The passage and lecture are about the presence of fossilized trees in Arizona since 200-million-years old. The writer claims, these fossilized structures not for bees, he gave several arguments. The lecturer casts doubt on claim made in the article. She states, these arguments are inconvenience.
First, the author elaborates on, no fossil of actual bees have been found that date to 200 million years ago. This point challenged by lecturer, she mentions, there is no evidence of bees fossils at that date dose not mean that bees did not find, instead, these fossils did not preserve because in that time there was no trees which have especial glue like resin which is important to preserve the fossils, for these reason the fossils were not preserved.
Second, the author says, there were no flowers which bees feed on. This argument rebutted by professor, she mentions that bees before 200 million years feed on non-flowers trees, and after evolution of the flower tree, the bees began feeding on them.
Finally, the author posits, lack of some structure in the fossil nest like chambers of modern nests mean that these nests for another insect rather than for bees. In the other hand, the lecturer suggests, although, the nests did not have especial structures, but these nests fossils have chemical structure which are similar to the chemical water prove materials that found in the bees’ nest.
The passage and lecture are about the presence of fossilized trees in Arizona since 200-million-years old. The writer claims, these fossilized structures not for bees, he gave several arguments. The lecturer casts doubt on claim made in the article. She states, these arguments are inconvenience.
First, the author elaborates on, no fossil of actual bees have been found that date to 200 million years ago. This point challenged by lecturer, she mentions, there is no evidence of bees fossils at that date dose not mean that bees did not find, instead, these fossils did not preserve because in that time there was no trees which have especial glue like resin which is important to preserve the fossils, for these reason the fossils were not preserved.
Second, the author says, there were no flowers which bees feed on. This argument rebutted by professor, she mentions that bees before 200 million years feed on non-flowers trees, and after evolution of the flower tree, the bees began feeding on them.
Finally, the author posits, lack of some structure in the fossil nest like chambers of modern nests mean that these nests for another insect rather than for bees. In the other hand, the lecturer suggests, although, the nests did not have especial structures, but these nests fossils have chemical structure which are similar to the chemical water prove materials that found in the bees’ nest.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-03-02 | talelaldabous | 76 | view |
- Thr reading passage and the lecture are both talking about using technique called burning mirror by Creek to defense themselves from Roman navy The writer has several reasons to debate thgis story and says it just myth However the lecturer has another opi 76
- The reading passage and the lecture are both talking about declination of bird population in United States The writer claims three reasons beyond this declination However the lecturer contradicts these reasons She thinks each reason is mentioned in readin 65
- Teachers an important part in education process because of paramount effect of education on their future because help them earn suitable job Whether the teacher in the past have more respect from student than now day this can be weigh in many aspects from 60
- The reading and lecture are both about see otter a small mammal that live in western coast of North America The author claims that pollution is the main cause for see otter declination The lecture casts doubt on claim made in the article She says that pre 78
- The reading passage and lecture talk about type of fungus called Phytophthora which detected in forest of USA these fungus infects trees and cause serious damage to oak trees The author claims three methods to protect the forests The lecturer casts doubt 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 196, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...ot for bees, he gave several arguments. The lecturer casts doubt on claim made in t...
^^^
Line 2, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...es, these arguments are inconvenience. First, the author elaborates on, no foss...
^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...reason the fossils were not preserved. Second, the author says, there were no f...
^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... tree, the bees began feeding on them. Finally, the author posits, lack of some...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, second, so
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 7.30242825607 41% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1175.0 1373.03311258 86% => OK
No of words: 232.0 270.72406181 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.06465517241 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.90276135726 4.04702891845 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.44490038679 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 131.0 145.348785872 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.564655172414 0.540411800872 104% => OK
syllable_count: 348.3 419.366225166 83% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 3.25607064018 276% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 13.0662251656 77% => 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: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 89.0285909133 49.2860985944 181% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.5 110.228320801 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.2 21.698381199 107% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.1 7.06452816374 44% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 4.33554083885 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.452537222699 0.272083759551 166% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.200627959873 0.0996497079465 201% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.143629940251 0.0662205650399 217% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.304511110195 0.162205337803 188% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.271041055987 0.0443174109184 612% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.3589403974 105% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 53.8541721854 105% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.36 12.2367328918 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.11 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 49.0 63.6247240618 77% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 76.6666666667 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 23.0 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.