Based on the given materials, the article as well as the lecture discusses Robert E. Peary's expedition who claimed reaching the North Pole. The author states that there are several viable supports regarding this assertion. That being said, the lecturer provides several ideas to repudiate this claim.
Initially, the author says that a committee had been held by the National Geographic Society, and investigated Peary's evidences. The members of the mentioned committee found those records convincing. However, the lecturer explains that this cannot be trustworthy owing to the fact that not only were not the committee objective but also its members were both close friends of Peary and the project's investors. In addition, this investigation took only two days which decrease the accuracy of results.
Second, the writer proclaims that Peary's expedition took only 37 days. At first it is impossible due to the distance between two places, but after checking this phenomenon by a British explorer, named Tom Avery, with the same equipment, the claim turned into a possible one, because Avery's trip took less than 37 days. Yet again, the speaker underscores that there were two differences between Peary's journey and Avery's one; one of them is that Avery did carry less amounts of equipment like food, because he were supplied by dropped foods and the other difference is that Avery did his trip in more favorable climate and it counts as a significant factor. So, it cannot be comparable to Peary's journey.
The final point of contention between the reading and the listening passage is photography analysis. The author thinks that it is possible to be aware of Surfs position in the sun, by checking Peary's pictures. On the other hand, the speaker explains that the pictures, which had been taken by a primitive camera, were not focused enough and were faded and blurred. It leads decreasing the trustworthy of evidences.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 462, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun amounts is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...ne; one of them is that Avery did carry less amounts of equipment like food, because...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, regarding, second, so, well, as to, in addition, as well as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 10.4613686534 172% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 22.412803532 116% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 30.3222958057 106% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1615.0 1373.03311258 118% => OK
No of words: 314.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.14331210191 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20951839842 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.61952500155 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 181.0 145.348785872 125% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.576433121019 0.540411800872 107% => OK
syllable_count: 502.2 419.366225166 120% => 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: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 78.3625139576 49.2860985944 159% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.9375 110.228320801 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.625 21.698381199 90% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.8125 7.06452816374 96% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 4.45695364238 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.31350118225 0.272083759551 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.101288440804 0.0996497079465 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.115019710366 0.0662205650399 174% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.170655811287 0.162205337803 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0558875834328 0.0443174109184 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.6 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.95 8.42419426049 106% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 63.6247240618 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => 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.