The reading passage claims that there are several possible causes for the little ice age such as Gulf Stream, volcanic eruption, and indirect human activities. However, the professor in the lecture casts doubts on the points made in the reading.
The reading passage claims that there are several possible causes for the little ice age in many parts of the world. However, the professor in the lecture casts doubts on the points made in the reading.
First, considering the article the cooling may have been caused by disrupting of ocean currents before the little ice age, and actually, a large amount of cold freshwater reaches into Gulf Stream. In contrast, the professor in the lecture contradicts the idea and further explains that this huge stream just occurred in Europa and North America but the cooling was happening in many parts of the world such as South Africa, etc.
Second, the reading passage puts forward the idea that volcanic eruption could have caused the little ice age. In the same way, the professor validates the idea and adds that there is no evidence about visual notices such as gray or brown snow with a huge amount of dust. So, the claim is out of data.
Third, the reading claims that some indirect activities by humans may have contributed to the cooling. For instance, forest trees started on the fields and they absorb a greenhouse gas and this effect may decrease the earth warm. Admittedly, the speaker makes the points that such these activities happened so quickly and there are not long enough to be a cause of cooling.
To sum up, both the writer and speaker hold conflicting views about the little ice age.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-05-25 | Elhamsarvari | 70 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 251, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...otices such as gray or brown snow with a huge amount of dust. So, the claim is ou...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, but, first, however, may, second, so, third, for instance, in contrast, such as, to sum up, in the same way
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 12.0772626932 50% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 22.412803532 45% => OK
Preposition: 29.0 30.3222958057 96% => 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: 1171.0 1373.03311258 85% => OK
No of words: 243.0 270.72406181 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.81893004115 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94822203886 4.04702891845 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.28808064655 2.5805825403 89% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 145.348785872 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.584362139918 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 355.5 419.366225166 85% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 3.25607064018 0% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => 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: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 53.0711357948 49.2860985944 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.454545455 110.228320801 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0909090909 21.698381199 102% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.6363636364 7.06452816374 151% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 4.33554083885 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 4.45695364238 45% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.27373068433 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.471417795966 0.272083759551 173% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.15865148116 0.0996497079465 159% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.121011606921 0.0662205650399 183% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.241014331148 0.162205337803 149% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.161327170691 0.0443174109184 364% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.3589403974 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 53.8541721854 107% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.68 12.2367328918 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.72 8.42419426049 92% => OK
difficult_words: 46.0 63.6247240618 72% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 21.0 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.