methane gas explosion vs asteroid
The reading passage presents some arguments that the enormous explosion that happened in Siberia, Russia around 1903 was due to methane gas leakage. However, the speaker in the lecture casts doubts on the claims made in the article. He mentions that an asteroid that exploded above the ground as it entered the Earth's atmosphere is the real reason behind this explosion.
First and foremost, the author assumes that expeditions had never found evidence for any extra-terrestrial object, such as the easily detectable rocks that usually contain high amounts of Nickel and Iridium. In contrast to the reading, the lecturer asserts that many eyewitnesses saw a streak of light that appeared as if it was splitting the sky with an explosion and great winds. According to the lecture, this piece of evidence exclusively points out to a celestial body that hit the Earth and was destroyed before reaching the ground.
Secondly, The lecturer further elaborates that the absence of impact crater and rock remains is simply because the object never touched the Earth's surface and any remaining debris from the explosion might have been washed away and ended up unrecognizable. Moreover, the listening indicates that when Russian scientists tested the asteroid hypothesis by running a simulation, what was observed in the computer simulation was identical to the pattern of destruction that occurred to the fifty kilometers of nearby forests. These statements refute the writer's implications that it was a methane explosion.
Lastly, the excerpt contends that many rivers, swamps and peat bogs in the region had high levels of methane gas, which was trapped underground. When it was released, it detonated above the forests due to the lightning. Nevertheless, the lecturer challenges this idea by declaring that sheer volume of methane would be needed to cause such explosion and the area never held these vast amounts of methane required. Besides, no fires erupted in the forests which makes this aforementioned explanation questionable.
- Every year forest fires and severe storms cause a great deal of damage to forests in the northwestern United States One way of dealing with the aftermath of these disasters is called salvage logging which is the practice of removing dead trees from affect 83
- The city enjoys urban forests not only in the city square the municipal parks and golf courses but also along many streets in the city The forest boasting almost 700 000 trees was planted during the late 17th century but since the 1920s planting has not k 47
- In the United States, it had been common practice since the late 1960s not to suppress natural forest fires. The “let it burn” policy assumed that forest fires would burn themselves out quickly, without causing much damage. However, in the summer of 1 70
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?The ability to maintain friendships with a small number of people over a long period of time is more important for happiness than the ability to make many new friends easily.Use specific reasons and ex 73
- Summarize the pint made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific theories discussed in the reading passage.As early as twelfth century A.D., the settlements of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico in the American Southwest were nota 80
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 13, column 514, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...forementioned explanation questionable.
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, first, however, if, lastly, moreover, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, in contrast, such as, in contrast to
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 : 9.0 7.30242825607 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 12.0772626932 157% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 36.0 30.3222958057 119% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1726.0 1373.03311258 126% => OK
No of words: 321.0 270.72406181 119% => OK
Chars per words: 5.3769470405 5.08290768461 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.23278547379 4.04702891845 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82007012132 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 195.0 145.348785872 134% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.607476635514 0.540411800872 112% => OK
syllable_count: 524.7 419.366225166 125% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
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: 24.0 21.2450331126 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.3309413585 49.2860985944 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.769230769 110.228320801 120% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.6923076923 21.698381199 114% => OK
Discourse Markers: 9.15384615385 7.06452816374 130% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 4.33554083885 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => 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: 0.198657540534 0.272083759551 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0603040134418 0.0996497079465 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0645998141922 0.0662205650399 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119935306833 0.162205337803 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0615283979426 0.0443174109184 139% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 13.3589403974 122% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 53.8541721854 87% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.0289183223 115% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.22 12.2367328918 116% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.04 8.42419426049 119% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 63.6247240618 167% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 10.7273730684 98% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.498013245 110% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
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.