Manned space flight is costly and dangerous. Moreover, the recent success of a series of unmanned space probes and satellites has demonstrated that a great deal of useful information can be gathered without the costs and risks associated with sending men and women into space.
The letter to the editor of a national aeronautics magazine presents the conclusion that it is feasible to invest the resources in unmanned space flights instead of manned space flights. The reason that the author has provided to bolster the conclusion is that manned space flight is costlier and dangerous than unmanned space flights. Moreover, the author also mentioned that there is great success achieved recently by sending unmanned space flights and probes. However, while the conclusion is drawn by the author, it rests on several unfounded assumptions that, if not substantiated, dramatically attenuate the persuasiveness of the argument. Thus, several points need to be addressed.
Firstly, the author has completely denied answering the question that, why manned space flight is costly and dangerous? The author has simply provided the readers with a statement without providing enough pieces of evidence to espouse his statement. It might be possible that the equipment or the resources that are being used by the astronauts are not maintained or might be using cheap quality products that will eventually lead to greater risks. Hence, to avoid risk it would be feasible to use the best quality resources.
Secondly, the author described that the achievements gained in using unmanned space flights and probes have been immense recently. However, the author has failed to notice the earlier success rate of manned space flight. There is nothing mentioned about the success related to manned space flights in the letter. There have been many successful events in history like Apollo 11 which was a manned space flight that orbited the moon twice and had returned safely back to Earth. This example negates the statement that "Manned space flight is dangerous."
Moreover, if men and women are sent to space, it would be a great opportunity and experience for them, if we think as a career prospect. The example of great astronauts such as Kalpana Chawla, Sunita Williams, etc, helps to explore the teenagers to get into the field of astrology. This might be one of the reasons that manned space flights must be given enough importance than unmanned space probes.
A careful analysis exposes the loopholes present in the argument of the author. The arguments do not seem to be strong enough to buttress the conclusion of investing the resources in unmanned space flight because all the reasons provided by the author are dubious and questionable. Hence, the author must rethink and present a logical and foolproof solution.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-23 | Krisha Lakhani | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-17 | riyarmy | 83 | view |
| 2023-08-11 | Anish Sapkota | 58 | view |
| 2023-08-04 | DCAD123 | 50 | view |
| 2023-07-30 | BusariMoruf | 55 | view |
- The best way to teach whether as an educator employer or parents to praise positive actions and ignore negative ones 50
- The following appeared in a memo from the new vice president of Sartorian a company that manufactures men s clothing Five years ago at a time when we had difficulties in obtaining reliable supplies of high quality wool fabric we discontinued production of 68
- In order for any work of art for example a film a novel a poem or a song to have merit it must be understandable to most people 70
- The following appeared as a recommendation by a committee planning a ten year budget for the city of Calatrava The birthrate in our city is declining in fact last year s birthrate was only one half that of five years ago Thus the number of students enroll 59
- Government officials should rely on their own judgment rather than unquestioningly carry out the will of the people they serve 66
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 409 350
No. of Characters: 2080 1500
No. of Different Words: 194 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.497 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.086 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.561 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 173 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 123 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 78 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 45 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.45 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.419 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.345 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.546 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.095 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, hence, however, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, thus, while, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.9520958084 69% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 42.0 55.5748502994 76% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2146.0 2260.96107784 95% => OK
No of words: 409.0 441.139720559 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.24694376528 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49708221141 4.56307096286 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70711051549 2.78398813304 97% => OK
Unique words: 204.0 204.123752495 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.498777506112 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 653.4 705.55239521 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.76447105788 126% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.70958083832 148% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 19.7664670659 96% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.0140462654 57.8364921388 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 112.947368421 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5263157895 23.324526521 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.21052631579 5.70786347227 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 8.20758483034 134% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.355074382109 0.218282227539 163% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.117293061982 0.0743258471296 158% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0797520642743 0.0701772020484 114% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.195818734162 0.128457276422 152% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0655153039978 0.0628817314937 104% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.3799401198 98% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.17 12.5979740519 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.62 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 102.0 98.500998004 104% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => 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.