612 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.457831890213 0.275328986314 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0629482421367 0.0653680567796 96% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.4325221239 58% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.30420353982 151% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.88274336283 164% => OK
Positive topic words: 4.0 7.22455752212 55% => OK
Negative topic words: 8.0 3.66592920354 218% => OK
Neutral topic words: 7.0 2.70907079646 258% => OK
Total topic words: 19.0 13.5995575221 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.