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 and the lecture both deal with whether Peary's claim is reliable that he have reached the North Pole. While the author of the reading thinks his words are trustworthy for three specific reasons, the lecturer opposes the author's claims. In his opinion, he might actually do not reach the pole.
First, the writer claims that due to the investigation carried out by the committe, Peary have consistent and convincing accounts and that supports his declaration. In contrast, the lecturer argues that the committee, composed of some friends who funded Peary, is not objective. Additionally, he maintains that as the investigation only lasted for 2 days, it couldn't have examined Peary's record thoroughly and the result could be a bias.
Second, the author mentions that Peary's speed is acceptable as there is a morden example. In the article, it is said that an explorer called Tom Avery, with the same vehicle and dog breed, complete the trip in less that 37 days. The lecturer, however, calls this argument into question by mentioning that unlike the situation that aircraft drop the food along his way, Peary had to carry the supply on the sled and thus it's heavier. Further, he remarks that during Avery's trek, the weather was favorable, but just the opposite for Peary.
Finally, the writer asserts that the method to calculate the sun's position through shadows would only be reasonable if there remains precise shadow measurement. As opposed to the author, the lecturer holds that with time passing by, Peary's pictures has faded and worn out. He highlights that the shadows has blurred and faded away, resulting in the inadequate accuracy of measuring them.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 359, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...nvestigation only lasted for 2 days, it couldnt have examined Pearys record thoroughly ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, finally, first, however, if, second, so, thus, while, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1397.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 277.0 270.72406181 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.04332129964 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.53058549474 2.5805825403 98% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 145.348785872 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.638989169675 0.540411800872 118% => OK
syllable_count: 417.6 419.366225166 100% => 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: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.385509828 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.461538462 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3076923077 21.698381199 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.15384615385 7.06452816374 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.200830123822 0.272083759551 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0702728354002 0.0996497079465 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0720495657532 0.0662205650399 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113960148168 0.162205337803 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0600922051547 0.0443174109184 136% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 58.62 53.8541721854 109% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.0289183223 93% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.95 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.69 8.42419426049 115% => OK
difficult_words: 88.0 63.6247240618 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.