Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic regions. They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of the year. Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. Unfortunately, according to reports from local hunters, the deer populations are declining. Since these reports coincide with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, we can conclude that the purported decline in deer populations is the result of the deer's being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The prompt that is presented above is full of logical fallacies that made it harder to bolster. For three main reasons-
Firstly, global warming is not a something that has been observed just for a couple of years. For almost more than a century, global warming has been affecting the climate and countless lives that directly rely on the climate change as it has a great impact on their habitat, food chain and so on. The logic presented in the argument was the arctic deer’s population is facing a decline because they are failing to follow their age-old tradition of migration. However, this logic is defected because it overlooked the theory of “Evolution” here entirely. Evolution can play a major role in these sorts of cases and reserve the power to alter the nature of these animals. It is possible that a new species could evolve from the arctic deer, those don’t need to migrate at all by making their current habitat good enough to live. Perhaps the known species of arctic deer are declining but a new species is evolving at the same time.
Secondly, the local hunters are shown as an authentic source in the argument. But the case can be completely different here. They can be the main reason to be the cause of the reduction of population of the deer. There is no indication of checking their words if they are true or not. They can be hunting more than before for extra benefits and profits. But as the continuously reducing population is catching more attention than before, they can be trying to blame the global warming for that.
Thirdly, no solid evidence of any sort of animal census is presented. No base population was stated in the argument with which the current population could be compared. There is no information that states what the population was ten or twenty years before, even if there is any sort of decline or not. Only the information from the locals are being taken into account here. Without conducting any proper research or census, it is not so wise to come into such a nuanced and concise recapitulation.
The reasons presented above ruins the presented argument thus announcing it invalid.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-17 | okazaki11 | 72 | view |
| 2022-06-19 | Soumyadip Kar | 53 | view |
| 2022-05-09 | fredrickomoarukhe37@gmail.com | 54 | view |
| 2021-09-18 | Tej | 60 | view |
| 2021-09-15 | Robur_13 | 55 | view |
- Originality does not mean thinking something that was never thought before it means putting old ideas together in new ways 50
- Arctic deer live on islands in Canada s arctic regions They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of the year Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed and cold enough at le 59
- Originality does not mean thinking something that was never thought before it means putting old ideas together in new ways 50
- Originality does not mean thinking something that was never thought before it means putting old ideas together in new ways 50
- Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed 50
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 372 350
No. of Characters: 1724 1500
No. of Different Words: 194 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.392 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.634 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.44 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 123 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 89 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 51 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 33 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.6 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.989 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.6 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.268 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.268 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.054 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 77, Rule ID: IT_VBZ[1]
Message: Did you mean 'invalids'?
Suggestion: invalids
...e presented argument thus announcing it invalid.
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, thus, sort of
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 30.0 19.6327345309 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 13.6137724551 59% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 55.5748502994 77% => OK
Nominalization: 20.0 16.3942115768 122% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1776.0 2260.96107784 79% => OK
No of words: 371.0 441.139720559 84% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.78706199461 5.12650576532 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.38877662729 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55697850439 2.78398813304 92% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 204.123752495 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.539083557951 0.468620217663 115% => OK
syllable_count: 567.0 705.55239521 80% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 4.96107784431 141% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.7636068193 57.8364921388 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.8 119.503703932 74% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.55 23.324526521 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.85 5.70786347227 85% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.169006426308 0.218282227539 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0460725869977 0.0743258471296 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0517869824755 0.0701772020484 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0688264381037 0.128457276422 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0736357125286 0.0628817314937 117% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.4 14.3799401198 72% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 61.67 48.3550499002 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.197005988 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.5 12.5979740519 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.19 8.32208582834 98% => OK
difficult_words: 86.0 98.500998004 87% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 12.3882235529 105% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.