The reading and the speaker discuss 70-million-years -old fossils of T.rex from discrepant perspectives. The article believes that this discovery reveals many significant information about primitive animals. However, the speaker seems to negate all the claims made in the article. He says that none of those information are convincing.
First of all, the article points out that the breaking of the fossilized leg bone revealed blood vessels. This point is challenged by the lecture. The speaker restates the fact that blood vessels, which the article has mentioned might come from bacterial. He says that when bacterial colonized in the hollow of leg bones, they left their traces, such as their soft tissues.
Secondly, the article contends that people examined in the inner of the bones claims the presence of sphere that could be the red blood cells contained iron materials. The speaker rebuts this idea by saying that experts did not find any red blood in other fossils in the same place of 70 -million-years -old fossils of T.rex. Therefore, spheres iron that the article has mentioned is incorrect.
Finally, the article states that scientists test on the dinosaur’s leg bone showed that it contained collagen. The speaker, on the other hand, opposes this arguing by saying that collagen cannot last very long as 70 million years. It is impossible thing. He puts forth the idea that the collagen, which the article has talked about might be the skin of researchers left behind when they handed the fossils to do research.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 155, Rule ID: MANY_NN_U[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun information seems to be uncountable; consider using: 'much significant information', 'a good deal of significant information'.
Suggestion: much significant information; a good deal of significant information
...le believes that this discovery reveals many significant information about primitive animals. However, the s...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 303, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this information' or 'those informations'?
Suggestion: this information; those informations
...de in the article. He says that none of those information are convincing. First of all, the art...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, such as, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 10.4613686534 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 1.0 7.30242825607 14% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 28.0 30.3222958057 92% => 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: 1289.0 1373.03311258 94% => OK
No of words: 251.0 270.72406181 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.13545816733 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.98032404683 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67592689598 2.5805825403 104% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.565737051793 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 373.5 419.366225166 89% => 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: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 21.2450331126 75% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 42.0410381519 49.2860985944 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 85.9333333333 110.228320801 78% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.7333333333 21.698381199 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.13333333333 7.06452816374 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 4.45695364238 22% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 11.0 4.27373068433 257% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.321963980793 0.272083759551 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0981120739152 0.0996497079465 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0855719352161 0.0662205650399 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.194139147795 0.162205337803 120% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0754920125206 0.0443174109184 170% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.3589403974 83% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 63.7 53.8541721854 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.4 11.0289183223 76% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.27 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 61.0 63.6247240618 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.498013245 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 71.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.5 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.