In the recent century, the increasing shortage of animals' life place hitting to eyes can be inferred from overpopulation and technology improvement. Although some people advocate the idea that preserving wild animals is a pointless act and cause the waste of resource, I completely disagree with the given statement owing to a number of compelling reasons.
To begin with, the root reason is that rushing of human beings to the living place of wild animals, as a consequence of ever-increasing population, causes the animals have been expelled from their own habitat and their habitat shrunken. To put it another way, when it comes to wild-life place the human being is the most known culprit in making a recipe for disaster. By taking their own selfish advantages about nature and other animals' habitat, they would expose animals to the risk of vulnerability and even worst becoming extinction. Thereby resting a duty on their shoulders about apportioning the resource and budget to protect the animals' habitats and keeping them alive and it does not just a favor to them.
Another rational argument is that animals could be accounted for a priceless resource of information, therefore, rejecting the idea that spending for the resource could waste of the resource. These alive information resources have to preserve in favor of the next generation in order to be in touch with the given information about them for their fans or conducting researches. In addition to this, if we do not protect the wild animals and their habitat or prevent from allocating especial resources to keep them safe, it will be robbed the chance of seeing them or benefit accruing because of researches for the next generation.
To conclude, it is my firm conviction that however, the home place of wild animals has turned smaller but protecting them have to become as a part of pressing matters in every society.
- The graph below shows the consumption of fish and different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant. 65
- In the past photography was used to real people and place however because of technology you can not trust what you see Is it a positive or negative development 64
- In many nations many people in huge cities either live alone or in small units instead of in large extended family groups Why is this Is a positive or negative development 78
- The Internet provides us with information about life and cultures of different countries, and some people say it is not necessary to visit these countries to learn about them. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this statement? Give your opinion 73
- In many countries traditional food is being replaced by international fast food. This has negative effects on both families and societies. To what extend do you agree or disagree? 84
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 431, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'animals'' or 'animal's'?
Suggestion: animals'; animal's
...lfish advantages about nature and other animals habitat, they would expose animals to t...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 507, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'even the worst'.
Suggestion: even the worst
...nimals to the risk of vulnerability and even worst becoming extinction. Thereby resting a ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, so, therefore, in addition, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 7.85571142285 64% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 10.4138276553 125% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 24.0651302605 116% => OK
Preposition: 46.0 41.998997996 110% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1589.0 1615.20841683 98% => OK
No of words: 314.0 315.596192385 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06050955414 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20951839842 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8029331669 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 175.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.557324840764 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 506.7 506.74238477 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.76152304609 126% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 16.0721442886 62% => 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: 31.0 20.2975951904 153% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 34.9869975848 49.4020404114 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 158.9 106.682146367 149% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.4 20.7667163134 151% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.9 7.06120827912 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.233017818142 0.244688304435 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0973283274365 0.084324248473 115% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0437610861203 0.0667982634062 66% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.153551374946 0.151304729494 101% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0229215522568 0.056905535591 40% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.1 13.0946893788 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.01 50.2224549098 80% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.4 11.3001002004 136% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.66 12.4159519038 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.35 8.58950901804 109% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 78.4519038076 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 9.78957915832 143% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 10.1190380762 142% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 10.7795591182 130% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.