Cloud seeding
The reading and listening both discuses "cloud seeding" which is a process for converting hail to snow. The article strongly postulates three theories to provide the effectiveness of the process for crop protection in the United States. However, the lecturer refutes all of the reasons and claims that their effectivity is unclear by presenting counter-arguments for each of the assertions.
First and foremost, the passage begins by asserting "laboratory experiments" evidence that when silver iodide is added to the cold water vapors it resulted in the production of snow which is very similar to hail as it also produces water vapors close to it freezing temperature. This point is challenged by the lecturer by pointing out that it could be possible under experimental conditions, but in real life scenario silver iodide cause precipitation in clouds which would affect snow, rain, and hail all. The professor elaborates this point by mentioning that the addition of chemicals in real life would result in drought in areas where there is low rainfall, and subsequently, lack of water would damage the crops.
Next, the professor in the lecture rejects the theory by illustrating the fact. In Asia, the procedure was adopted in urban areas and big cities where contributing factors play major role in the declination of hail. For instance, urban areas contain factories and industries, while it was noticed that pollutants from these industries interact with clouds and chemicals. As a result of their interaction, such conditions would have been created that had success the snow production. Whereas, the success of this method seems impossible in farmland where there are no pollution particles. These points refute the writer's implication that positive results from some urban areas in Asia would be a piece of evidence for the productivity of cloud seeding.
Ultimately, the article wraps its arguments by declaring that a study done in Central united states farm has also proven that no crop damage was observed because of reduced hailing. The speaker in the listening rebuts this point by insisting that though hail damage was reduced in the central part of the US, there were no signs of hailing seen in the east and south region of the country too. It indicates that the whole area experiences the same decline that is because of natural variation in weather and had nothing to do with cloud seeding.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-03-22 | Anurag96 | 78 | view |
| 2022-04-26 | Seyed Armin Mirhosseini | 83 | view |
| 2020-12-10 | Safa Arshad | 80 | view |
| 2020-12-10 | Safa Arshad | 80 | view |
| 2020-12-09 | Safa Arshad | 70 | view |
- Burning mirrors 80
- Do you believe it is important to travel to somewhere near or somewhere far 73
- Some students prefer to study alone Others prefer to study with a group of students Which do you prefer Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer 70
- Tpo52 80
- Do you prefer to have realistic goals or ambitious goals in life 83
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 278, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...d States. However, the lecturer refutes all of the reasons and claims that their effectivi...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 483, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whereas” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...d that had success the snow production. Whereas, the success of this method seems impos...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 612, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'writers'' or 'writer's'?
Suggestion: writers'; writer's
...tion particles. These points refute the writers implication that positive results from ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, so, whereas, while, for instance, in fact, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 7.30242825607 151% => OK
Relative clauses : 19.0 12.0772626932 157% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 54.0 30.3222958057 178% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.01324503311 259% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2042.0 1373.03311258 149% => OK
No of words: 393.0 270.72406181 145% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.19592875318 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45244063426 4.04702891845 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9022115933 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 216.0 145.348785872 149% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.549618320611 0.540411800872 102% => OK
syllable_count: 630.9 419.366225166 150% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.23620309051 121% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.51434878587 198% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 2.5761589404 39% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 21.2450331126 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 53.2471804157 49.2860985944 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.133333333 110.228320801 124% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.2 21.698381199 121% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.66666666667 7.06452816374 80% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 4.33554083885 208% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 4.45695364238 112% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.128001598766 0.272083759551 47% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0422458950413 0.0996497079465 42% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0712066485593 0.0662205650399 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0749157887343 0.162205337803 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0391869327994 0.0443174109184 88% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 13.3589403974 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 45.09 53.8541721854 84% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 11.0289183223 121% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.18 12.2367328918 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.59 8.42419426049 114% => OK
difficult_words: 116.0 63.6247240618 182% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 10.7273730684 135% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.498013245 118% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 85.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.5 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.