Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they challenge the specific arguments presented in the reading passage.
Starting in the 1960s and continuing until the 1980s, sailors in Russian submarines patrolling the North Atlantic and Arctic Ocean would occasionally hear strange sounds. These underwater noises reminded the submarine crews of frog croaks, so they called the sounds “quackers” (from the Russian word for frog sounds). The sources of the sound seemed to be moving with great speed and agility; however, the submarines’ sonar (a method of detecting objects underwater) was unable to detect any solid moving objects in the area. There are several theories about what might have caused the odd sounds.
The first theory suggests that the strange noises were actually the calls of male and female orca whales during a courtship ritual. Orca whales are known to inhabit the areas where the submarines were picking up the bizarre noises. Orcas have been studied extensively, and the sounds they make when trying to attract a mate are similar to those that the submarines were detecting.
A second idea is that the sounds were caused by giant squid. Giant squid are giant marine invertebrates that live deep in the ocean and prey on large fish. They are difficult to detect by sonar because they have soft bodies with no skeleton. Not much is known about giant squid behavior, but their complex brains suggest they are intelligent animals. It is possible they have the ability to emit sound, and perhaps they approached the submarines out of curiosity.
A third theory suggests the Russian submarines were picking up stray sounds from some military technology, like another country’s submarines that were secretly patrolling the area. Perhaps the foreign submarines did not register on the sonar because they were using a kind of technology specifically designed to make them undetectable by sonar. The strange froglike sounds may have been emitted by the foreign submarines unintentionally.
The lecturer challenges the topic proposed in the reading that there are several theories about what might have caused the odd sounds. Also, she thinks that no one can make sure the cause and all of these theories include problems.
First, the passage indicates that the strange noises were actually the calls of male and female ocra whales during a courtship ritual. However, the professor points out that it's highly unlikely the calls of ocra whales because they always live near the surface of the water and submarines are in the deep water. So submarines cannot hear the sound near the surface, and the sound cannot be detected by sonar from deep water.
Second, the essay supposes that the sound were caused by giant squid. But the lecturer considers that the sound was reported firstly at 1960s and disappeared entirely for two decades and then occurred again at 1980s. Hence, squids always live in the ocean and continue to live until now, which cannot explain the facts that the sound appeared at the beginning and reoccurred 20 years later.
Third, the article suggests that the froglike sounds may have been emitted by the foreign submarines unintentionally. Nevertheless, the professor argues that this theory does not hold up because the strange sounds change directions quickly and no submarine could do this. Plus, the engine noises from submarines cannot accompany the sounds and there is still no silent submarine can be built. Consequently, the sounds cannot be made by submarines.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 436, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...nsequently, the sounds cannot be made by submarines.
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, consequently, first, firstly, hence, however, may, nevertheless, second, so, still, then, third
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 24.0 30.3222958057 79% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 5.01324503311 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1257.0 1373.03311258 92% => OK
No of words: 248.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.0685483871 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.96837696647 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.41779519621 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 149.0 145.348785872 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.600806451613 0.540411800872 111% => OK
syllable_count: 378.0 419.366225166 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 2.5761589404 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.833236434 49.2860985944 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.75 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6666666667 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.66666666667 7.06452816374 137% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 4.33554083885 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.119405587045 0.272083759551 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0435632639388 0.0996497079465 44% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0275583766014 0.0662205650399 42% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0657442174192 0.162205337803 41% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0100731422057 0.0443174109184 23% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.8 13.3589403974 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.2367328918 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.13 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 63.6247240618 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => 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.