Human activities have negative effects on plants and animals species. Some people think it is too late to do a anything about this problem, Others believe that effective measures can be taken to improve this situation.
Discuss both views and give our opinion.
The question of whether human endeavors can effectively counteract the negative impact of human activities on plant and animal species remains a topic of debate. While some argue that the damage is irreversible and it is too late to make a difference, I firmly believe that concerted efforts and strategic measures can indeed improve this dire situation.
Undeniably, human activities such as hunting and deforestation have cast a dark shadow over the planet's biodiversity. Throughout history, these actions have led to the extinction of numerous species, often directly related to the practices of indigenous communities. In the present day, the urgency to restore and protect these species has become more pronounced than ever. Adding to the complexity, the undeniable consequence of global warming exacerbates habitat loss, leading to irreversible damage to the distribution and survival capabilities of various species.
However, amid these challenges, there is reason for optimism. Effective solutions can be implemented to safeguard the well-being of plants and animals. Foremost among these is the enactment of stringent governmental regulations and laws aimed at preserving endangered species. Such measures should be accompanied by significant penalties to deter destructive activities like hunting and the harvesting of plants for consumption and medicine. Additionally, advancements in biomedical sciences present a glimmer of hope. Research is accumulating, proposing viable techniques for conserving the genetic material of extinct or endangered species, thereby potentially enabling their revival.
In conclusion, while the adverse consequences of human activities on plant and animal species are undeniable, it is premature to dismiss the potential for positive change. By instituting comprehensive regulations backed by appropriate penalties and leveraging the advancements in scientific research, we have the capacity to mitigate the harm we have caused. The path to healing our planet's ecosystems is challenging, but it is far from impossible.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-04 | viviannguyen | 89 | view |
| 2023-08-04 | viviannguyen | 61 | view |
- The graph below shows the percentage of female students on four different course at one university from 1970 to 2015 Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and comparisons where relevant 84
- The pictures below show the recycling process of wasted glass bottles 61
- The line graph shows the percentage of New Zealand population from 1950 to 2050 78
- Is the mental strength important for success in sports or is it more important to have strong and fit people in sports Discuss both views and give opinion 78
- The best way to solve traffic and transportation problems is to encourage people to live in cities rather than suburbs or countryside What extent do you agree or disagree 56
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHETHER[3]
Message: Wordiness: Shorten this phrase to the shortest possible suggestion.
Suggestion: Whether; The question whether
The question of whether human endeavors can effectively counter...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 97, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'planets'' or 'planet's'?
Suggestion: planets'; planet's
...tation have cast a dark shadow over the planets biodiversity. Throughout history, these...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, so, well, while, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 7.85571142285 51% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 7.30460921844 27% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 15.0 24.0651302605 62% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 8.3376753507 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1774.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 299.0 315.596192385 95% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.93311036789 5.12529762239 116% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 4.20363070211 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.28884492398 2.80592935109 117% => OK
Unique words: 188.0 176.041082164 107% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.628762541806 0.561755894193 112% => OK
syllable_count: 571.5 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.9 1.60771543086 118% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.9503072037 49.4020404114 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 118.266666667 106.682146367 111% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.9333333333 20.7667163134 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.8 7.06120827912 54% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.67935871743 69% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.242414325998 0.244688304435 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0665909268295 0.084324248473 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0773485476416 0.0667982634062 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.145602101996 0.151304729494 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.105565954606 0.056905535591 186% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 13.0946893788 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 26.81 50.2224549098 53% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.2 11.3001002004 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 17.11 12.4159519038 138% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.92 8.58950901804 127% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 78.4519038076 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 17.0 10.7795591182 158% => 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.