The article here states the research performed by Stanley Miller. The research included some arrangments flasks, tungsten electrode, mixing of ammonia into water, constant electrical charge, and further adding of amino acids to achive the real conditions. However the professor refutes with the above mentioned arrangments and process by mentioning following reasons.
First, the professor highlighted the atmosphere of the lab that was provided to the experiment highly skeptical. And further adds that, the experiment had a flow of constant charge, which represents the lightning and storms, but the charge in real conditions wasn't continuous, instead it was frequent.
Second, the professor says one isn't sure about the mixture of gas, and also adds that there was a decrease in amount of oxygen in real conditions. And with this point he casts doubt on the results and states that, if the mixture of gas is false then everything else is false.
And the last, he questions the adding of amino acids. The article here states that adding of amino acids is equal to adding of amini acids by meteirites in real condition. But the professor refutes by saying that, instead of meteorite, the earth can also be a meteorite already having amino acids or beacause of impact of meteorite, the amino acids would have escaped. And lastly, professor concluded that, still there is doubt on the formation of first cell so, its not possible to deduce that how the multi cell organism would have evolved.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 257, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...no acids to achive the real conditions. However the professor refutes with the above me...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 260, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wasn't
...orms, but the charge in real conditions wasnt continuous, instead it was frequent. ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 32, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
...ent. Second, the professor says one isnt sure about the mixture of gas, and also...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, lastly, second, so, still, then
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 7.30242825607 164% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 13.0 22.412803532 58% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1256.0 1373.03311258 91% => OK
No of words: 245.0 270.72406181 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.12653061224 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.95632099841 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5868793986 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.54693877551 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 387.0 419.366225166 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 8.0 1.51434878587 528% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.8154456394 49.2860985944 95% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.181818182 110.228320801 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2727272727 21.698381199 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.63636363636 7.06452816374 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 4.33554083885 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0491671400647 0.272083759551 18% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0247238371387 0.0996497079465 25% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0354286173825 0.0662205650399 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0350051752319 0.162205337803 22% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0224802889969 0.0443174109184 51% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.3589403974 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.53 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 59.0 63.6247240618 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.