The reading and the lecture are both about evidence of whether the dinosaurs were endotherms or not. The reading supports the idea of dinosaurs were, in fact, endotherms, but the lecturer casts doubt on the claims made in the article. She asserts that these pieces of evidence are very controversial, and she hasn't considered dinosaurs as the endothermy animals.
First of all, the author points out that the fossils of the dinosaurs were found in Polar Regions, and only the animals that can maintain their body temperatures constant can survive there. This point of view is challenged by the lecturer. She believes that during those time Polar Region was warmer than nowadays, and even in the coldest days, the dinosaurs were able to migrate to the more pleasant regions. Therefore, fossils of the dinosaurs, found in the Polar region, don’t mean that they were endotherms.
Secondly, the author contends that the dinosaurs had legs, positioned underneath a body, what is the important distinction of all of the endotherms. On the other hand, the lecturer believe that such legs’ position allowed to support tremendous weight of the dinosaurs and wasn’t an evidence of the endothermy.
Finally, the special bone structure of the dinosaurs included parts called Haversian canals. This part is presented in all endothermy animals and allows them to grow quickly. However, the lecturer claims that the dinosaurs also had growth ring region, which was an evidence of their unendothermy nature. Growth ring region was found in all unendotherms, and it is responsible for decreasing growth during cold periods. The lecturer puts forth the idea that the dinosaurs, as all the modern reptiles, weren’t the endotherms.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 310, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: hasn't
...vidence are very controversial, and she hasnt considered dinosaurs as the endothermy ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 127, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...y, what is the important distinction of all of the endotherms. On the other hand, the lect...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 228, Rule ID: ALLOW_TO[2]
Message: Did you mean 'supporting'? Or maybe you should add a pronoun? In active voice, 'allow' + 'to' takes an object, usually a pronoun.
Suggestion: supporting
...e that such legs' position allowed to support tremendous weight of the dinosaurs and ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, however, second, secondly, so, therefore, in fact, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 10.4613686534 134% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1465.0 1373.03311258 107% => OK
No of words: 276.0 270.72406181 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.30797101449 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07593519647 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.78303089717 2.5805825403 108% => OK
Unique words: 151.0 145.348785872 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.547101449275 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 439.2 419.366225166 105% => 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: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 1.51434878587 330% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.5860043498 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.642857143 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7142857143 21.698381199 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.78571428571 7.06452816374 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.436739616443 0.272083759551 161% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.13854466406 0.0996497079465 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0631152906241 0.0662205650399 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.243600211029 0.162205337803 150% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0091346051099 0.0443174109184 21% => 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: 13.4 13.3589403974 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 12.2367328918 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.