It is hard to deny that in a human dominated world as the one we live in today, human needs should be the first priority rather than the needs of animals. Such a fact leads impressionable people to generate the opinion that human needs for farmland, housing and industry are more crucial that saving land for endangered animals. However, such a statement suffers both logical and factual fallacies and it should be examined meticulously. As far as the possible threat due to broken chain of the ecosystem and the abundant options thanks to technological advances developed by human, I firmly hold that human needs for land are no more important than saving lands for endangered animals.
First and foremost, the chain in ecosystem is not possible to be repaired once it is broken. There are many species of animals need specific conditions to survive, and these conditions can only be met in certain natural environment. For instance, some species of birds inhabit in trees located in mountains of mid-low altitude, and these birds served as the preys of another species of endangered hawk. As the trees inhibited by birds chopped down by human due to faming activities, the amount of birds would keep decreasing, and there would also be a reduction in hawk population due to a lack of prey. Meanwhile, the likely result of this situation is the hawks will search for other food sources and start to compete with other species for food. Therefore, the rhythm of the natural is interrupted and the original chain of ecosystem is broken, and the broken ecosystem might have unpredictable effect to human society.
Furthermore, the fact that the technological advances and innovation nowadays indicate that human now have much more options to choose in the light of land using. Take the example of the new social housing plan in my city, the government renovated the old and spare building in and around the cites, turning them into new apartments with much higher stories to make the most of the space in city. Had it not been for the advanced architectural development of anti-earthquake technology, the buildings built nowadays would never be this high and thus would not accommodate the skyrocketing population in the city. What I want to emphasize here is that human can be so creative that can inventive and develop lots of novel technologies to meet our current needs. As a result, the options offered to fulfill human needs can be present without sacrificing endangered animals, which are not intelligent enough to make change to their own lives.
To sum up, I strongly believe that human needs for more land is no important than the needs for land of endangered animals. This is because the threat posed to ecosystem by depriving them of their only land might in the end cause harm to human ourselves and also because human are smart enough to make changes to other aspects to attain the same outcome without taking the lands from endangered animals.
- The sea otter is a small mammal that lives in waters along the western coast of North America from California to Alaska When some sea otter populations off the Alaskan coast started rapidly declining a few years ago it caused much concern because sea ot 73
- People today spend too much time on personal enjoyment doing things they like to do rather than doing things they should do 76
- There s no doubt that Turtle Excluder Devices are a great idea that must be used by every single shrimping boat However they are far from perfect and in need of drastic improvement regardless of what the author in the reading may believe 71
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement Because people are busy doing so many different things they do very few things well Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 70
- The following appeared as part of a campaign to sell advertising time on a local radio station to local businesses The Cumquat Caf began advertising on our local radio station this year and was delighted to see its business increase by 10 percent over las
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 344, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'higher' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: higher
...ning them into new apartments with much more higher stories to make the most of the space i...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, however, if, so, therefore, thus, while, for instance, as a result, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 15.1003584229 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 9.8082437276 143% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 13.8261648746 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 43.0788530466 70% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 52.1666666667 134% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2495.0 1977.66487455 126% => OK
No of words: 509.0 407.700716846 125% => OK
Chars per words: 4.90176817289 4.8611393121 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74984508646 4.48103885553 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67802229506 2.67179642975 100% => OK
Unique words: 245.0 212.727598566 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.481335952849 0.524837075471 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 790.2 618.680645161 128% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 8.0 3.08781362007 259% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.94265232975 20% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.6003584229 83% => 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: 29.0 20.1344086022 144% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 46.2525039068 48.9658058833 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 146.764705882 100.406767564 146% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.9411764706 20.6045352989 145% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.05882352941 5.45110844103 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 11.8709677419 59% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.32870072453 0.236089414692 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108822930039 0.076458572812 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.116927841193 0.0737576698707 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.215353065074 0.150856017488 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.101748314079 0.0645574589148 158% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 11.7677419355 141% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 58.1214874552 72% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.1575268817 144% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.73 10.9000537634 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.01818996416 106% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 86.8835125448 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.002688172 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.0537634409 135% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.247311828 146% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 344, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'higher' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: higher
...ning them into new apartments with much more higher stories to make the most of the space i...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, furthermore, however, if, so, therefore, thus, while, for instance, as a result, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 15.1003584229 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 9.8082437276 143% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 13.8261648746 123% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.0286738351 91% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 43.0788530466 70% => OK
Preposition: 70.0 52.1666666667 134% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2495.0 1977.66487455 126% => OK
No of words: 509.0 407.700716846 125% => OK
Chars per words: 4.90176817289 4.8611393121 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74984508646 4.48103885553 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67802229506 2.67179642975 100% => OK
Unique words: 245.0 212.727598566 115% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.481335952849 0.524837075471 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 790.2 618.680645161 128% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 9.59856630824 42% => OK
Article: 8.0 3.08781362007 259% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 3.51792114695 85% => OK
Conjunction: 4.0 1.86738351254 214% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.94265232975 20% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 20.6003584229 83% => 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: 29.0 20.1344086022 144% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 46.2525039068 48.9658058833 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 146.764705882 100.406767564 146% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.9411764706 20.6045352989 145% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.05882352941 5.45110844103 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.5376344086 18% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 11.8709677419 59% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.85842293907 181% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.88709677419 61% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.32870072453 0.236089414692 139% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.108822930039 0.076458572812 142% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.116927841193 0.0737576698707 159% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.215353065074 0.150856017488 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.101748314079 0.0645574589148 158% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.6 11.7677419355 141% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.04 58.1214874552 72% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 6.10430107527 183% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 10.1575268817 144% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.73 10.9000537634 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.01818996416 106% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 86.8835125448 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.002688172 145% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.0537634409 135% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.247311828 146% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.