The lecture refutes the reading that claims that Repenomamus robustus (R. robustus) is not an active hunter of dinosaurs but a scavenger that fed on dinosaur eggs containing unhatched dinosaurs, by providing three reasons.
First, the lecture argues that R. robustus would be large enough to catch baby dinosaurs or similarly sized dinosaurs. While the reading suggests that R. robustus is relatively smaller than other dinosaurs such as psittacosaurs, the lecture clarifies that the body size of R. robustus has more than twice the mass of the dinosaurs in its stomach. Given this quantitative evidence, the lecture emphasizes that R. robustus are capable of hunting other small dinosaurs.
Second, the lecture believes that the short legs of R. robustus and these positions would not be sufficient evidence to prove that they are incapable of hunting other dinosaurs through the analogy of modern animals that share this disadvantage in hunting. She introduced that Tasmanian Devil, modern short-legged animals, can run fast enough to catch prays despite their short legs positioned somewhat to the sides of their bodies. Although the reading surmises that R. robustus would lack the ability to hunt other dinosaurs because of its physical disadvantage, the lecture vindicates that R. robustus could have overcome the difficulty of hunting as Tasmanian Devil has successfully proved its hunting ability.
Third, the lecture identifies that the reading overlooked the important fact of R. robustus. Although the reading highlights a lack of teeth marks on the bones of the animals that were eaten by R. robustus to prove it as the scavenger of dinosaurs, the lecture expounds on this point by offering empirical data. The lecture indicates that the powerful jaw of R. robustus enables it to omit using its back teeth for chewing and to swallow prays whole or big pieces, which explains the absence of its teeth marks on its prays in its stomach.
In conclusion, the lecture indicates that R. robustus is capable of hunting other dinosaurs by refuting three points made by the reading.
- Do you agree or disagree with the statements Children should not be allowed to play the video games 59
- Young people enjoy life more than older people do Do you agree or disagree 70
- R robustus 73
- Some young adults want independence from their parents as soon as possible Other young adults prefer to live with their family for a longer time Which of these solutions do you think is better Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion 66
- do you agree or disagree with the following statement television advertisement directed toward young children should not be allowed Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 81
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 222, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... dinosaurs, by providing three reasons. First, the lecture argues that R. robust...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 715, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...uccessfully proved its hunting ability. Third, the lecture identifies that the r...
^^^
Line 4, column 541, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eeth marks on its prays in its stomach. In conclusion, the lecture indicates tha...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 140, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...uting three points made by the reading.
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, if, look, second, similarly, so, third, while, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 5.04856512141 99% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 18.0 12.0772626932 149% => OK
Pronoun: 34.0 22.412803532 152% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 40.0 30.3222958057 132% => 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: 1755.0 1373.03311258 128% => OK
No of words: 335.0 270.72406181 124% => OK
Chars per words: 5.23880597015 5.08290768461 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27820116611 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71280717874 2.5805825403 105% => OK
Unique words: 162.0 145.348785872 111% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.483582089552 0.540411800872 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 540.9 419.366225166 129% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 3.25607064018 31% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 13.0662251656 168% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 21.2450331126 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.9894960959 49.2860985944 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.7727272727 110.228320801 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.2272727273 21.698381199 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.68181818182 7.06452816374 52% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 4.19205298013 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.27373068433 211% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.364328558368 0.272083759551 134% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.11723323772 0.0996497079465 118% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.114044143078 0.0662205650399 172% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.249589635669 0.162205337803 154% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0556688444647 0.0443174109184 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 13.3589403974 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 53.8541721854 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 11.0289183223 83% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.52 12.2367328918 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.34 8.42419426049 99% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 63.6247240618 132% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 10.7273730684 56% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.0 10.498013245 76% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.