Robert E. Peary's claim, a well-known adventure and arctic explorer, about reaching to North Pole in 1909
Both the reading and the lecture discuss Robert E. Peary's claim, a well-known adventure and arctic explorer, about reaching to North Pole in 1909. The passage provides three supporter evidences which identify the accuracy of his claim. The professor, in the contrast, says all of these reasons are unconceivable and denies all of them.
In the first place, the reading states that the committee of national geographic society examined Peary's recorded and proved them. The professor refutes this by stating that their examination wasn't at all trustworthy because not only they were the close friends of Peary and received money to confirm the authority of claim; but also the number of days spent by them to investigate records is very short in which they weren't able to do their tasks carefully.
Second, according to the passage, Tom Avery, a British explorer, recently traveled the same distance with the same condition of Peary traveling, like his dogsled's kind, took 37 days. This showed that the time of Peary's traveling wasn't unreliable and could be true. The professor repudiates this by explaining that tom Avery didn't carry his food, in fact the airplane carried his food, so it is a big different between these two explorers. He says such an evidence cannot support the accuracy of Peary's statement.
Third, the reading talks about the examination of photographs took by Peary. The position of them showed such a photograph took from North Pole. The lecture disagrees this evidence too by saying that those photo weren't in a proper condition to estimate the position of their location. The camera used for those hadn't enough focus, and the photograph by passing time faded away. Both of these made shadow on photographs which made the exact examination of location impossible.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 192, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wasn't
... this by stating that their examination wasnt at all trustworthy because not only the...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 418, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: weren't
...ate records is very short in which they werent able to do their tasks carefully. Seco...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 229, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wasn't
...howed that the time of Pearys traveling wasnt unreliable and could be true. The profe...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 324, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...iates this by explaining that tom Avery didnt carry his food, in fact the airplane ca...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 212, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: weren't
...evidence too by saying that those photo werent in a proper condition to estimate the p...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 285, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...stimate the position of their location. The camera used for those hadnt enough focu...
^^^
Line 4, column 311, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: hadn't
...eir location. The camera used for those hadnt enough focus, and the photograph by pas...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, second, so, third, well, in fact, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 10.4613686534 48% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 7.30242825607 110% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.01324503311 259% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1498.0 1373.03311258 109% => OK
No of words: 294.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 5.09523809524 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14082457966 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.57713616287 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 145.348785872 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.58843537415 0.540411800872 109% => OK
syllable_count: 463.5 419.366225166 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More 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: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.6717998024 49.2860985944 135% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.8666666667 110.228320801 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.6 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.93333333333 7.06452816374 70% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
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: 0.227741188978 0.272083759551 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0903504435327 0.0996497079465 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.209619366524 0.0662205650399 317% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.15271303045 0.162205337803 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.170198237283 0.0443174109184 384% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.3589403974 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.3 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.82 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 63.6247240618 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 10.7273730684 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.