It is now possible for scientists and tourists to travel to remote natural environment, such as South pole.
Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages?
Advances in various fields have led to impressive achievements, one of which is to make journeys to far-flung natural environments such as the South Pole possible. As will be demonstrated in the following essay, this development is more harmful than beneficial.
Regarding the advantages, proponents of this development first highlight the fact that it allows for expanding humans’ survival on Earth. Being able to travel to formerly inaccessible areas is the precursor to acquiring more information about them, which could then be utilized to make them more hospitable for tourism or for long-term settlement. Furthermore, this is also an encouraging start, catalyzing revolutionary developments in various fields, including material science, transportation and adaptive food science. For instance, to adapt to the extreme colds characteristic of the South pole, people need highly insulating materials for clothing and housing, vehicles that are compatible with slippery surfaces and ways to maintain food supplies.
Having examined these gains, it is of paramount importance that the pitfalls are also well-understood. Naturally, travelling to these far-off places requires substantial amounts of human and financial resources, which may dilute efforts needed to tackle other more urgent current issues such as overpopulation and poverty. However, the most damaging repercussion roots in the possible disturbances to these primarily pristine habitats. Aside from problems of pollution and overexploitation readily seen in formerly untouched forests and caves, activities in places like the South Pole run the risk of releasing ancient viruses and bacteria along with a surplus amount of greenhouse gases. As mankind is still combating against diseases and climate change, the aforementioned threats are guaranteed to wreak havoc.
Considering both sides of the development, it is in my conviction that the advantages are outweighed by the disadvantages. Albeit promising, travelling to certain far-off areas not only diverts needed resources to tackle more prevailing problems but also entails irreversible damages in the form of potent pathogens and accelerated global warming.
- For all children the ability to play a musical instrument is just as important as the ability to read and write What is the importance of learning to play a musical instrument for a child How important is it in comparison to the ability to read and write 89
- Some employers are willing to give their workers a certain amount of unpaid leave believing this benefits the individual and the organization Other employers see no merit in this arrangement and discourage it Discuss both views and give your own opinion 84
- It is more important to spend public money on promoting a healthy lifestyle in order to prevent illness than to spend it on treatment of people who are already ill To what extent do you agree or disagree 89
- It is now possible for scientists and tourists to travel to remote natural environment such as South pole Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages 89
- In many countries truancy skipping classes is a worrying problem for both parents and educators What are the causes of truancy What may be the effects on the child and the wider community 89
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...es and ways to maintain food supplies. Having examined these gains, it is of pa...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, furthermore, however, may, regarding, so, still, then, well, for instance, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1876.0 1615.20841683 116% => OK
No of words: 319.0 315.596192385 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.88087774295 5.12529762239 115% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22617688928 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.22778081658 2.80592935109 115% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 176.041082164 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.664576802508 0.561755894193 118% => OK
syllable_count: 579.6 506.74238477 114% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => 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: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.5578858112 49.4020404114 106% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.307692308 106.682146367 135% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5384615385 20.7667163134 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.69230769231 7.06120827912 109% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 3.9879759519 150% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.213327181993 0.244688304435 87% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.062187641365 0.084324248473 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0426676133104 0.0667982634062 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116349551846 0.151304729494 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0514432978555 0.056905535591 90% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.5 13.0946893788 141% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 50.2224549098 60% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.12 12.4159519038 138% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.36 8.58950901804 132% => OK
difficult_words: 132.0 78.4519038076 168% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => 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.