Did bees (a type of insect) exist on Earth as early as 200 million years ago? Such a theory is supported by the discovery of very old fossil structures that resemble bee nests. The structures have been found inside 200- million-year-old fossilized trees in the state of Arizona in the southwestern United States. However, many skeptics doubt that the structures were created by bees. The skeptics support their view with several argumentos.
No Fossils of Actual Bees First, no fossil remains of actual bees have ever been found that date to 200 million years ago. The earliest preserved body of a bee is 100 million years old—only half as old as the fossilized structures discovered in Arizona.
Absence of Flowering Plants A second reason to doubt that bees existed 200 million years ago is the absence of flowering plants in that period. Today's bees feed almost exclusively on the flowers of flowering plants; in fact, bees and flowering plants have evolved a close, mutually dependent biological relationship. Flowering plants, however, first appeared on Earth 125 million years ago. Given the bees’ close association with flowering plants, it is unlikely bees could have existed before that time.
Structures Lack Some Details Third, while the fossilized structures found in Arizona are somewhat similar to nest chambers made by modern bees, they lack some of the finer details of bees’ nests. For example, chambers of modern bee nests are closed by caps that have a spiral pattern, but the fossilized chambers lack such caps. That suggests the fossilized structures were made by other insects, such as wood-boring beetles.
The topic up for debate in the reading and listening passage is about the existence of bees 200 million years ago. The notion presented by the author is that the bees do not appear on Earth as early as 200 million years ago. However, the instructor takes the exception to it and he is of the opinion that the reasons provided by the author is unconvincing. Further, he justifies himself with convincing evidence.
First of all, the author argues that the fossil structures are not created by the bees since fossil remains of actual bees have never been found, but the speaker denounces it. Rather, the grounds for his rejection are well-informed, because the fossil remains of bees are preserved by some certain sticky liquid secreted by trees. However, the trees were rare in 200 million years ago. It is later on that the trees started to become common.
Moving to the second battle field, the writer suggests that the flowering plants, closely associated with the bees, first appeared on Earth until 125 million years ago. The lecturer, however, rebuts this by mentioning that the bees initially fed on the non-flowering plants such as fern. He elaborates this by bringing up the point that the bees adapted to feeding on flowering plants later on, and such relationship remains stable since then.
Finally, even though the author spells out the mindset that the fossilized structure lack finer details of the bees’ nests. It bears watching that the fossilized chambers nests lack caps similar with the modern bees. In contrast, the lecturer could not lend credence to it, and he references to the chemical evidence. He notes that the modern chamber are created near water, so there are some water-preventing chemicals around it. Similarly, the fossilized chamber also contains the same chemical substance.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, second, similarly, so, then, well, in contrast, such as, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 22.412803532 112% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 30.3222958057 132% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1529.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 301.0 270.72406181 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07973421927 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16525528304 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58276963721 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.538205980066 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 451.8 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.9843717863 49.2860985944 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.5625 110.228320801 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8125 21.698381199 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.8125 7.06452816374 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.341880537987 0.272083759551 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104412230573 0.0996497079465 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103864962223 0.0662205650399 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199805944366 0.162205337803 123% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0917143284171 0.0443174109184 207% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.9 13.3589403974 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.62 8.42419426049 102% => OK
difficult_words: 78.0 63.6247240618 123% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.