cloud seeding
Both the reading and the lecture discuss a method of decreasing hail, called "cloud seeding". In this set of materials, the author strongly postulates the method for protecting crops from pieces of ice fall from clouds and mentions three pieces of evidence to support the effectiveness of cloud seeding. The professor, on the other hand, does not consider the reasons mentioned in the article, authentic and challenges each of them.
First and foremost, the article reinforces the concept of cloud seeding by experiments performed in the laboratory. In this experiment, cold water vapors were incorporated with silver iodide which resulted in the formation of light snow rather than hail. However, the professor does not think it is a practical approach. He elaborated if this trial is conducted in real life, the emergence of precipitation will not take place at all, in clouds, and as a result, there will be no hail, snow, or rainfall. Moreover, this experiment will cause dry spell in areas where cloud seeding was analyzed, the professor added. Consequently, the crops will get destroy any due to lack of water.
Next, the professor states that the authentication of positive reports of cloud seeding came from different parts of the world, is in doubt. The lecture claims that the effectiveness of cloud seeding has not been approved worldwide yet. So it can not be concluded that it will work in the United States. Moreover, according to the reports, the method was effective in Urban areas where pollution is outrageous. Although, It is surprisingly true that pollution particles interact with clouds and seeding chemicals, for instance, silver iodide but this procedure will be limited to polluted areas, for example, cities. The professor further states that it may not work in less polluted areas, for example, in farms and villages. This argument completely denies the preposition from Asia that crops could be protected by cloud seeding.
Ultimately, the article wraps its argument by declaring the third hypothesis that local research was conducted in the central United States to evaluate the effectiveness of cloud seeding. The study indicated less destruction of crops where cloud seeding was implemented compared to previous years. In contrast, the speaker refutes this evidence by showing the inaccuracy of the author that the reduction of the crop damage was not only in the areas where cloud seeding was held but also in the surroundings. Cloud seeding is not the reason for protected crops but a natural climate variation could be, he concluded.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-03-22 | Anurag96 | 78 | view |
| 2022-04-26 | Seyed Armin Mirhosseini | 83 | view |
| 2020-12-10 | Safa Arshad | 80 | view |
| 2020-12-10 | Safa Arshad | 80 | view |
| 2020-12-09 | Safa Arshad | 70 | view |
- Life on Mars 80
- Glass is a favored building material for modern architecture yet it is also very dangerous for wild birds Because they often cannot distinguish between glass and open air millions of birds are harmed every year when they try to fly through glass windows T 83
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Successful people try new things and take risks rather than only do what they know how to do well Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 60
- Spending money 73
- benefits of high taxes on unhealthy products 85
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, however, if, may, moreover, so, then, third, well, for example, for instance, in addition, in contrast, as a result, it is true, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 10.4613686534 191% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 22.412803532 120% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 59.0 30.3222958057 195% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 5.01324503311 379% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2228.0 1373.03311258 162% => OK
No of words: 432.0 270.72406181 160% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.15740740741 5.08290768461 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55901411391 4.04702891845 113% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81683954957 2.5805825403 109% => OK
Unique words: 220.0 145.348785872 151% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.509259259259 0.540411800872 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 669.6 419.366225166 160% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 3.25607064018 184% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.23620309051 158% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 2.5761589404 311% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 13.0662251656 161% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.2579771879 49.2860985944 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 106.095238095 110.228320801 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.5714285714 21.698381199 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.47619047619 7.06452816374 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 4.33554083885 231% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 4.45695364238 179% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.397191392903 0.272083759551 146% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.140328407476 0.0996497079465 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.138195709757 0.0662205650399 209% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.2717067474 0.162205337803 168% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0582507539543 0.0443174109184 131% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.2 13.3589403974 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 53.8541721854 95% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.69 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 63.6247240618 174% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.