The passage proposes Agnostids behaviors and brings three main factors for their ways for life. On the contrary, the professor casts doubts about this hypothesis and does not validate this information and reasons that are mentioned in the passage by underlining some cogent reasons which contradict them in this framework.
First, the passage states that Angosides were free-swimming predators which hunted smaller animals. However, the professor in the lecture says that this point is not to be taken seriously because free-swimming predators have large eyes for vision and taking their preys in the sea but Agnostids did not have such large eyes and they were probably blind. So, other senses of them must help them for prey but the evidence does not approve it.
Furthermore, the author asserts that Agnostids were seafloor dwellers. On the other hand, the professor mentions that this reason is highly questionable due to the fact that seafloor dwellers did not move so fast and live in the localized area but Agnostids were multiple dwellers who swim in a large distance and move fast from one location to another one. So, it is unusual for them to be seafloor dwellers.
Finally, the passage holds the view that Agnostids were parasites. Conversely, the lecturer refutes this point based on the evidence that parasites' population is not large because they harm animals in this way but the Agnostids lived in great size based on which the fossils show. So, it contradicts the idea that Agnostids were parasites.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 139, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'parasites'' or 'parasite's'?
Suggestion: parasites'; parasite's
...s this point based on the evidence that parasites population is not large because they ha...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, conversely, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, so, well, in fact, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 10.4613686534 124% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 5.04856512141 20% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 20.0 30.3222958057 66% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1277.0 1373.03311258 93% => OK
No of words: 249.0 270.72406181 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.12851405622 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.97237131171 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56356426566 2.5805825403 99% => OK
Unique words: 132.0 145.348785872 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.530120481928 0.540411800872 98% => OK
syllable_count: 387.9 419.366225166 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 84.3846956474 49.2860985944 171% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.090909091 110.228320801 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6363636364 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.1818181818 7.06452816374 144% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.400635715125 0.272083759551 147% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.161985472849 0.0996497079465 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0656656060146 0.0662205650399 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.241819187539 0.162205337803 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0678806920226 0.0443174109184 153% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 13.3589403974 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.77 12.2367328918 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 57.0 63.6247240618 90% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 10.7273730684 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => 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.