Many animals are endangered. Some people argue that we should only protect animals that are useful to humans. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
In many parts of the world, animal species are on the verge of extinction. Many hold a belief that individuals and governments should only preserve species that are economically beneficial to humans. However, to the best of my knowledge, all animals that are being threatened should be protected for the following reasons.
Firstly, it is note-worthy that the interdependence of species is the main characteristic of eco-balance. Nowadays, many zoological studies have shown that although it is invisible, the survivals of living species are closely intertwined in one way or another. Therefore, it will be a grave mistake to overlook the fact that the extinction of one species is accompanied by demise of other species. For example, poisonous snakes are regarded as dangerous animals; however, the underpopulation of snakes in farming regions has resulted in the overpopulation of rats, which have chronic effects on agricultural yields. This example is the illustration of the fact that all threatened animals should be preserved.
Secondly, the counter-argument raised by objectors to this is that we should only protect animals that are useful to humans, because governments and individuals that are on the tight budget have to spend money on various social aspects, typically education and medication. This argument could be true to some extent; however, it is incomplete. What they fail to take into account is the fact that despite high expenses of animal preservation, deterring the extinction of endangered species is widely regarded as the top priority to governments. Furthermore, we are not able to predict the future and some species that are classified as unuseful to humans.
In conclusion, all animals in danger of extinction should be protected for the reasons mentioned above.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-07-09 | maiphuong0610 | 67 | view |
| 2021-07-09 | maiphuong0610 | 56 | view |
| 2021-07-09 | maiphuong0610 | 73 | view |
| 2021-07-09 | maiphuong0610 | 67 | view |
| 2021-07-09 | maiphuong0610 | 67 | view |
- The charts below show the percentages of the water used in different sectors in Sydney Australia in 1997 and 2007 89
- Some people say that advertising is extremely successful at persuading us to buy things Other people think advertising is so common that we no longer pay attention to it Discuss Both views and give your opinion 84
- Some people argue that holding sporting events is beneficial to countries development However other people hold the opposite opinion Discuss both views and give your own opinion 61
- Surveys show that in many countries people are living longer but increased life expectancy has many implications for the aging individuals and society as a whole What are the possible effects of longer living for individuals and society 89
- In the future nobody will buy printed newspapers or books because they will be able to read everything they want online without paying 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 76, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun hold seems to be countable; consider using: 'Many holds'.
Suggestion: Many holds
...species are on the verge of extinction. Many hold a belief that individuals and governmen...
^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, therefore, for example, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 13.1623246493 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 13.0 7.30460921844 178% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 24.0651302605 96% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1519.0 1615.20841683 94% => OK
No of words: 282.0 315.596192385 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.3865248227 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.09790868904 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.18953643953 2.80592935109 114% => OK
Unique words: 150.0 176.041082164 85% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.531914893617 0.561755894193 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 487.8 506.74238477 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 57.2315963547 49.4020404114 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 116.846153846 106.682146367 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.6923076923 20.7667163134 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.23076923077 7.06120827912 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.241712223913 0.244688304435 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0852945872811 0.084324248473 101% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0585230613854 0.0667982634062 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.159487320886 0.151304729494 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0696923332794 0.056905535591 122% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 13.0946893788 113% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 41.7 50.2224549098 83% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.98 12.4159519038 113% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.38 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 84.0 78.4519038076 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.