Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic regions. They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of the year. Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. Unfortunately, according to reports from local hunters, the deer populations are declining. Since these reports coincide with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, we can conclude that the purported decline in deer populations is the result of the deer's being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author of the argument asseverates that the purported decline in Arctic deer population inhabiting Canada’s arctic regions springs from deer incapable of adhering to their perennial migratory routes across the frozen sea, which has been adversely affected by the melting sea ice, professedly caused by global warming. Although the argument in the prompt appears ostensibly conniving, several specific pieces of evidence are needed in order for the justification of the validity and soundness of the argument.
First and foremost, reports from local hunters might not manifest the truth. Specifically, since no further information is proffered on how local hunters might have deduced the decline in deer populations, we cannot in actuality attest to such a claim. Did these hunters go to where the deer moved and count the number of the deer population and make a comparison between the number of deer population prior to and after the purported decline? If so, we could be more confident about the claim with respect to the deer populations in decline. However, if not, then the claim about the deer populations in decline should be taken with a grain of salt.
Furthermore, should the deer populations are declining, as stated by local hunters, more evidence pertinent to the underlying cause of the decline should be provided in order to bolster the author’s argument. To wit, the author seems to ascribe the declining deer populations to the deer’s failure to follow their long-established migratory patterns across the frozen sea to reach their living resources. However, the correlation here cannot be considered the causality. Just because deer populations could not follow their traditional routes of moving does not necessarily denote that this is the cause of their decline. The author should probe into whether the age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea are the one and only method for the deer populations to get access to necessary sustenance. If so, then the validity of the argument could be further strengthened since the only means for the deer populations to get food were bereaved, leaving the animals no food to survive. However, if the determinants of the population decline lie elsewhere, such as local hunters over-hunting the deer or the food resources becoming scarcer, then the soundness of the argument made in the prompt would become attenuated.
The last respect, or specifically a piece of evidence, that should be properly appraised by the author for his argument is that supposed that the reports from local hunters are accurate and that the cause of the declining deer population is due to the claim that deer populations could no longer rely on their age-old migration patterns, the author should still evaluate what truly contributed to deer’s inability to follow their routes. According to the author, the reports from the local hunters coincided with the recent trends of global warming, which is therefore believed to have caused the melting of the sea ice, the result of which might have led to the deer’s inability to migrate as they could have before. However, the coincidence of the two events (i.e. global warming and the melting of the sea ice) needs more critical analysis since global warming does not necessarily make itself the sole factor that causes the melting of the sea ice. Maybe the sea ice was melted because of the rising of the arctic regions in Canada. Therefore, the author’s argument could not stay foolproof without the provision of clear-cut evidence that pinpoints the real cause of the melting of sea ice.
All told, although there are some merits in the author’s argument concerning the purported decline in deer population and their inability to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea, the author, however, needs to cite more robust evidence in order to buttress his argument. Evidence such as the veracity of the local hunters’ reports, the root cause of the decreasing deer population, and the culprit of the melting sea ice is all necessary, if not mandatory, in order to gauge whether the author’s argument would hold or not.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2018-08-14 | ShrutiUrkude | 68 | view |
- To serve the housing needs of our students, Buckingham College should build a number of new dormitories. Buckingham's enrollment is growing and, based on current trends, will double over the next 50 years, thus making existing dormitory space inadequate. 55
- Agree or disagree It is better to make friends with intelligent people than with the people who have a good sense of humor 73
- A/G Your job has a greater effect to your overall happiness than your social life does. 73
- In any profession—business, politics, education, government—those in power should step down after five years.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be 83
- Your friend has the opportunity to choose either one of the two types of major (field of study). Which one of the following two majors do you think is a better choice, and why? A. A major that would allow him to finish years of study and get a degree soon 73
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- not exactly
----------------
flaws:
No. of Words: 674 350
---------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 674 350
No. of Characters: 3396 1500
No. of Different Words: 251 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 5.095 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.039 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.62 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 263 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 193 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 129 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 82 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 32.095 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 14.209 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.619 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.387 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.516 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.18 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, however, if, may, so, still, then, therefore, such as, with respect to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.9520958084 147% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 28.8173652695 94% => OK
Preposition: 100.0 55.5748502994 180% => OK
Nominalization: 32.0 16.3942115768 195% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3512.0 2260.96107784 155% => OK
No of words: 674.0 441.139720559 153% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.21068249258 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 5.0952438579 4.56307096286 112% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80146511972 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 267.0 204.123752495 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.396142433234 0.468620217663 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 1098.9 705.55239521 156% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 9.0 2.70958083832 332% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 32.0 22.8473053892 140% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 89.6901190785 57.8364921388 155% => OK
Chars per sentence: 167.238095238 119.503703932 140% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.0952380952 23.324526521 138% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.52380952381 5.70786347227 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 14.0 6.88822355289 203% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.145550027895 0.218282227539 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0545965628949 0.0743258471296 73% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0373052207621 0.0701772020484 53% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0982188133506 0.128457276422 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0343985828808 0.0628817314937 55% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.2 14.3799401198 134% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.0 48.3550499002 81% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 12.197005988 130% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.53 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 147.0 98.500998004 149% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 16.0 12.3882235529 129% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 11.1389221557 133% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.9071856287 134% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.