Both the reading passage and the lecture discuss the mass extinction happened 200 million years ago at the end of Triassic period. Albeit the reading passage brings three possible reasons why the extinction happened, the lecturer believes non of them is convincing and refutes them all. Now in the following article, I try to explain why the lecturer doesn't accept the reasons provided by the author.
First of all, the author points to a reduction in sea levels during this period causing problems in food chain. Although the lecturer agrees with the fluctuation in sea level, she states that coastal and shallow water were gradually changing making the modifications in food chain adaptable. Also for the food chains being affected all over the world, we do need a much more sudden event, not a gradual one which animals would be able to adapt to it.
Additionally, the author mentions a massive climate change due to volcanic eruptions producing lots of SO2. Yet, according to the lecturer, in order for SO2 to take action, we need a much longer period of time. As a matter of fact, in short period of time SO2 combines with water in atmosphere and produces acid rain. Therefore, SO2 produced by volcanic eruption, couldn't have stayed in atmosphere to cause climate change.
Finally, the author discusses the possibility of an asteroid strike, blocking sunlight. Thus, lots of plants died out of not receiving sunlight and animals depending on those plants came into extinction too. However, few scientists believe in such hypothesis as they couldn't have found a crater returning to that time. And they just could find a crater returning to 12 million years before the extinction, and this amount of time seems too long to assume that the strike would have anything to do with the extinction. In conclusion, the reasons provided by the reading passage doesn't sound logical.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 352, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...icle, I try to explain why the lecturer doesnt accept the reasons provided by the auth...
^^^^^^
Line 2, column 293, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
... modifications in food chain adaptable. Also for the food chains being affected all ...
^^^^
Line 3, column 195, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
...2 to take action, we need a much longer period of time. As a matter of fact, in short period o...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 241, Rule ID: PERIOD_OF_TIME[1]
Message: Use simply 'period'.
Suggestion: period
... of time. As a matter of fact, in short period of time SO2 combines with water in atmosphere a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 364, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...ore, SO2 produced by volcanic eruption, couldnt have stayed in atmosphere to cause clim...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 268, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...ists believe in such hypothesis as they couldnt have found a crater returning to that t...
^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 578, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...reasons provided by the reading passage doesnt sound logical.
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, so, therefore, thus, in conclusion, in short, as a matter of fact, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 10.4613686534 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 12.0772626932 33% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 30.3222958057 152% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1568.0 1373.03311258 114% => OK
No of words: 314.0 270.72406181 116% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99363057325 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20951839842 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56612022735 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 190.0 145.348785872 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.605095541401 0.540411800872 112% => OK
syllable_count: 471.6 419.366225166 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.626097257 49.2860985944 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.533333333 110.228320801 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.9333333333 21.698381199 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.6 7.06452816374 108% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 4.19205298013 167% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 12.5 13.3589403974 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 53.8541721854 111% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.66 12.2367328918 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 75.0 63.6247240618 118% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 10.7273730684 84% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.