Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific theories presented in the reading passage.
The reading and the lecture offer two opposing views on the varoius theories about the living behavior of agnostids. Whereas the author of the reading suggests that three possible theories could explain how agnostids had lived, the lecturer states that all of the theories have many drawbacks. She challenges the main points made in the reading by providing three reasons.
First, according to the text, due to the previous knowledge about primitive arthropods, the agnostids might have been free-swimming predatores. However, the lecturer disputes that the see predators should have strong and developed eyes to chace their pray, but the agnostids had very poor developed eyes, and even they were blind in some cases. Therefore, they could not have been free-swimming predators. Also, she says that no other evidence was found about other organs that could help them to be a pradators in the water.
Secondly, the reading claims that the agnostids could have been seafloor dwellers because of same examples of primitive arthropods which had lived in this way. Nevertheless, the lecturer argues that seafloor dwellers could not move very fast, so they occupied only a small rigion. While, the agnostids' occupation ereas show that they could move rapidly that they were able to live in multiple areas.
Finally, another possiable theory mentioned in the text, is that the agnostids might have been parasties. On the other hand, the lecturer refutes this theory as well. She asserts that owing to the small populations of parasties and the great size of the agnostids' population, they could not have been paraties. She explains that usually, paraties, kill their host's organisms and they are not able to grow their populations.
To recap, the lecturer casts doubt on the three theories which the text provids for possibility of different living behavior of the agnostids.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 254, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...ids had lived, the lecturer states that all of the theories have many drawbacks. She chall...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 281, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “While” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
..., so they occupied only a small rigion. While, the agnostids occupation ereas show th...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, well, whereas, while, in some cases, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1573.0 1373.03311258 115% => OK
No of words: 301.0 270.72406181 111% => OK
Chars per words: 5.22591362126 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16525528304 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55571788558 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.531561461794 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 462.6 419.366225166 110% => 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: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.0347209797 49.2860985944 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.866666667 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.0666666667 21.698381199 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.4 7.06452816374 133% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => 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: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.212649002279 0.272083759551 78% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0783948827776 0.0996497079465 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0589617320667 0.0662205650399 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.125464370784 0.162205337803 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0887691483425 0.0443174109184 200% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.3589403974 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.05 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.25 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 69.0 63.6247240618 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => 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.