possible explanations of the mass extinction at the end of the Triassic period
Both the article and the lecture talk about the mass extinction at the end of the Triassic period, 200 million years ago. The article strongly postulate three theories that bring possible explanations of this extinction. However, the lecture adamantly delineates each of them.
First and foremost, according to the author of the excerpt, falling down of sea levels near the end of Triassic period caused destroying of species' habitats that live in coastal regions and shallow waters. Consequently, food chains were changed inasmuch as such a mass extinction happened. Nevertheless, the professor in the lecture refuses this theory by stating that those species in that time was often encountered with fluctuating of sea levels, so because of that all of them adapted themselves to such a changing and following habitats' destruction. He states that nothing could bring such a demise only if a sudden event had occurred.
The professor in the lecture further maintains that effects of sulfur dioxide had to be in atmosphere long enough to decrease temperature, but it always combines with water and come back to the earth via rain. This claim refutes the writer implications of how sulfur dioxide could cause the very extinction.
The text lasting insists that an asteroid's colliding with the earth could be the source of this extinction because when asteroids hit the earth's surface, much debris will spread into the atmosphere all of which affects the amount of sunlight so that plants die and following many species starve. Nonetheless, the professor in the lecture opposes this theory by declaring that there is not any sign of crater back to Triassic period, so it cannot be a convincible theory.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 533, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'habitats'' or 'habitat's'?
Suggestion: habitats'; habitat's
...selves to such a changing and following habitats destruction. He states that nothing cou...
^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 31, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[1]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'an asteroid' or simply 'asteroids'?
Suggestion: an asteroid; asteroids
...ction. The text lasting insists that an asteroids colliding with the earth could be the s...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, first, however, if, nevertheless, nonetheless, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 12.0772626932 99% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 30.3222958057 125% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1430.0 1373.03311258 104% => OK
No of words: 277.0 270.72406181 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16245487365 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71017445009 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 145.348785872 112% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.58844765343 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 425.7 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.23620309051 73% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
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: 25.0 21.2450331126 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 76.9168274639 49.2860985944 156% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.0 110.228320801 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.1818181818 21.698381199 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.18181818182 7.06452816374 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => 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: 0.222837425933 0.272083759551 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0816212064586 0.0996497079465 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.112002456132 0.0662205650399 169% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.138041509285 0.162205337803 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.135393053487 0.0443174109184 306% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 13.3589403974 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.98 8.42419426049 107% => OK
difficult_words: 72.0 63.6247240618 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.498013245 114% => 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.