The reading and lecture are both about cloud seeding. The author of the reading feels that this technique is effective in protecting crops from hail. These arguments are challenged by the lecturer. She is of the opinion that it is not clear that the cloud seeding technique is effective and refutes each one of the evidence provided in the passage.
To begin with, the author argues that laboratory experiments support the idea that cloud seeding is effective. The article mentions that when experimenters added silver iodide to cold water vapor in the laboratory, they often observed light snow forming instead of hail pellets. This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer. She notes that they are just valid for laboratory conditions. Silver iodide prevents snow or rain from forming. Additionally, she says that cloud seeding could do damages by bringing lack of water in regions where the rainfall is low.
Secondly, the article suggests that in some Asian countries cloud seeding has been successfully used to control precipitation in urban areas. In the article, it is stated that these positive results suggest that cloud seeding should also be effective in protecting fields and farms in the United States. The lecturer, however, rebuts this by stating that this could not be repeated in the US. She elaborates on this bringing up the point that this evidence is specific to countries where are high level pollution. Because of the unpolluted area, this may not occur in US farms.
Finally, the author posits that one study conducted in a farming region in the central United States, for example, directly monitored crop damage due to hail. Moreover, in the article it is stated that in an area where cloud seeding was used there was reduced hail damage compared to previous years. In contrast, the lecturer’s position is that the decline has been monitored in other nearby regions where cloud seeding hasn't been utilized. Additionally, she notes that reducing number of hailstorm was result of the natural variation.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 426, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: hasn't
...ther nearby regions where cloud seeding hasnt been utilized. Additionally, she notes ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, however, if, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, for example, in contrast, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 10.4613686534 220% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 22.0 12.0772626932 182% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 22.412803532 170% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 41.0 30.3222958057 135% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1715.0 1373.03311258 125% => OK
No of words: 333.0 270.72406181 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.15015015015 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27180144563 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62447687547 2.5805825403 102% => OK
Unique words: 173.0 145.348785872 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.51951951952 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 531.9 419.366225166 127% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 3.25607064018 307% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 13.0662251656 145% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.4008176348 49.2860985944 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 90.2631578947 110.228320801 82% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.5263157895 21.698381199 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.73684210526 7.06452816374 81% => 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 : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.27373068433 140% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => 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: 11.6 13.3589403974 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.29 12.2367328918 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.84 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 63.6247240618 145% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.