The development of science and technology benefit our life. However, scientists cannot find effective solutions for what they created. Do you agree or disagree?
It is thought that scientists offer no efficient measures for their great-influence scientific and technological inventions which bring benefits to humans. I agree with this statement for certain reasons which will be explained in this essay.
To commence with, one evident explanation of this matter is somewhat related to prolonged and arduous progress to seek solutions. In other words, scientists find it hard to balance the cost of items and side effects to compete with their components. A good case in point is plastic which is tremendously prevalent in the world on account of meeting the demands of users in terms of cost and durability. Nevertheless, plastic bags or bottles need millions of years to self-decompose or that can be burned in bulk, giving rise to adverse impacts on our environment. In fact, there is no substitute for plastic which is convenient for human and subsequently trigger environmental degradation.
In addition, another underlying factor to take under advisement is the popularity of these innovations. To be more detailed, it is indispensable to understand that inventors have had various challenges when controlling on a large-scale. To take Facebook for an example, billions of people from numerous nations get access to this social media simultaneously. Although we also can derive benefits from Facebook, such as sharing stories or emotions, studying, etc, a wide range of pornography, cyberbullying, and the like appearing without any serious hindrance acts as a catalyst for misbehaviors, deviant thinking, violent actions, especially in young adults. An increasing number of people accessing this media platform, regardless of no approaches for negative aspects.
In conclusion, we can deny the upper hand of these life-changing products, however, there are no appropriate solutions for disadvantageous impacts from these.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-11-10 | Hương Giang | 65 | view |
- The graph below shows the average carbon dioxide CO2 emissions per person in the United Kingdom Sweden Italy and Portugal between 1967 and 2007 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The line graph below shows the household recycling rates in three different countries between 2005 and 2015 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
- The diagram below shows one way of manufacturing ceramic pots 63
- The graph below gives information from 1 2008 report about consumption of energy in the USA since 1980 with projections until 2030 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 89
- The pie charts below compare water usage in San Diego California and the rest of the world 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 6, column 223, Rule ID: DT_JJ_NO_NOUN[1]
Message: Probably a noun is missing in this part of the sentence.
... various challenges when controlling on a large-scale. To take Facebook for an example, billi...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, nevertheless, so, in addition, in conclusion, in fact, such as, in other words
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1594.0 1615.20841683 99% => OK
No of words: 286.0 315.596192385 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.57342657343 5.12529762239 109% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11236361783 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.30575498788 2.80592935109 118% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.653846153846 0.561755894193 116% => OK
syllable_count: 482.4 506.74238477 95% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 50.3503700415 49.4020404114 102% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.615384615 106.682146367 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.0 20.7667163134 106% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.46153846154 7.06120827912 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.134806792295 0.244688304435 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0426912820423 0.084324248473 51% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0390032356224 0.0667982634062 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0826131466379 0.151304729494 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0297626484447 0.056905535591 52% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.8 13.0946893788 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.03 12.4159519038 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.47 8.58950901804 122% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.