The reading and the lecture are both about methods to forecast earthquakes. The author of the article provides three methods about prediction of earthquakes. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article. He thinks that there is no clear evidence to completely rely on the three methods provided by the author of reading.
According to the reading, earthquakes can be predicted by observing animal movement. The article mentions that the change in behaviour of animals can be one of the indicator for prediction of earthquake. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. He claims that one cannnot completely depend on animal behaviour. Additionally, he points out that animal behaviour may be due to slight shaking of earth crust.
Secondly, the author contends that earthquakes can be predicted by observing headache in humans. The article notes this headache is caused due to presence of magnetite in our brain which reacts to electormagnetic field. The lecturer rebuts this argument. He suggests that headache in humans is not an reliable parameter to forecast earthquake. He elaborates on this by mentioning that magnitite present in human brain is in very minute quantities and there are very rare cases of headache during earthquakes.
Finaly, the author posits that earthquakes can be predicted by radon gas emission. He contends that radon gas is emmited by sesmic activity. The lecturer, on the other hand, posists that radon gas cannot be emitted only through sesmic activity. He puts forth the idea that radon gas emission could be emitted during landslides and rock crushes.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 159, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ethods about prediction of earthquakes. The lecturer casts doubt on the claims made...
^^^
Line 5, column 299, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...suggests that headache in humans is not an reliable parameter to forecast earthqua...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, may, second, secondly, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1361.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 259.0 270.72406181 96% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25482625483 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.01166760082 4.04702891845 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83302457358 2.5805825403 110% => OK
Unique words: 129.0 145.348785872 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.498069498069 0.540411800872 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 422.1 419.366225166 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 14.0 21.2450331126 66% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 29.6291898116 49.2860985944 60% => OK
Chars per sentence: 75.6111111111 110.228320801 69% => OK
Words per sentence: 14.3888888889 21.698381199 66% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.72222222222 7.06452816374 39% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
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: 11.0 4.27373068433 257% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.101579996818 0.272083759551 37% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0391939769013 0.0996497079465 39% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0876771380243 0.0662205650399 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0597271284204 0.162205337803 37% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0344876447636 0.0443174109184 78% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 13.3589403974 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.27 53.8541721854 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.8 11.0289183223 80% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.58 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.29 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 65.0 63.6247240618 102% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 5.5 10.7273730684 51% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 7.6 10.498013245 72% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 71.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.5 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.