Pterosaurs were an ancient group of winged reptiles that lived alongside the dinosaurs. Many pterosaurs were very large, some as large as a giraffe and with a wingspan of over 12 meters. Paleontologists have long wondered whether large pterosaurs were capable of powered flight (flying by flapping their wings) or whether they were able only to glide. Several arguments have been made against powered flight. Doubters point out that since modern reptiles are cold-blooded, ancient reptiles such as pterosaurs were probably cold-blooded as well. Cold-blooded animals typically have a slow metabolism and are unable to produce a lot of energy. Powered flight is an activity requiring a lot of energy, which is why all modern vertebrates that fly are warm-blooded, not cold-blooded. It seemed unlikely that pterosaurs would have been able to generate the energy needed to fly.
Second, there is a limit to the weight of animals that can be kept airborne by powered flight. Pterosaurs that were as large as a giraffe were probably so heavy that they would not have been able to flap their wings fast enough to stay aloft for any length of time.
Third, all animals with powered flight are able to take off from the ground. For example, birds take off by jumping from their legs or running to gain speed and then jumping. But these methods would not have worked for large pterosaurs. Large pterosaurs would have needed big, powerful muscles in their back legs to launch themselves into the air, and we know from fossilized bones that their back leg muscles were too small and weak to allow the pterosaurs to run fast enough or jump high enough to launch themselves into the air.
In the reading passage, the author concentrates on several reasons given by the scientists who believe that pterosaurs were not capable of powered flight. However, the lecturer casts doubt on these reasons and respectively points out the problems with all author's assertions.
Firstly, the author argues that pterosaurs were probably cold-blooded like modern reptiles. Thus, they could not obtain the required energy for powered flight. In contrast, the lecturer challenges this idea and states that according to research data, pterosaurs had a dense covering on their body, which indicates they were warm-blooded and their metabolism was fast enough to provide them with the energy needed to fly.
Secondly, the author suggests that as a result of the large size of pterosaurs, they were likely to be too heavy to flap their wings. On the contrary, the lecturer brings up the fact that pterosaurs benefited from a light body despite their large size. Their bones were hollow rather than solid. Therefore, their weight was low enough to allow them to flap their wings and fly.
Lastly, the author asserts that the muscles in pterosaurs' back legs, unlike birds, were too small and weak to enable them to launch themselves into the air. Conversely, the lecturer refutes this claim and clarifies that there is a difference between birds and pterosaurs. Birds use only their back legs to walk on the ground and launch themselves into the air. However, pterosaurs could launch themselves employing all of their four legs and they didn't need to push only their back legs. This way, they were able to run very fast and then launch themselves up.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 447, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...ploying all of their four legs and they didnt need to push only their back legs. This...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, in contrast, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 33.0 22.412803532 147% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1372.0 1373.03311258 100% => OK
No of words: 270.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08148148148 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05360046442 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47584766767 2.5805825403 96% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.555555555556 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 398.7 419.366225166 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => 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: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.1578190405 49.2860985944 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 98.0 110.228320801 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2857142857 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.64285714286 7.06452816374 136% => 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: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.199587791593 0.272083759551 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0737763260548 0.0996497079465 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0551939552934 0.0662205650399 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125128024727 0.162205337803 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.024083578697 0.0443174109184 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.18 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.85 8.42419426049 93% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => 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.