At the end of the Triassic period 200 million years ago, there was a mass-extinction event that caused the extinction of more than half of all living species. It was this extinction event that allowed dinosaurs to become the dominant species for the next 145 million years. We do not know exactly what happened that eliminated so many species in a relatively short period of time, but there are several possible explanations.
The reading asserts that there are some theories about the mass extinction of living species at the end of the Triassic period. The lecture, however, finds all the theories dubious and casts doubt on the reasons provided by the reading passage.
First, the author argues that decrement in the sea level may have destroyed the habitat of the shallow-ocean and coastal species that resulted in destruction in food chains all over the world, and at the end caused the mass extinction. Conversely, the lecturer brings up the intention that although the fluctuation in the sea level has a harsh effect on the living of sea species, it must occur in a short period to have a significant impact. Since these fluctuations had occurred gradually, the coastal species had enough time to adapt themselves to the changes. Therefore, the decline of the sea level does not seem to be the cause of the mass extinction.
Furthermore, the reading passage holds the view that a large amount of sulfur dioxide (SO2) emission may have caused a reduction in the global temperature that led to mass extinction. In contrast, the professor underlines the fact that while the SO2 can reduce the air temperature, it does not have a severe effect in a short time that it is in the atmosphere. As the SO2 combines with the water particles in the atmosphere, it falls down by rainfall. Accordingly, it is unlikely that SO2 caused mass extinction.
Finally, the reading claims that the debris of asteroid strike which had thrown up into the atmosphere had blocked the sunlight and resulted in the death of animals and plants. On the contrary, the speaker dismisses this issue due to the fact that scientists have not found any crater or any other evidence to prove that an asteroid strike had happened in that epoch. Hence, the asteroid strike cannot be the reason for the mass extinction.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, hence, however, if, may, so, therefore, while, in contrast, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 30.3222958057 142% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.01324503311 239% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1551.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 318.0 270.72406181 117% => OK
Chars per words: 4.87735849057 5.08290768461 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22286093782 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67892230905 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.509433962264 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 468.9 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.3455853777 49.2860985944 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.307692308 110.228320801 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4615384615 21.698381199 113% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.92307692308 7.06452816374 140% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.144719772737 0.272083759551 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0557930715295 0.0996497079465 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0744493984062 0.0662205650399 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0914177764066 0.162205337803 56% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0669052794183 0.0443174109184 151% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.32 12.2367328918 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.55 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 63.6247240618 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.