Both the article and the professor discuss whether Pterosaurs could fly. The article provides three arguments to be against power flight. On the other hand, the professor disagree with those arguments and think that Pterosaurs could actually fly.
First of all, the reading materials claims that since modern reptiles are cold-blooded, pterosaurs might also be cold-blooded animal. We also learned that cold-blooded animal has slow metabolism, therefore pterosaurs could not produce enough energy needed to fly. However, the professor points out that pterosaurs had dense, hair-like coating to help them maintain their body temperature and condition. Thus, the professor believe that pterosaurs was actually warm-blooded, and they could produce enough energy to fly.
In addition, the article claims that pterosaurs were as large as giraffe, so they were too heavy to fly. The professor oppose this idea by providing anatomical evidence. She points out that the pterosaurs’ bones were hollow, hence the light weight let them could be kept airborne.
Finally, based on the fossil evidence, the reading assert that pterosaurs’ back leg muscles were too weak to allow them to run fast enough or jump high enough to launch themselves into the air. Nevertheless, the professor indicates that unlike birds, pterosaurs walked on the ground by four limbs. Thus, they could use four limbs to push them off from the ground successfully.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 120, Rule ID: MASS_AGREEMENT[2]
Message: Possible agreement error - use third-person verb forms for singular and mass nouns: 'opposes'.
Suggestion: opposes
...ey were too heavy to fly. The professor oppose this idea by providing anatomical evide...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 241, Rule ID: LIGHT_WEIGHT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'lightweight'?
Suggestion: lightweight
...aurs' bones were hollow, hence the light weight let them could be kept airborne. Fin...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, finally, first, hence, however, nevertheless, so, therefore, thus, in addition, first of all, 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: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 12.0772626932 75% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 22.0 22.412803532 98% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1225.0 1373.03311258 89% => OK
No of words: 223.0 270.72406181 82% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.4932735426 5.08290768461 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.86434787811 4.04702891845 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80827783888 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 132.0 145.348785872 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.591928251121 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 355.5 419.366225166 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 35.3561758622 49.2860985944 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.2307692308 110.228320801 85% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.1538461538 21.698381199 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.76923076923 7.06452816374 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => 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: 0.357708935566 0.272083759551 131% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.126362576963 0.0996497079465 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0721988624416 0.0662205650399 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.211056084173 0.162205337803 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0389668405353 0.0443174109184 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.0 13.3589403974 97% => OK
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: 14.27 12.2367328918 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.42419426049 95% => OK
difficult_words: 50.0 63.6247240618 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25 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.