Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific points made in the reading passage
The reading and the lecture offer two opposing views on the solutions on the increasing level of salt in the lake of Salton. Whereas the author of the reading suggests that these solutions are very beneficial for decreasing the salt level, the lecturer desputes that these solutions aren't practical. She casts doubt on the main pionts made in the reading by providing three reasons.
First, according to the text, desalination procedures could decay the level of the salt by evaporating the water and remaining salt and solid materials outside of the lake. However, the lecturer discusses about some kind of the solid materials which are harmful for humans. She states that Selenioum as an example of the solid materials provided by desalination, is very toxic and in case of evaporating through the air, it is very dangerous for people's health.
Secondly, the author calims that another process for deterioration of salt is to deliver the Pacific Ocean's water, which is less salty than lake's water, to the lake to dilute the lake's water. Although, the lecturer believes that this proposal costs very high and isn't an appropriate and economized solution. She explains that about one hundred kilometers, pipeline construction is very expensive for governement.
Finally, the text asserts that by constructing walls and separating the lake to different parts, the water of the lake will be pure in the main parts. Nevertheless, the lecturer mentions that by a strong earthquake the walls will be destroied, and no longer this idea would work properly.
To recap, the lecturer refutes the three proposed solutions in the text, and she believes that none of them could not be useful and practical for decaying the salt level of the lake' s water.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 284, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: aren't
... lecturer desputes that these solutions arent practical. She casts doubt on the main ...
^^^^^
Line 2, column 30, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... reasons. First, according to the text, desalination procedures could decay the ...
^^
Line 3, column 263, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: isn't
... that this proposal costs very high and isnt an appropriate and economized solution....
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
finally, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, whereas, kind of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 10.0 10.4613686534 96% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 19.0 22.412803532 85% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1458.0 1373.03311258 106% => OK
No of words: 288.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0625 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68590248242 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 145.348785872 102% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.513888888889 0.540411800872 95% => OK
syllable_count: 450.9 419.366225166 108% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => 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: 12.0 13.0662251656 92% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.21661442 49.2860985944 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.5 110.228320801 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.0 21.698381199 111% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.75 7.06452816374 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.103575431194 0.272083759551 38% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0481744512082 0.0996497079465 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0563959883793 0.0662205650399 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0616400036531 0.162205337803 38% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0503035969759 0.0443174109184 114% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.3589403974 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.88 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.