Both the passage and the lecture discusses the sending of the human to the Mars. The author of the passage claims that sending the human to the Mars is impossible and provides a lot of problems for doing that. On the other hand, the professor completely denies the points in the reading and provides several reasons.
First of all, the passage states that one trip around the Mars, take two years. The author claims that a lot of food, water, oxygen and other things are needed for this trip and carrying all of them is impossible. The lecture challenges this assertion and illustrates that there is a technique that we can cultivate the vegetables in the space trips. He also explains that in this way, we can produce food and oxygen in the space.
Secondly, the passage and lecture point out to the less of gravity in the space. The author believes that zero gravity for several months is harmful to the human, hence, the human cannot travel to the Mars. The professor casts doubt on this point and states that at this century, many space crafts go to the space trips and there are special technique and exercises that keep people healthy in the space and he mentions to the use of calcium that is useful for them.
Finally, the author goes on to mention that dangerous solar radiations and charged particles in the space are harmful to the human. On the other hand, the professor proposes a solution to this problem and explains that these radiations sometimes exist in the space. He asserts that there is special equipment on the space crafts that detect these radiations and alarm, hence, the people in the spacecraft can go into the special shields until the radiations release.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 468, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...l shields until the radiations release.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, hence, second, secondly, so, 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: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 7.30242825607 205% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 15.0 12.0772626932 124% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 22.412803532 134% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 30.3222958057 122% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1394.0 1373.03311258 102% => OK
No of words: 296.0 270.72406181 109% => OK
Chars per words: 4.70945945946 5.08290768461 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14784890444 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.30316222734 2.5805825403 89% => OK
Unique words: 129.0 145.348785872 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.435810810811 0.540411800872 81% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 425.7 419.366225166 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.23620309051 146% => 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: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.8991883109 49.2860985944 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.230769231 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7692307692 21.698381199 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.30769230769 7.06452816374 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 12.1 13.3589403974 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 66.07 53.8541721854 123% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.33 12.2367328918 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.61 8.42419426049 90% => OK
difficult_words: 54.0 63.6247240618 85% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.2008830022 71% => 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.