For decades, mankind has been influencing the balance of the nature substantially, and animals and plants have been undergoing devastating results. Some argue that this situation cannot be changed, while others argue that there is still a possibility of changing it. This essay discusses both sides of the argument and then I will give my own perspective.
The main reason why some believe that the human activities bringing negative ramifications on the nature cannot be changed is because producing basic human needs such as shelter and food heavily impact on animals and plants. People nowadays are struggling to secure their basic needs, hence they are unlikely to pay attention on the resulting issues on the environment. Moreover there are manifold other activities that directly impact on animals and natural habitats, which are unlikely to be stopped for the sake of well-being of nature, because of money-grubbers. For example widespread illegal wood cutting and hunting often bring detrimental effects to ecological systems around the world.
Others, however, believe that aforementioned human activities still can be changed in order to tackle this situation. Firstly environmental-friendly and sustainable housing development planning can massively reduce the deforestation not only by effective land usage, but also by reduced usage of natural resources in construction. For example, even though Singapore has limited land area , the government has been able to conserve forests and natural habitats by effective land usage , particularly by promoting multi-story residencies. Secondly, robust rules and regulations can be introduced against many forms of activities such as illegal wood cutting or hunting, which would bring significant impact on deterring them.
In conclusion, I believe that both arguments have their merits. On balance, however, I tend to believe that harmful human activities to the nature can be controlled by effective resource planning in developing activities and imposing rigid rules and regulations against those who destroy natural resources and habitats indiscriminately.
- Some people believe the purpose of education is to prepare people to be useful members for society Others say that the purpose of education is to achieve personal ambitions Discuss both views and give your own opinion 56
- The most important aim of science ought to be to improve people s lives To what extent do you agree or disagree 78
- Nowadays we are producing more and more rubbish Why do you think this is happening What can governments do to help reduce the amount of rubbish produced 78
- Young people are often influenced by their peers Do the advantages of peer pressure outweigh the disadvantages 56
- Happiness index is becoming a new national success rather than only economic growth. What do you think about this idea? What can be used to measure happiness index? 77
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 370, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Moreover,
...he resulting issues on the environment. Moreover there are manifold other activities tha...
^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 388, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...n though Singapore has limited land area , the government has been able to conserv...
^^
Line 3, column 484, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...natural habitats by effective land usage , particularly by promoting multi-story r...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, then, well, while, for example, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 13.1623246493 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 10.4138276553 144% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 41.998997996 83% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1801.0 1615.20841683 112% => OK
No of words: 315.0 315.596192385 100% => OK
Chars per words: 5.71746031746 5.12529762239 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.21286593061 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.15072635998 2.80592935109 112% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 176.041082164 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.587301587302 0.561755894193 105% => 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: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => 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: 57.5347592392 49.4020404114 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.538461538 106.682146367 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2307692308 20.7667163134 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.7692307692 7.06120827912 153% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.01903807615 60% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => 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: 0.35210353697 0.244688304435 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.115967907358 0.084324248473 138% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0862664452832 0.0667982634062 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.199002384522 0.151304729494 132% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0406795244918 0.056905535591 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.6 13.0946893788 134% => 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: 16.19 12.4159519038 130% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.09 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 78.4519038076 134% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.