The reading asserts that there are different theories about how agnostids may have lived. The lecturer, however, finds the idea dubious and casts doubt on the reasons proposed by the reading passage.
First of all, the author argues that the agnostids may have been free-swimming predators that hunted smaller animals. since they were just six millimeters long, they were abundant of smaller organisms in the ancient ocean for them to prey on and catch them. Conversely, the lecturer brings up the idea that for hunting, predators should have a well-developed eye while agnostids were having tiny poor eye and somewhat they were blind and they were not able to chase the prey. For following preys, they should have had a sensory organisms whereas there is not any documents for this claim.
Furthermore, the reading holds the view that agnostids may have dwelled on the seafloor. On the contrary, the professor underlines the fact that seafloor animals swim very fast and changed their habitat by swimming far distances, but they occupied and localized in a particular and didn't swim fast so this acclaim which proposed by the reading passage cannot be accepted.
Finally, the reading asserts that agnostids were parasites. In contrast, the speaker dismisses this issue due to the fact that parasites are not having large population as they will kill other organisms and animals; however we know that agnostids lived in large group since the vast amount of fossils of agnosties were discovered.
The reading asserts that there are different theories about how agnostids may have lived. The lecturer, however, finds the idea dubious and casts doubt on the reasons proposed by the reading passage.
First of all, the author argues that the agnostids may have been free-swimming predators that hunted smaller animals. since they were just six millimeters long, they were abundant of smaller organisms in the ancient ocean for them to prey on and catch them. Conversely, the lecturer brings up the idea that for hunting, predators should have a well-developed eye while agnostids were having tiny poor eye and somewhat they were blind and they were not able to chase the prey. For following preys, they should have had a sensory organisms whereas there is not any documents for this claim.
Furthermore, the reading holds the view that agnostids may have dwelled on the seafloor. On the contrary, the professor underlines the fact that seafloor animals swim very fast and changed their habitat by swimming far distances, but they occupied and localized in a particular and didn't swim fast so this acclaim which proposed by the reading passage cannot be accepted.
Finally, the reading asserts that agnostids were parasites. In contrast, the speaker dismisses this issue due to the fact that parasites are not having large population as they will kill other organisms and animals; however we know that agnostids lived in large group since the vast amount of fossils of agnosties were discovered.
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 118, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Since
... predators that hunted smaller animals. since they were just six millimeters long, th...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 528, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'organism'?
Suggestion: organism
...g preys, they should have had a sensory organisms whereas there is not any documents for ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 282, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...upied and localized in a particular and didnt swim fast so this acclaim which propose...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, so, well, whereas, while, in contrast, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => 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: 1258.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 244.0 270.72406181 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15573770492 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.95227774224 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53563689193 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.581967213115 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 377.1 419.366225166 90% => 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: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.1409342502 49.2860985944 152% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.8 110.228320801 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4 21.698381199 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.2 7.06452816374 187% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.411467403314 0.272083759551 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.197210907754 0.0996497079465 198% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.159607318806 0.0662205650399 241% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.284566474989 0.162205337803 175% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.205736860579 0.0443174109184 464% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.3589403974 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.45 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 118, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Since
... predators that hunted smaller animals. since they were just six millimeters long, th...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 528, Rule ID: A_PLURAL[2]
Message: Don't use indefinite articles with plural words. Did you mean 'organism'?
Suggestion: organism
...g preys, they should have had a sensory organisms whereas there is not any documents for ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 282, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...upied and localized in a particular and didnt swim fast so this acclaim which propose...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, so, well, whereas, while, in contrast, first of all, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 22.0 30.3222958057 73% => 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: 1258.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 244.0 270.72406181 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15573770492 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.95227774224 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53563689193 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.581967213115 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 377.1 419.366225166 90% => 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: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 75.1409342502 49.2860985944 152% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.8 110.228320801 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4 21.698381199 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 13.2 7.06452816374 187% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.411467403314 0.272083759551 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.197210907754 0.0996497079465 198% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.159607318806 0.0662205650399 241% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.284566474989 0.162205337803 175% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.205736860579 0.0443174109184 464% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.1 13.3589403974 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 53.8541721854 103% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.94 12.2367328918 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.45 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 63.6247240618 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.