Based on the reading material, it is stated that there are 3 viable reasons for archeologists to have doubts in order to accept the use of the vessels as electric batteries in ancient times. However, the lecturer finds this idea bereft of sufficient reasoning and presents some ideas to the contrary.
Initially, the author argued that these vessels must have been attached to some electricity conductors, like metal wires, whereas there are were no evidences of any metal wires or electricity conductors in the site. That being said, the lecturer repudiated this idea by clarifying that these vessels were found by local people, not archeologists. So, It would be possible that local people might have been found these metal wires and electricity conductors and since they have no knowledge about them, they were uninteresting and might have been discarded.
Another point mentioned by the author was that since the copper cylinders inside the jar were look like those had been discovered in Seleucia, the must have been used for holding scrolls of sacred text. However, the lecturer rejected this one too by stating that although these vessels were close resemblance to those had been found in Seleucia, I was not possible to use for scrolls. Since each clay jar contained a copper cylinder surrounding an iron rod and some liquid, they must have been adopted for another purpose, like generating electricity.
The final point mentioned in the reading passage was that since ancient people had no electronic devices, these vessels were completely futile. Yet again, the lecture casted doubt on this idea. She said that ancient people used these vessels in order to generate electricity as an invisible and magical power. Also, they used these batteries for healing, stimulating muscles and releasing pain, just like the modern medicine.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 141, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'been'.
Suggestion: been
...rs, like metal wires, whereas there are were no evidences of any metal wires or elec...
^^^^
Line 3, column 90, Rule ID: WERE_VBB[1]
Message: Did you mean 'where' or 'we'?
Suggestion: where; we
...nce the copper cylinders inside the jar were look like those had been discovered in ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, look, so, whereas, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 10.4613686534 201% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 31.0 22.412803532 138% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 34.0 30.3222958057 112% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1544.0 1373.03311258 112% => OK
No of words: 298.0 270.72406181 110% => OK
Chars per words: 5.18120805369 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15483772266 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58173011574 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 155.0 145.348785872 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.520134228188 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 494.1 419.366225166 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 7.0 8.23620309051 85% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => 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: 48.2700735446 49.2860985944 98% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.666666667 110.228320801 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.8333333333 21.698381199 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.58333333333 7.06452816374 51% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => 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: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.527585058648 0.272083759551 194% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.191921242423 0.0996497079465 193% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110371095576 0.0662205650399 167% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.306130055266 0.162205337803 189% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.116141172493 0.0443174109184 262% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.3589403974 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 53.8541721854 72% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 11.0289183223 125% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.06 12.2367328918 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.8 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 63.6247240618 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => 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.