Both the article and the lecture talk about the existence of bees 200 million years age. The author provide several arguments to show that they couldn't live on that period. However, the professor refutes each of the author's reasons.
First, the reading claims that the fossil of actual bees can't survived from 200 million years ago. However, the professor argues that the main reason that bees' fossils can not remain more for along time is the sticky material that produce by tree. According to the professor, may be these fossil remain in resin and protected from deterioration.
Second, the reading passage says that this fossil can't belong to the bees because there wasn't any flowering plant in that time. The professor counters this point by stating that It is possible that bees in that period fed on none flowering plant and after the centuries by coming of the flowering plant, they develop their feeding system and use flower pants.
Third, the reading make the argumentation that the structure of fossil that found in Arizona have a lack of similarity in some details. The professors refutes this claims by pointing out that chemical analysis show that modern bees' nest have waterproof advantage. Furthermore, he states that by using chemical analysis, Scientist found out that this fossil also have waterproofing material that exist in modern bee's nest
To summarize, In the reading, the author claims that the bee's couldn't exist in as early as 200 million years ago. However, the professor disagrees with this idea and gives three pieces of evidence to show that the existence of bees in that period is quit possible.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 101, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'provides'.
Suggestion: provides
... bees 200 million years age. The author provide several arguments to show that they cou...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 145, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...ide several arguments to show that they couldnt live on that period. However, the profe...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 58, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...g claims that the fossil of actual bees cant survived from 200 million years ago. Ho...
^^^^
Line 3, column 189, Rule ID: FOR_ALONG_TIME[1]
Message: Did you mean 'for a long time'?
Suggestion: for a long time
...n that bees fossils can not remain more for along time is the sticky material that produce by ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 193, Rule ID: ALONG_TIME[1]
Message: Did you mean 'a long time'?
Suggestion: a long time
...at bees fossils can not remain more for along time is the sticky material that produce by ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 284, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this fossil' or 'these fossils'?
Suggestion: this fossil; these fossils
...ree. According to the professor, may be these fossil remain in resin and protected from dete...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 51, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...e reading passage says that this fossil cant belong to the bees because there wasnt ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 89, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wasn't
...l cant belong to the bees because there wasnt any flowering plant in that time. The p...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 152, Rule ID: AGREEMENT_SENT_START[1]
Message: You should probably use 'refute'.
Suggestion: refute
...ilarity in some details. The professors refutes this claims by pointing out that chemic...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 63, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...eading, the author claims that the bees couldnt exist in as early as 200 million years ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, however, may, second, so, third
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: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 21.0 12.0772626932 174% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 22.412803532 143% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1369.0 1373.03311258 100% => OK
No of words: 272.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.03308823529 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.39394138226 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 141.0 145.348785872 97% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.518382352941 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 406.8 419.366225166 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 59.3595447721 49.2860985944 120% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.083333333 110.228320801 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6666666667 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.75 7.06452816374 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 10.0 4.19205298013 239% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.291025783695 0.272083759551 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.112779966041 0.0996497079465 113% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103906170343 0.0662205650399 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.164699827946 0.162205337803 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0613855767908 0.0443174109184 139% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.3589403974 102% => 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: 12.19 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.