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. Therefore, we should invest our resources in unmanned space flight.
Space flight, whether it is manned or unmanned has a certain degree of risk associated with it due to huge number of factors that play a role in a successful launch. That said, the author's opinion that further resources should be invested only in unmanned space flight due to costs and risks associated with manned flights is baseless and does not hold merit.
Firstly, the author states that manned space flights are expensive than unmanned flight. But, the author does not provide a number describing the difference in expenditure for both these flights. It is possible that manned flights are only slightly expensive than unmanned ones. It is also possible that if the research and development (R&D) costs of the sensors and imaging devices for unmanned flights are calculated, manned flights might be cheaper overall. Even if both R&D costs and launch costs of unmanned flight is lower than manned flight, there is a need for continuous input and monitoring of unmanned satellies and probes for many years which could increase the cost dramatically over the years. Thus, in order to reach a conclusion, additional information should be provided regarding the R&D costs of unmanned probes and satellites, the launch costs of both manned and unmanned space flights as well as the cost associated with maintaining the infrastructure to monitor the unmanned probes over its lifetime. Without this knowledge, no conclusion can be drawn about which is expensive.
Secondly, the author states that a great deal of useful information could be gathered from unmanned probes and satellites. But, he/she does not provide information about its accuracy and whether it is reliable. There is a chance that the signals from the satellite could be garbled due to interference from space which might change the results drastically. If the results are not trustworthy, even lower launch cost is not enough to justify unmanned flight over a manned flight. Also, there could be things that only a manned launch can provide the scientists. For example, if we consider the manned launch, only a human can bring back space soil and rock samples. These samples provide a huge insight into the formation of those extraterrestial objects and also into the origins of the universe. If a satellite were to provide this information, it will take several years to get the complete picture. Thus, in order to support a particular type of launch, the author will benefit by providing a scientific analysis into the abilites of satellites as well as its suitability for the particular mission. He/she needs to provide additional information about what the mission is and why the unmanned flights are better suited for such a task than manned flight. Without this, it is impossible to say which of these can provide better information.
Therefore, as we see, the author's argument in support of unmanned space flight is flawed on many levels and cannot be considered seriously to influence a critical decision like a space launch.
| 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 |
- An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be p 42
- 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 49
- Many lives might be saved if inoculations against cow flu were routinely administered to all people in areas where the disease is detected. However, since there is a small possibility that a person will die as a result of the inoculations, we cannot permi 83
- Over the past year, our late night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news. During this time period, most of the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station’s coverage of loca 35
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK. it only told: 'Manned space flight is costly and dangerous. '.
argument 2 -- better to say: 'a great deal of useful information' is not equal to 'all information'
argument 3 -- ???
----------------
Need to argue against the conclusion always. For this topic it is:
Therefore, we should invest our resources in unmanned space flight.
----------------
samples:
https://www.testbig.com/gmatgre-essays/following-opinion-was-provided-l…
----------------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 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: 498 350
No. of Characters: 2456 1500
No. of Different Words: 206 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.724 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.932 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.668 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 191 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 137 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 89 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 52 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.714 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.138 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.34 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.48 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.152 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 182, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
... in a successful launch. That said, the authors opinion that further resources should b...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 27, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...formation. Therefore, as we see, the authors argument in support of unmanned space f...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, well, for example, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.6327345309 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 11.1786427146 143% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 13.6137724551 95% => OK
Pronoun: 32.0 28.8173652695 111% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 55.5748502994 95% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 16.3942115768 73% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2518.0 2260.96107784 111% => OK
No of words: 493.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.10750507099 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.71206996034 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71657190747 2.78398813304 98% => OK
Unique words: 210.0 204.123752495 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.425963488844 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 773.1 705.55239521 110% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.6091900862 57.8364921388 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.904761905 119.503703932 100% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4761904762 23.324526521 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.2380952381 5.70786347227 92% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.67664670659 150% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.396044054869 0.218282227539 181% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.12851945203 0.0743258471296 173% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0932729925746 0.0701772020484 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.261511544027 0.128457276422 204% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0797876214699 0.0628817314937 127% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.3799401198 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 48.13 48.3550499002 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.5979740519 100% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.08 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 103.0 98.500998004 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.