Space travel is fantastic these days, but there are many issues, such as environmental problems that we should be focusing on. What are your views on the allocation of public funding?
Recently, the phenomenon of "space travel is fantastic these days, but there are many issues, such as environmental problems that we should be focusing on" and its corresponding impact has sparked a long-running dispute. Whereas many people are debating the proposition that focusing on environmental problems might be remarkably fruitful, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a remarkable number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that space travel can be a plus, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From the technology standpoint, the allocation of public funding to space travel can provide the society with profound effects, which might stem from the fact that reaching sophisticated knowledge and exploring the universe are inextricably bound up. Regarding my personal experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment that discovered the importance of astronomy. Thus, invaluable ramifications of both inventing new rockets and travelling to distant planets distinctly can be observed.
Within the realm of climate science, without the slightest doubt, the lack of the allocation of public funding to environmental problems might exacerbate the already catastrophic consequences of climate change. Moreover, fundamental aspects of global warming can relate to the reality that the demerits of the lack of budgets can pertain to the role of governments. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by a prestigious university has asserted that if the downsides of the preservation of wildlife were correlated positively with public funding, the local authorities would ultimately address sea level issues. Hence, it is reasonable to infer the preconceived notion of new allocation methods.
To conclude, despite several compelling arguments on both sides, I opt to vigorously support the idea that the merits of the allocation of public funding to space travel far outweigh its downsides.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-04-15 | vahidmetall | 85 | view |
| 2020-12-02 | Basil3241 | 75 | view |
| 2020-08-21 | sattar_iust | 88 | view |
| 2020-06-30 | Gohar Khan | 72 | view |
| 2020-05-19 | Behnaz fallah | 85 | view |
- In a number of countries some people think it is necessary to spend large sums of money on constructing new railway lines for very fast trains between cities Others believe the money should be spent on improving existing public transport Discuss both thes 89
- Some people claim that not enough of the waste from homes is recycled They say that the only way to increase recycling is for governments to make it a legal requirement To what extent do you think laws are needed to make people recycle more of their waste 84
- Wealthy nations are required to share their wealth with poorer countries What is your opinion 77
- Government should allocate resources prior to the technology research do you agree or disagree Give your own experience and examples 88
- Governments should not put too much attention on arts such as theaters Governments should allocate more funds to areas of concern Do you agree with this opinion or not Use your own experience to support your idea 83
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 208, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...nd its corresponding impact has sparked a long-running dispute. Whereas many people are debati...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, if, moreover, regarding, so, thus, whereas, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 6.10837438424 180% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 5.94088669951 185% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 20.9802955665 100% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 31.9359605911 135% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.75862068966 174% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1708.0 1207.87684729 141% => OK
No of words: 299.0 242.827586207 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.71237458194 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 3.92707691288 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.22089727556 2.71678728327 119% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 139.433497537 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.612040133779 0.580463131201 105% => OK
syllable_count: 540.0 379.143842365 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 4.0 1.56157635468 256% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.931034482759 322% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 20.5024630542 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 58.8747093832 50.4703680194 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 155.272727273 104.977214359 148% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1818181818 20.9669160288 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.72727272727 7.25397266985 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 6.9802955665 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 2.75862068966 109% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.341971289588 0.242375264174 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103077154299 0.0925447433944 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.089540808131 0.071462118173 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.178636195602 0.151781067708 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.108194360317 0.0609392437508 178% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.1 12.6369458128 151% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.15 53.1260098522 51% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 10.9458128079 148% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.13 11.5310837438 140% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.0 8.32886699507 132% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 55.0591133005 207% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.3980295567 123% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.5123152709 124% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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 1, column 208, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...nd its corresponding impact has sparked a long-running dispute. Whereas many people are debati...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, hence, if, moreover, regarding, so, thus, whereas, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.5418719212 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 6.10837438424 180% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 8.36945812808 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 5.94088669951 185% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 20.9802955665 100% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 31.9359605911 135% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 5.75862068966 174% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1708.0 1207.87684729 141% => OK
No of words: 299.0 242.827586207 123% => OK
Chars per words: 5.71237458194 5.00649968141 114% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.1583189471 3.92707691288 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.22089727556 2.71678728327 119% => OK
Unique words: 183.0 139.433497537 131% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.612040133779 0.580463131201 105% => OK
syllable_count: 540.0 379.143842365 142% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 4.0 1.56157635468 256% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 1.71428571429 117% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 0.931034482759 322% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.65517241379 164% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6551724138 87% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 20.5024630542 132% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 58.8747093832 50.4703680194 117% => OK
Chars per sentence: 155.272727273 104.977214359 148% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1818181818 20.9669160288 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.72727272727 7.25397266985 79% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.33497536946 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 6.9802955665 72% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 2.75862068966 109% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 2.91625615764 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.341971289588 0.242375264174 141% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.103077154299 0.0925447433944 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.089540808131 0.071462118173 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.178636195602 0.151781067708 118% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.108194360317 0.0609392437508 178% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 19.1 12.6369458128 151% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.15 53.1260098522 51% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 6.54236453202 199% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 10.9458128079 148% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 16.13 11.5310837438 140% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 11.0 8.32886699507 132% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 55.0591133005 207% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.94827586207 151% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.3980295567 123% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.5123152709 124% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.