The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine.
"In 1975 a wildlife census found that there were seven species of amphibians in Xanadu National Park, with abundant numbers of each species. However, in 2002 only four species of amphibians were observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. There has been a substantial decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide, and global pollution of water and air is clearly implicated. The decline of amphibians in Xanadu National Park, however, almost certainly has a different cause: in 1975, trout — which are known to eat amphibian eggs — were introduced into the park."
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.
In this letter, the author claims that the decline in both numbers and species of amphibians attributes to the introduction of trout in 1975. plausible as it seems to be, there are many evidences, which, if not investigated, would dramatically reduce the persuasiveness of the argument.
First of all, we need more evidence to verify that the credibility of the statistical numbers reported by the wildlife census. while this census claims that both the numbers and species of amphibians had declined dramatically from 1975 to 2002, this claim and this data may not statistically plausible. it is possible that the census conducted its studies in different seasons of a year. To be more specific, this census, in 1975, may study the number of amphibians in spring which is the most active period for amphibians to live. Nevertheless, in 2002, they did their research in winter, which made them discover fewer traces of amphibians. In addition, amphibians might evolve and change their habitats over time, therefore they do not live in the same place as decades ago. In this case, if the researchers still try to find these animals in the old place, the observed result would render invalid. On the other hand, however, if the evidence proves the above is wrong, then the argument is strengthened.
Secondly, more evidence is needed regarding the environment change in xanadu nation park. while this argument does not provide any information about the habitat change of these amphibians, we cannot rule out this possibility. it is possible that the global pollution also happened in xanadu nation park, and the water there was in a poor condition, which caused a serious damage among these animals in recent years. Or the air was also polluted and mixed with some poisonous materials which are vital for amphibians. if these scenarios have merit, then it is reasonable to claim that these pollutions destroyed the ecosystem in this park and rendered it no longer suitable for amphibians to live.
Lastly, despite the evidences mentioned above, we also need more information to investigate whether the trout, who was introduced in 1975, are the real cause of the drop of amphibians. we are not denying that trout can eat amphibian eggs, but more evidences are needed to investigate the food sources of the trout and the relatively number of trout. if it turns out that the eggs are their main food source of trout and the number of trout is in a large quantity comparing to the amphibians, then we may safely regard trout as the main reason. however, if the evidence shows that the number of trout is quite small or they also eat other plants or animals other than eggs, then the conclusion is significantly weakened.
Overall, the argument, as it stands above, is considerably flawed due to its lack of specific evidences. if the author is able to provide more evidences, it is possible to fully evaluate the soundness of the conclusion that the trout are the main reason why amphibians are declined in xanadu nation park.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-01 | Reetin | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-14 | Captain | 35 | view |
| 2019-10-30 | sushil koirala | 43 | view |
| 2019-09-05 | Krishna Prasad | 50 | view |
| 2019-09-03 | wogns030609 | 50 | view |
- Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia. Using an observation-centered approach to studying Tertian culture, he concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than 53
- According to a recent report cheating among college and university students is on the rise However Groveton College has successfully reduced student cheating by adopting an honor code which calls for students to agree not to cheat in their academic endeav 64
- The following appeared as part of an article in a business magazine."A recent study rating 300 male and female Mentian advertising executives according to the average number of hours they sleep per night showed an association between the amount of sl 61
- In an attempt to improve highway safety Prunty County last year lowered its speed limit from 55 to 45 miles per hour on all county highways But this effort has failed the number of accidents has not decreased and based on reports by the highway patrol man 64
- The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine."In 1975 a wildlife census found that there were seven species of amphibians in Xanadu National Park, with abundant numbers of each species. However, in 2002 only four species of am 35
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 12 15
No. of Words: 509 350
No. of Characters: 2451 1500
No. of Different Words: 223 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.75 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.815 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.635 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 164 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 114 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 90 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 60 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 42.417 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 21.777 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 1 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.381 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.637 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.193 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 143, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Plausible
...s to the introduction of trout in 1975. plausible as it seems to be, there are many evide...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 128, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: While
...umbers reported by the wildlife census. while this census claims that both the number...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 304, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...s data may not statistically plausible. it is possible that the census conducted i...
^^
Line 15, column 91, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: While
...vironment change in xanadu nation park. while this argument does not provide any info...
^^^^^
Line 15, column 227, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...s, we cannot rule out this possibility. it is possible that the global pollution a...
^^
Line 15, column 363, Rule ID: A_UNCOUNTABLE[3]
Message: Uncountable nouns are usually not used with an indefinite article. Use simply 'serious damage'.
Suggestion: serious damage
...e was in a poor condition, which caused a serious damage among these animals in recent years. Or...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 15, column 518, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: If
...terials which are vital for amphibians. if these scenarios have merit, then it is ...
^^
Line 21, column 186, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: We
...e real cause of the drop of amphibians. we are not denying that trout can eat amph...
^^
Line 21, column 189, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...eal cause of the drop of amphibians. we are not denying that trout can eat amphibian eggs, but ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 21, column 351, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: If
...out and the relatively number of trout. if it turns out that the eggs are their ma...
^^
Line 21, column 545, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: However
...safely regard trout as the main reason. however, if the evidence shows that the number ...
^^^^^^^
Line 27, column 106, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: If
... due to its lack of specific evidences. if the author is able to provide more evid...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, lastly, may, nevertheless, regarding, second, secondly, so, still, then, therefore, while, in addition, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 46.0 28.8173652695 160% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 68.0 55.5748502994 122% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 16.3942115768 91% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2554.0 2260.96107784 113% => OK
No of words: 509.0 441.139720559 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01768172888 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74984508646 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.72132444606 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 243.0 204.123752495 119% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.477406679764 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 793.8 705.55239521 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 10.0 2.70958083832 369% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.22255489022 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 35.3999500365 57.8364921388 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.619047619 119.503703932 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2380952381 23.324526521 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.90476190476 5.70786347227 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 12.0 5.25449101796 228% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.88822355289 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.151989833149 0.218282227539 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0494568097371 0.0743258471296 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0471071272084 0.0701772020484 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.090267615238 0.128457276422 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0368922315623 0.0628817314937 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.3 14.3799401198 99% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.39 8.32208582834 101% => OK
difficult_words: 115.0 98.500998004 117% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.