Summarize the points made in the lecture. Being sure to explain how they cast doubt on specific points made in the reading passage. Fires in Yellowstone park
The reading and lecture are both about ''let it burn'' policy, which in the summer of 1988 made create conditions for<span class="hiddenSpellError" pre="annihilated "></span> Yellowstone park. The author of the reading believes that the policy destroyed Yellowstone. The lecture challenges the statement made by the author. The professor is of the opinion that Yellowstone fires have positively affected at that time.
First of all, the author suggests that Yellowstone fires ruined vegetation and caused the most area of Yellowstone has been scorched. This argument is challenged by the lecture. She says that scorched plants colonized by new plants, so this event caused became more diverse. Furthermore, she mentions that the fires created states to plants which could not grow before it, like seeds that can grow in high temperature, therefore scorched lands have provided suitable situations to them.
Secondly, the writer contends that the fires impacted on park wildlife. The article notes smaller animals could not escape, also animals' habitats and food chains have been annihilated, consequently, there is no things for <span class="hiddenSpellError" pre="annihilated "></span>survived animals. The lecture, however, rebuts this by asserting that the fires made the new situation for animals like rabbits. She elaborates on this by mentioning that small plants that altered trees produced ideal habitats for some animals, thus this fact created good conditions for predators and caused food chains were stronger than before.
Finally, it is stated in the article that the fires reduced tourist attraction, so caused local economy has damaged. The lecture, on the other hand, posits that the fires can not the main problem, actually in that time various factors caused the fire to be so enormous, also she utters that tourists came back next year.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-23 | NIMA SAEEDI | 80 | view |
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?Some modern agriculture methods damage environment, people think providing more food for the growing world population is more important that protecting the environment. 82
- using regular glass has bird's injury. what is your opinion? 81
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Television has destroyed communication among friends and family. Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion. 66
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: grades encourage students to learn. Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion. 70
- In general, people are living longer now.Discuss the cause of this phenomenon. Use specific reasons and details to develop your essay. 76
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 284, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... that the policy destroyed Yellowstone. The lecture challenges the statement made b...
^^^
Line 1, column 341, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
...enges the statement made by the author. The professor is of the opinion that Yellow...
^^^
Line 5, column 200, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY[4]
Message: Did you mean 'there are no things'?
Suggestion: there are no things
...ns have been annihilated, consequently, there is no things for ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, consequently, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, thus, first of all, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 10.4613686534 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 17.0 12.0772626932 141% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 22.412803532 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 26.0 30.3222958057 86% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1616.0 1373.03311258 118% => OK
No of words: 285.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.6701754386 5.08290768461 112% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.85735817176 2.5805825403 149% => OK
Unique words: 166.0 145.348785872 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.582456140351 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 486.0 419.366225166 116% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.55342163355 109% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 3.25607064018 154% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.25165562914 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 2.5761589404 78% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 13.0662251656 107% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 21.2450331126 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.2263049655 49.2860985944 134% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.428571429 110.228320801 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3571428571 21.698381199 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.5 7.06452816374 149% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 4.19205298013 72% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 4.45695364238 90% => OK
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: 0.141187611225 0.272083759551 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0589795402691 0.0996497079465 59% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0417954356148 0.0662205650399 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0889848019197 0.162205337803 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0338644701097 0.0443174109184 76% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 13.3589403974 116% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 53.8541721854 79% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.0289183223 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.61 12.2367328918 128% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.45 8.42419426049 112% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 63.6247240618 137% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.498013245 95% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 11.2008830022 143% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.