Both the reading and the lecture talk about some theories with regard to the extinction of sea cow animals in 17th century. The former mentions three hypothesis regarding the main reasons which led to the extinction of these animals. The professor, on the other hand, casts doubt on the idea by saying that we don't know what caused them to be extinct. Accordingly, there are problems for each theories given in the reading section as follows.
First of all, both the author and the lecturer posit whether native Siberian individuals overhunted sea cows or not. The text suggests that because these sea animals were a great food resource for native people, they overhunted them leading their population to be extinct. The man in the lecture, in contrast, rebuts this notion by pointing out that sea cows were massive creatures which were nine meters long weighting 10 tons. According to him, these animals could feed people for months because their population were not so large. Therefore, the first deduction made by the author is flawed.
Second of all, both the writer and the professor put forward whether the ecosystem disturbances resulted in a decrease in the kelp populations which were their main source of food. The writer asserts that ecological alterations helped the decline in the population of the kelps giving rise to sea cows to be extinct. The speaker, however, refutes this idea by explaining that if such severe ecosystem incident happened in the past, it should have affected not only kelps but also other marine creatures such as whales. Accordingly, nevertheless, there is no reports showing a reduction in whales’ populations. Therefore, kelps, which were their critical resource for eating, had no problem and sea cows had not the problem regarding food shortages.
Finally, both the article and the speaker put forth the idea of the European fur traders as a main reasons for these animals' extinction. The reading passage avers that these European traders had special weapons helping them quickly kill a vast majority of the sea cows resulting in their elimination. The lecturer, conversely, rejects this by giving explanation that sea cow population was small when European commercial traders came there and also the reduction in sea cow populations happened long before European individuals arrived to that location. Hence, this is also not a main extinction reasons of that animals.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 151, Rule ID: CD_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun 'hypothesis' seems to be countable, so consider using: 'hypotheses', 'hypothesises'.
Suggestion: hypotheses; hypothesises
...17th century. The former mentions three hypothesis regarding the main reasons which led to...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 311, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...sts doubt on the idea by saying that we dont know what caused them to be extinct. Ac...
^^^^
Line 3, column 546, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY[4]
Message: Did you mean 'there are no reports'?
Suggestion: there are no reports
...h as whales. Accordingly, nevertheless, there is no reports showing a reduction in whales’ populati...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 118, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'animals'' or 'animal's'?
Suggestion: animals'; animal's
...fur traders as a main reasons for these animals extinction. The reading passage avers t...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, also, but, conversely, finally, first, hence, however, if, nevertheless, regarding, second, so, therefore, in contrast, such as, first of all, with regard to, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 5.01324503311 299% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2025.0 1373.03311258 147% => OK
No of words: 393.0 270.72406181 145% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15267175573 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45244063426 4.04702891845 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6284408409 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 145.348785872 138% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.508905852417 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 615.6 419.366225166 147% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => 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: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.1337293924 49.2860985944 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.5 110.228320801 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8333333333 21.698381199 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.5 7.06452816374 149% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.126752762118 0.272083759551 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0418869395823 0.0996497079465 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0332051515596 0.0662205650399 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0819701692359 0.162205337803 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0291144036874 0.0443174109184 66% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.59 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.54 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 63.6247240618 151% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.