MEthods to predict earthquakes
Both the reading and the lecture discuss earthquakes. The reading states that earthquakes are unavoidable disasters and provides three methods to predict them. However, the professor excerpts that there is no clear evidence that earthquakes can be predicted by the ways mentioned in the article and gainsays each of them.
First and foremost, the passage begins by asserting a distinct intuitive quality of animals to detect earthquakes by showing different behavior. By examining animals' attitudes, earthquakes can be predicted like reported in Greece when animals left their dwellings several days before the earthquake. On the other hand, the speaker explains that animals are mildly reactive towards minor tremblings which do not necessarily depict the occurrence of earthquakes. Therefore, we cannot blind trust animals to predict earthquakes.
Next, the professor further delves into details that headaches in humans are a rare sign before the earthquake. Since the magnetite level is low in humans, electromagnetic rays can barely sensitize the brain. Thus, headaches cannot be associated with earthquakes. These claims refute the writer's implication about headaches occurred in humans before the earthquake. The reading mentions that magnetite helps humans to detect changes in electromagnetic fields by causing headaches.
Ultimately, the article wraps its argument by declaring the third approach which deals with the measurement of radon emission from rocks due to seismic changes. The high level of radon in an area can be a sign of an earthquake. In contrast, the speaker rebuts this point by showing the inaccuracy of the author that radon can also be emitted from rocks by land sliding and rock fracture. The high concentration of seismic waves does not mean the indication of an earthquake. It could be a false alarm. Hence, this theory is not reliable.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 289, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...th earthquakes. These claims refute the writers implication about headaches occurred in...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, so, therefore, third, thus, well, in contrast, by the way, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 5.04856512141 158% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1589.0 1373.03311258 116% => OK
No of words: 290.0 270.72406181 107% => OK
Chars per words: 5.47931034483 5.08290768461 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.12666770723 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.92042908906 2.5805825403 113% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 145.348785872 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565517241379 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 482.4 419.366225166 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.8166704544 49.2860985944 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.2777777778 110.228320801 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.1111111111 21.698381199 74% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.33333333333 7.06452816374 90% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186564074126 0.272083759551 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0538726767114 0.0996497079465 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.107139318478 0.0662205650399 162% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.127487462571 0.162205337803 79% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.143914426774 0.0443174109184 325% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 46.78 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.21 12.2367328918 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.89 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 63.6247240618 129% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 81.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.5 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.