The following appeared in a newsletter offering advice to investors.
Three years ago, because of flooding at the Western Palean Wildlife Preserve, 100 lions and 100 western gazelles were moved to the East Palean Preserve, an area that is home to most of the same species that are found in the western preserve, though in larger numbers, and to the eastern gazelle, a close relative of the western gazelle. The only difference in climate is that the eastern preserve typically has slightly less rainfall. Unfortunately, after three years in the eastern preserve, the imported western gazelle population has been virtually eliminated. Since the slight reduction in rainfall cannot be the cause of the virtual elimination of western gazelle, their disappearance must have been caused by the larger number of predators in the eastern preserve.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The newsletter argues that the main reason for termination of western gazelle is due to larger number of predators in eastern habitat. However, the newsletter has overlooked several circumstances and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.
Firstly, the newsletter focuses on the effect of the predators. However, there might be other factors responsible for the disappearance of the gazelle. There might be a possibility that the eastern gazelle might have evolved better than the western gazelle, consequencing a natural selection on these species. Moreover, the habitat of eastern preserve might be untoward to preys leading a substantial decline on these species. Furthermore, there might be a possibility that the western lion has effected the eastern habitat, resulting a current situation.
Secondly, the newsletter does not consider other possibilities of this disappearance. Since it only states that the population of western gazelle eliminated on eastern preserve, there is a need to other statistics in other region. The western gazelle might have just moved to other preserve and not being eliminated by the predators in the eastern region. Moreover, there might be a possibility that the observers simply could not distinguish the western gazelle to eastern gazelle.
Thirdly, the newsletter condones the effect of the rainfall since it does not have significant changes compared to western region. However, without actual references with these two region, we can not verify this effect is slight. Moreover, just because the previous observation was similar between the regions does not mean the result of the rainfall will be the same three years afterward.
In conclusion, the newsletter's assertion that the main reason for the elimination of the western gazelle is due to larger number of predators in eastern preserve relies on weak substantiation. Since there is no direct evidence on this assumption, the newsletter's argument is unpersuasive.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-07-04 | aman_kumarrr | 63 | view |
| 2023-02-27 | tedyang777 | 55 | view |
| 2023-02-20 | vishals | 55 | view |
| 2022-07-05 | iGeni | 70 | view |
| 2021-08-13 | victoraman2021 | 68 | view |
- Leaders are created by the demands that are placed on them 50
- We learn our most valuable lessons in life from struggling with our limitations rather than from enjoying our successes 50
- Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear 50
- Over the past year our late night news program has devoted increased time to national news and less time to weather and local news During this time period most of the complaints received from viewers were concerned with our station s coverage of weather a 55
- A nation should require all its students to study same curiculum until they enter college 50
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 1 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 2 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 301 350
No. of Characters: 1628 1500
No. of Different Words: 133 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.165 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.409 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.945 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 136 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 112 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 63 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 45 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.812 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 5.445 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.688 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.392 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.392 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.135 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 20, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'newsletters'' or 'newsletter's'?
Suggestion: newsletters'; newsletter's
...ee years afterward. In conclusion, the newsletters assertion that the main reason for the ...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 251, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'newsletters'' or 'newsletter's'?
Suggestion: newsletters'; newsletter's
...direct evidence on this assumption, the newsletters argument is unpersuasive.
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, look, moreover, second, secondly, so, therefore, third, thirdly, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 2.0 11.1786427146 18% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 28.8173652695 56% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 55.5748502994 65% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 16.3942115768 79% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1666.0 2260.96107784 74% => OK
No of words: 301.0 441.139720559 68% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.53488372093 5.12650576532 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.16525528304 4.56307096286 91% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04082369714 2.78398813304 109% => OK
Unique words: 138.0 204.123752495 68% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.458471760797 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 517.5 705.55239521 73% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 19.7664670659 81% => 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: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 31.6740602662 57.8364921388 55% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 104.125 119.503703932 87% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.8125 23.324526521 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.5 5.70786347227 131% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.156460614471 0.218282227539 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.060998274616 0.0743258471296 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0415957369224 0.0701772020484 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0990056373445 0.128457276422 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0241267408631 0.0628817314937 38% => 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: 14.0 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 48.3550499002 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.79 12.5979740519 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.73 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 98.500998004 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6
---------------------
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.