Robert E. Peary was a well-known adventurer and arctic explorer who in 1909 set out to reach the North Pole. When he returned from the expedition, he claimed to have reached the pole on April 7, 1909. This report made him into an international celebrity. Though some historians have expressed doubts that Peary did in fact reach the North Pole, three arguments provide strong support for the truth of Peary’s claim.
First, the National Geographic Society put together a committee that was instructed to conduct a thorough investigation of Peary’s records and equipment. At the end of the investigation, the committee concluded that Peary’s accounts were consistent and persuasive and declared that he had indeed reached the North Pole.
Second, a recent expedition provides support for Peary’s claim that he reached the North Pole in only 37 days after setting out from Ellesmere Island off the coast of Greenland. Skeptics used to argue that Peary could not have traveled that fast, since even modern snowmobiles take longer to cover the same distance. However, a British explorer named Tom Avery recently made the same trek in less than 37 days. In fact, Avery used the same kind of dogsled and the same number and breed of dogs as Peary had. Thus, Peary’s claims are not impossible, and he very well might have been telling the truth.
Third, there are photographs taken by Peary that support his claim to have reached the North Pole. Measuring the shadows in Peary’s photographs makes it possible to calculate the Sun’s position in the sky. The Sun’s position established from the photographs corresponds exactly to the Sun’s position as it should have been at the North Pole on that day. This provides strong evidence that Peary reached the North Pole and took the photographs there.
The article illustrates that there are three arguments provided to support that Robert Peary, a well-known adventurer and arctic explorer, did reach the North Pole, while the lecturer disputes those ideas presented in the passage with several proofs.
According to the writer, the National Geographic Society's investigation can prove it, since Peary's accounts were consistent. In contrast, the professor in the lecture maintains that the National Geographic Society's investigation does reasonable, but the conclusion is objective. She advances the theory by saying that the report was written by Peary's close friend, beside he contributed much money to the constitution. What's more, the investigation only last for 2 days, they did not carefully exam Peary's accounts. Thus, this evidence is not convincing.
In addition, the writer holds that a recent expedition can support it, because someone made a same trek. However, the professor casts doubt on the opinion mentioned in the passage. She states that Avery may made the same trek, but he carried less packages. To be exact, Avery drop his food and the wether condition is different. Avery went in a good weather, however, Peary went in an unfavorable weather condition. Thus, it cannot be used to prove that Peary reached the North Pole.
Finally, it is depicted in the reading that the photo can support his claim, because the sun's position asserted Peary reached in North Pole. Nevertheless, the speaker refutes that the to calculate the Sun's position, the photo has to be very clear, the shade in the photo has to be percised. However, the photo Peary took they used the camera that cannot focus and it became blur because of the time. Therefore, They cannot use the photo to decide the location.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 80, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...three arguments provided to support that Robert Peary, a well-known adventurer an...
^^
Line 3, column 420, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: What's
...ributed much money to the constitution. Whats more, the investigation only last for 2...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 243, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun packages is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
... may made the same trek, but he carried less packages. To be exact, Avery drop his f...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, therefore, thus, well, while, as to, in addition, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.01324503311 239% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1477.0 1373.03311258 108% => OK
No of words: 286.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.16433566434 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11236361783 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67513595708 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 145.348785872 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.573426573427 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 461.7 419.366225166 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 2.5761589404 233% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 49.6663870238 49.2860985944 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 92.3125 110.228320801 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.875 21.698381199 82% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.9375 7.06452816374 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.193787851846 0.272083759551 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0552074018514 0.0996497079465 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0624778124147 0.0662205650399 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.112371413373 0.162205337803 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0411856274997 0.0443174109184 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.35 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.84 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 63.6247240618 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.5 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.