fossils
Some controvresy has been generated about whether or not selling fossils is beneficial. The author states that the public and the scientisits will suffer from selling these percious fossils parts. However, the speaker says that actually selling fossils to the collecters will have great benefits for both the public and scientists.
The first point of dispute is if selling fossils has a negative impact on the public. The lecturer explains that this idea of selling fossils will allow people to see fossils more than ever before. This is because low income public institution can purchase and display them to the public. By contrast the author mentions that the public will suffer from the sale of fossils.
Another controversial issue is about scientists accessibility. According to the professor, the rich people can not buy the fossils unless they arego through several tests and examinations by scientists. Therefore, scientists will have access to fossils. On the other hand, the author posits that selling fossils will reduce the researchers ability to work on fossils.
The final point of debate is the question of the collectors demolish the percious evidence that related to the fossils during the unearthing them. The speaker claims that if the coolectors do not look for the fossils they highly likely stayed unknown and unearthed. Thus, it is better for collectors to look for them even though if they destroy the evidence that would be found around them. This is because universities and other institutions are no welling to look for these valuable parts. Despite that possible rationale, the author ignores these potential explanations.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 43, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...me controvresy has been generated about whether or not selling fossils is beneficial. The auth...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 33, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ts. The first point of dispute is if selling fossils has a negative impact on...
^^
Line 5, column 329, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'researchers'' or 'researcher's'?
Suggestion: researchers'; researcher's
...ts that selling fossils will reduce the researchers ability to work on fossils. The fin...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, first, however, if, look, so, therefore, thus, well, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1399.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 264.0 270.72406181 98% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29924242424 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.03089032464 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64073294758 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 145.348785872 95% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.522727272727 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 414.0 419.366225166 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
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: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 26.1841435797 49.2860985944 53% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 87.4375 110.228320801 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.5 21.698381199 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 7.06452816374 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.347335814472 0.272083759551 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.12914322661 0.0996497079465 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.120839202932 0.0662205650399 182% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.234363648849 0.162205337803 144% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0616833949973 0.0443174109184 139% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 55.24 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.16 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.96 8.42419426049 94% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => 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.