advantages of the clouding seeding schemes
The author points out to some possible advantages of the clouding seeding schemes by mentioning some pieces of evidence. The lecturer, however, refutes the arguments and offers some counterclaims to indicate that none of the aforementioned reasoning are compelling.
First, according to some experiments, which were conducted in a laboratory, the method of cloud seeding is more likely effective since by adding some silver iodide to the water vapor a light snow was observed. Nevertheless, the professor concedes the statements, but she also posits that it may also prevent snow and rain as well. Therefore, some undesirable consequences may be seen. As a matter of fact, when the precipitation decreases, drought poses a threat to farms because the lack of water.
Second, the cloud seeding has been examined in some cities throughout Asia, and it had some benefits for those regions. Conversely, the speaker rejects the claim that the same result can be observed in the US due to the fact that their conditions are diverse. In other words, the cloud seeding in Asia was tested in urban areas with a huge pollution, and it is worth mentioning that pollution in those areas in not comparable with the that of farming lands. In fact, chemical particles and substances in pollutant weather have influence on the process. Hence, it may not have similar outcome in rural zones.
Third, based on a few study results, crop damage reduced in places where the scheme, cloud seeding, was applied. On the contrary, the lecturer casts doubt on the impact of cloud seeding in the study. He explains that the decrease in the damage was recorded not only in the particular farming lands but also in the other areas. As a result, it can be considered as the natural variation. It can be interpreted that the process was not related to adding those particles.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-03 | sefeliz | 76 | view |
| 2023-08-20 | YasamanEsml | 80 | view |
| 2023-08-20 | YasamanEsml | 88 | view |
| 2023-06-21 | 宋致遠 | view | |
| 2023-06-14 | Simin_MB | 65 | view |
- TPO29-independent 3
- You are helping to select a leader for a student organization or club Do you agree or disagree that a person s honesty is the most important thing to consider in deciding whom to vote for Use reasons and examples to support your position 95
- Archaeologists problem to study artifacts 3
- TPO35 3
- TPO22 3
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, conversely, first, hence, however, may, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, third, well, in fact, as a matter of fact, as a result, in other words, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 10.4613686534 143% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 7.30242825607 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 12.0772626932 91% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 30.3222958057 139% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1547.0 1373.03311258 113% => OK
No of words: 309.0 270.72406181 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00647249191 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1926597562 4.04702891845 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.75747526554 2.5805825403 107% => OK
Unique words: 176.0 145.348785872 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.569579288026 0.540411800872 105% => OK
syllable_count: 484.2 419.366225166 115% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.116997792494 855% => Less interrogative sentences wanted.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.25165562914 240% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 43.5199307789 49.2860985944 88% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.6875 110.228320801 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.3125 21.698381199 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.9375 7.06452816374 155% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 4.19205298013 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 4.33554083885 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => 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: 0.259132814606 0.272083759551 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0718512858864 0.0996497079465 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.110165837224 0.0662205650399 166% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.155967219629 0.162205337803 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0706334080434 0.0443174109184 159% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 13.3589403974 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 53.8541721854 97% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.0289183223 97% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.33 8.42419426049 111% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 63.6247240618 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.7273730684 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.