TPO 36
The reading and the lecture are both about a method called cloud seeding which is used to make clouds produce harmless rain or snow instead of hail. Owing to hail pellets, crops would be damaged. Whereas the author of the reading states that it is a persuasive way of keeping safe crops from hail. The lecturer in the listening passage disagrees. He believes that it is not a definite method. The professor casts doubt on each of the claims made in the reading.
First of all, according to the reading, experiments in the laboratory have shown that there are obvious proofs which defend that idea. However, the lecturer disputes this point. She says that these experiments have not done in the real area. Consequently, if we carry out this plan in the real condition, we will take the risk of not raining and snowing which breed the worst drought.
Secondly, the reading states that, in Asia, cloud seeding is being applied to manage precipitation in cities that are so beneficial. Nevertheless, the professor refutes this argument. She argues that a high rate of air pollution in the cites is conducive to getting a good result due to a direct link between pollution and clouds. On the other hand, in unpolluted farming regions, using this method will probably not catch the same result.
Finally, the author claims that on closer examination in the central United States that process was convincing because of the crop damage of hail decreased compared to last year. In opposition, the speaker in the listening passage is doubtful that is this correct. She suggests that while hail damage decreased in many near areas to the east, south and not only in the testing area. Therefore, it is hard to advocate this test because it more likely that was the result of natural variation in the local weather.
To sum up, both the writer and professor hold conflicting views about using cloud seeding to protect the crop from hail. It is clear that they will have trouble finding common ground on the issue.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-09-20 | HideAPumpkin | 75 | view |
| 2022-09-02 | Allenwlh | 70 | view |
| 2021-09-08 | whiteflower | 80 | view |
| 2021-08-17 | Mizanur | 40 | view |
| 2021-03-22 | alibenvari | 70 | view |
- Tpo51 3
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The ability to maintain friendships with a small number of people over a long period of time is more important for happiness than the ability to make many new friends easily. Use specific reasons and 76
- Some people like to travel with a companion. Other people prefer to travel alone. Which do you prefer? Use specific reasons and examples to support your choice. 83
- Essay topics: TPO45Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?In the past, young people depended too much on their parents to make decisions for them; today young people are better able to make decisions about their own lives. Use specific reas 88
- TPO-13 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The extended family (grandparents, cousins, aunts, and uncles) is less important now than it was in the past.Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer. 3
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 198, 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.
...o hail pellets, crops would be damaged. Whereas the author of the reading states that i...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
consequently, finally, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, therefore, whereas, while, as to, first of all, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 10.4613686534 153% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 7.30242825607 82% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 22.412803532 147% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 48.0 30.3222958057 158% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 5.01324503311 160% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1669.0 1373.03311258 122% => OK
No of words: 345.0 270.72406181 127% => OK
Chars per words: 4.83768115942 5.08290768461 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.3097767484 4.04702891845 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.45631609588 2.5805825403 95% => OK
Unique words: 189.0 145.348785872 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.547826086957 0.540411800872 101% => OK
syllable_count: 501.3 419.366225166 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 8.0 8.23620309051 97% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 2.5761589404 272% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 13.0662251656 153% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.0904794326 49.2860985944 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 83.45 110.228320801 76% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.25 21.698381199 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.75 7.06452816374 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 4.19205298013 24% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 4.45695364238 224% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0 0.272083759551 0% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0 0.0996497079465 0% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0662205650399 0% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0 0.162205337803 0% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0443174109184 0% => 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: 10.0 13.3589403974 75% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 53.8541721854 116% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 11.0289183223 79% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.5 12.2367328918 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.1 8.42419426049 96% => OK
difficult_words: 79.0 63.6247240618 124% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 10.7273730684 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 3.33333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.