The passage and lecture both discuss three hypotheses around the reasons why animals were larger than today. The reading claims that there were some special conditions on this planet which really help animals to be larger. In contrast, the professor explains that the justification of the reading are not convincing, and he refutes each of the author's reasons.
Firstly, the text indicates that there were more supply of oxegen in the past. However, the professor refutes this and says that volcano's were more active meaning you could find more poisonous gases in the air. So, it was much more difficult for animals to breathe because of lack of oxegen.
Secondly, the passage puts out that because of plentiful plant life, you could find large amount of nutrients. On the other hand, the speaker mentions that there were less nutrients because plants depended on co2 which was a contaminating gas.
Thirdly, the reading points that the warm climate of the earth was a stimulating factor. In contrast, the lecturer denies this and talks that warm climate had a disadvantage for large animals. These animals spent Morehead to keep alive meaning consuming more food. So, they had to take too much heat to keep their body temperature.
In conclusion,based on reasons and analysis given by the professor, great source of oxegen, abundant p!ant life, and the warm climate of the earth are not likely to explain why animals were larger than today.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 9, column 168, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun nutrients is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...d, the speaker mentions that there were less nutrients because plants depended on co...
^^^^
Line 17, column 14, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , based
...r body temperature. In conclusion,based on reasons and analysis given by the pr...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, if, really, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, in conclusion, in contrast, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 5.04856512141 40% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 22.412803532 80% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 5.01324503311 20% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1230.0 1373.03311258 90% => OK
No of words: 240.0 270.72406181 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.125 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.93597934253 4.04702891845 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.50498114874 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 145.348785872 92% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.558333333333 0.540411800872 103% => OK
syllable_count: 370.8 419.366225166 88% => 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: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.3562257107 49.2860985944 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.6153846154 110.228320801 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.4615384615 21.698381199 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.23076923077 7.06452816374 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.277234531746 0.272083759551 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0948874779968 0.0996497079465 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0600562163856 0.0662205650399 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147318901769 0.162205337803 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.055082742851 0.0443174109184 124% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 13.3589403974 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 53.8541721854 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.47 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.15 8.42419426049 97% => OK
difficult_words: 55.0 63.6247240618 86% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => 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.