Ways to predict earthquakes
The reading passage and the lecture both have conflicting opinions about whether or not different ways to predict earthquakes are possible. The article strongly postulates that there are several different methods to predict earthquakes. On the other hand, the listening adamantly delineates that these methods of predicting earthquakes may seem valid, but these do not have clear evidence.
First, according to the author of the excerpt, observing animal methods is one way to predict earthquakes, as any bizarre change in animal behavior is an indicator of an earthquake. Nonetheless, the lecturer offsets these points by declaring that these animals reacting to mild shaking and minor movements do not lead to a sign of an earthquake. Therefore, animals' behavior is not the best way to predict an earthquake.
Second, the author contends that headaches can be another way of predicting earthquakes. Moreover, the presence of magnetite makes it possible for animals to adjust to the electromagnetic field of the earth. The professor, however, dissents this claim by explaining that headaches are symptoms of some other problems. In addition to this, the amount of magnetite is small as the sensory system is barely influenced.
The article lastly asserts that measuring radon emission can also be one of the methods to predict earthquakes. The speaker in the listening counters these indications by indicating that radon emission is not a practical way to predict earthquakes. Furthermore, radon emission from rocks does not lead to earthquakes. Earthquakes force landslide, which leads to rock fracture.
In conclusion, while the reading passage discusses ways to predict earthquakes, the lecturer opposes each of the methods mentions by the author using reasons.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 74, Rule ID: WHETHER[7]
Message: Perhaps you can shorten this phrase to just 'whether'. It is correct though if you mean 'regardless of whether'.
Suggestion: whether
...re both have conflicting opinions about whether or not different ways to predict earthquakes a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 188, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'several'.
Suggestion: several
...icle strongly postulates that there are several different methods to predict earthquakes. On the ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, if, lastly, may, moreover, nonetheless, second, so, therefore, while, in addition, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.4613686534 105% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 5.04856512141 59% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 8.0 12.0772626932 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 22.412803532 67% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 5.01324503311 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1505.0 1373.03311258 110% => OK
No of words: 273.0 270.72406181 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.51282051282 5.08290768461 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06481385082 4.04702891845 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01381292316 2.5805825403 117% => OK
Unique words: 143.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.52380952381 0.540411800872 97% => OK
syllable_count: 459.0 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 36.1106940147 49.2860985944 73% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.333333333 110.228320801 91% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2 21.698381199 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.3333333333 7.06452816374 146% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 4.33554083885 23% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.27373068433 187% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.36262395627 0.272083759551 133% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.125804784496 0.0996497079465 126% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.107728552178 0.0662205650399 163% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202269720459 0.162205337803 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0837276807934 0.0443174109184 189% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.6 13.3589403974 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 53.8541721854 83% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.68 12.2367328918 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.81 8.42419426049 105% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 63.6247240618 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => 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.