summerise the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific point made in the reading passage.
In this set of materials, the reading part discussed bees do not exist 200 million years ago and the listening section cast doubt on the information presented in the passage and argues that it's possible bees have been existed 200 million years ago and the skepticism in the article not convicting.
First, the passage posits that there are no fossils of actual bees. However, the lecture makes the point that that kind of trees was rare and they may exist much later and this does not mean bees not exist because trees could exist. therefore, the absence of them does not mean bees did not exist.
Second, according to the text, that time flower planets did not exist. the speaker asserts that although flower planer did not exist that time, bees could use other kinds of the planet for the nutrient source. and evolutionary changes make bees use flower planets.
Third, the article claims that structures are detected lack some details. on the contrary, the lecture points out that bees could use other chemical compounds in order to produce water prove material. hence he says that chemical compounds do not support the claim in the article.
In conclusion, the talk bolsters, mentioned pieces of information in the passage.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-04 | salarmoheb | 3 | view |
| 2019-11-04 | salarmoheb | 3 | view |
| 2019-10-08 | salarmoheb | 80 | view |
| 2018-12-15 | salarmoheb | 90 | view |
| 2018-12-03 | salarmoheb | 3 | view |
- summerise the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific point made in the reading passage. 76
- tpo49 3
- summerise the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific point made in the reading passage. 76
- summerise the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific point made in the reading passage. 88
- do you agree or disagree with the following statement? 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 233, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Therefore
...es not exist because trees could exist. therefore, the absence of them does not mean bees...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 71, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: The
...that time flower planets did not exist. the speaker asserts that although flower pl...
^^^
Line 3, column 210, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: And
... of the planet for the nutrient source. and evolutionary changes make bees use flow...
^^^
Line 4, column 74, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: On
...uctures are detected lack some details. on the contrary, the lecture points out th...
^^
Line 4, column 201, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Hence
... order to produce water prove material. hence he says that chemical compounds do not ...
^^^^^
Line 4, column 201, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: hence,
... order to produce water prove material. hence he says that chemical compounds do not ...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, hence, however, may, second, so, therefore, third, in conclusion, kind of, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 10.4613686534 38% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 22.412803532 71% => OK
Preposition: 18.0 30.3222958057 59% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 4.0 5.01324503311 80% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1023.0 1373.03311258 75% => OK
No of words: 208.0 270.72406181 77% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.91826923077 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.79765784423 4.04702891845 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.29547547478 2.5805825403 89% => OK
Unique words: 117.0 145.348785872 80% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.5625 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 300.6 419.366225166 72% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.55342163355 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 13.0662251656 84% => 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: 18.0 21.2450331126 85% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 67.9970830682 49.2860985944 138% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.0 110.228320801 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.9090909091 21.698381199 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.81818181818 7.06452816374 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 6.0 4.19205298013 143% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 0.0 4.33554083885 0% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0663026860075 0.272083759551 24% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0207079174604 0.0996497079465 21% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0278886893662 0.0662205650399 42% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0370474061365 0.162205337803 23% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0190778615614 0.0443174109184 43% => 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: 11.2 13.3589403974 84% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 70.13 53.8541721854 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.9 11.0289183223 72% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.26 12.2367328918 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.25 8.42419426049 98% => OK
difficult_words: 49.0 63.6247240618 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.498013245 88% => 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.