Private collectors have been selling and buying fossils, the petrified remains of ancient organisms, ever since the eighteenth century. In recent years, however, the sale of fossils, particularly of dinosaurs and other large vertebrates, has grown into a big business. Rare and important fossils are now being sold to private ownership for millions of dollars. This is an unfortunate development for both scientists and the general public.
The public suffers because fossils that would otherwise be donated to museums where everyone can see them are sold to private collectors who do not allow the public to view their collections. Making it harder for the public to see fossils can lead to a decline in public interest in fossils, which would be a pity.
More importantly, scientists are likely to lose access to some of the most important fossils and thereby miss out on potentially crucial discoveries about extinct life forms. Wealthy fossil buyers with a desire to own the rarest and most important fossils can spend virtually limitless amounts of money to acquire them. Scientists and the museums and universities they work for often cannot compete successfully for fossils against millionaire fossil buyers.
Moreover, commercial fossil collectors often destroy valuable scientific evidence associated with the fossils they unearth. Most commercial fossil collectors are untrained or uninterested in carrying out the careful field work and documentation that reveal the most about animal life in the past. For example, scientists have learned about the biology of nest-building dinosaurs called oviraptors by carefully observing the exact position of oviraptor fossils in the ground and the presence of other fossils in the immediate surroundings. Commercial fossil collectors typically pay no attention to how fossils lie in the ground or to the smaller fossils that may surround bigger ones.
The article states that the selling process of rare fossils to private ownerships for millions of dollars is unsuitable and provides three reasons for supports. However, the professor explains that the benefits of this selling process outweighed the disadvantages and refutes the author's reasons.
First, the reading claims that the public will not be allowed to see the fossils which may lead to a decrease in public interest in fossils. The professor refutes this point by saying that museums and schools can buy cheap fossils and not buying expensive ones. He states that for public view purposes it is not crucial the kind of fossils.
Second, the article posits that scientists will not be able to access and check the rarest and most important fossils. However, the professor says that this argument in the passage is unrealistic. According to the professor, usually after discovering the fossils, it will be checked first by the scientific community to decide the value of fossils.
Third, the reading passage says that there is a high chance of destroying the scientific evidence surrounding the fossils by commercial fossil collectors. The professor opposes this point by explaining that universities and scientific communities are not able to discover and collect all fossils. She argues that the scientific community depends on commercial collectors to collect and discover fossils.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, however, if, may, second, so, third, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 15.1003584229 53% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 9.8082437276 51% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 13.8261648746 65% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 43.0788530466 42% => OK
Preposition: 23.0 52.1666666667 44% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 2.0 8.0752688172 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1189.0 1977.66487455 60% => OK
No of words: 220.0 407.700716846 54% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.40454545455 4.8611393121 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.85128510684 4.48103885553 86% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.74862475004 2.67179642975 103% => OK
Unique words: 114.0 212.727598566 54% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.518181818182 0.524837075471 99% => OK
syllable_count: 345.6 618.680645161 56% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 9.59856630824 31% => OK
Article: 8.0 3.08781362007 259% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 0.0 3.51792114695 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.94265232975 20% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 20.6003584229 53% => 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: 20.0 20.1344086022 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 27.4171931339 48.9658058833 56% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 108.090909091 100.406767564 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0 20.6045352989 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.63636363636 5.45110844103 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 11.8709677419 34% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.132230979003 0.236089414692 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0557011413339 0.076458572812 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0263010747887 0.0737576698707 36% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0814040419611 0.150856017488 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0147891699018 0.0645574589148 23% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 11.7677419355 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 58.1214874552 88% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.10430107527 51% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.1575268817 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.04 10.9000537634 129% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.01 8.01818996416 112% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 86.8835125448 70% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.002688172 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.0537634409 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 10.247311828 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
We are expecting: No. of Words: 350 while No. of Different Words: 200
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Minimum 250 words wanted.
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.