Although the author claims three main hypotheses to support the skeptical view of scientists bout the presence of bees almost 200 million years ago by analyzing some fossilized trees found in Arizona in the United State, the professor finds them dubious and brings up three counterclaims to refute them all.
Firstly, the author states that the only fossil of bees dates back 100 million years ago and it is impossible that this fossils belong to bees of 200 million years ago. However, the professor takes the view that in order to preserve bees, they should remain in the sticky resin of some kind of trees that must have been rare 200 million years ago and they have become widespread recently.
Secondly, the author holds the view that flowering plants were thrived about 125 million years ago, while bees fed on these plants could not have been existed back then. The professor, on the other hand, asserts that this relationship might not have been existed but bees could feed on other non-flowering plants including fore and pine trees and it is more likely that by evolution of flowering plants from non-flowering plants, their roles as food supply became stable.
Eventually, the reading passage states that the fossils found in Arizona are devoid of some elaborate details such as caps, a spiral pattern of nests, and they must have been fossils of other insects. In contrast, the speaker says that scientists by investigating the chemical composition of these nests have found that they have the same composition as modern nests have which is a proper water proof material needed for preserving their nests.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 116, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'these'?
Suggestion: these
...ion years ago and it is impossible that this fossils belong to bees of 200 million y...
^^^^
Line 6, column 71, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... view that flowering plants were thrived about 125 million years ago, while bees ...
^^
Line 8, column 391, Rule ID: EN_COMPOUNDS
Message: This word is normally spelled as one.
Suggestion: waterproof
... as modern nests have which is a proper water proof material needed for preserving their ne...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, second, secondly, so, then, while, in contrast, kind of, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 22.412803532 107% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 30.3222958057 99% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1358.0 1373.03311258 99% => OK
No of words: 271.0 270.72406181 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0110701107 5.08290768461 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.05734859645 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.4104274594 2.5805825403 93% => OK
Unique words: 147.0 145.348785872 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.542435424354 0.540411800872 100% => OK
syllable_count: 396.0 419.366225166 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 13.0662251656 54% => 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: 38.0 21.2450331126 179% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 52.9566630677 49.2860985944 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 194.0 110.228320801 176% => OK
Words per sentence: 38.7142857143 21.698381199 178% => OK
Discourse Markers: 16.1428571429 7.06452816374 229% => Less transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 4.45695364238 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0927682683051 0.272083759551 34% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0482082505515 0.0996497079465 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0205171489989 0.0662205650399 31% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0559428423054 0.162205337803 34% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.017271680599 0.0443174109184 39% => 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: 21.5 13.3589403974 161% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.37 53.8541721854 77% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 5.55761589404 202% => Smog_index is high.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.9 11.0289183223 153% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.37 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.73 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 63.6247240618 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.5 10.7273730684 172% => OK
gunning_fog: 17.2 10.498013245 164% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 11.2008830022 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.