The following appeared as part of a petition sent to residents of Youngtown by an environmental protection group:
“The Smith Corporation should not be permitted to develop the land that is now part of the Youngtown Wildlife Preserve. This sanctuary is essential to the survival of the 300 bird species that live in our area. Although only a small percentage of the land will be sold to Smith, the proposed development will have disastrous consequences for our area. The company plans to build a small hotel on the land. Although they have promised to ensure the preservation of the sanctuary, there is no way that their plans will do anything but harm the sanctuary. There are no circumstances under which this sale will benefit our community, which relies on tourists who visit primarily to see our magnificent bird population.”
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
The prompt urges to disavow the permission to develop the land under the preservation of Youngtown Wildlife by The Smith Corporation. The prime reasons as well as some logical flaws; underneth the vague assumptions are stated only to be followed by sufficient critical reasoning.
1. The development of the land, small portion udner the Youngtown Wildlife, will definitely cause consequential harm to the birds.
2. Building a hotel on the small portion opf the land will definitely make the birds vulnerable to free surfing.
3. The residents of Youngtown will no longer have access to the revenues they get from tourists visiting the sanctuary.
To begin with - in spite of being promised by The Smith Corporation, the Youngtown Wilflide residents are not sure regarding the harm that might cause the birds of that area. To utter surprise, the environmental protection group migh not be acknowledged about the working policy of The Smith Corporation. What if the Smith Corporation maintains a certain code of buidling the land; provided by the authority of the area or by the government. The point can be unanimously accepted that - the maintainance of certain regulations provided by the government will do no harm to the wildlife as well to the birds. So it can be safely said that - if the Smith Corporation maintains the development work with proper regulations then the accuse by the environment protection group will be invalid.
Coming to the next - the pressumption that building a hotel might not help the birds to freely move as they did before. But it also prevaricates the the possibility that - what if the hotel is made with proper warning and acknowledgement, being that to say - attacking the wildlife or harming any animal or birds are thought to be criminal activites. If the Smith Corporation maintains such kind of strictness in its working princple in order to fulfilling its vows, then it stands good chance that no birds or animals will suffer from any casualities.
Also, the group are quite skeptic of their revenues; they had access to the visiting tourists before the development of the land. But it might still be possible even after the hotel is built. That is to say - for instance; the Smith Corporation might lend the sanctuary from the Youngtown Wildlife group and make it open to the visiting guests of the hotel, of course with proper conducts, rules and certain amount of fees. From there - if a good amount of those fees are supported to the protection group or residents of that area, then it will also provide them with certain amount of money. So, that - the group will devoid of any certain economic facilities that they were getting previously, mag stand no chance if the Smith Corporation works that way.
Overall, looking at all the aforementioned views and prospects, it can easily be said that the assumptions are still in need of proper clarification; also with necessary data and evidences to support those assumptions pointed out earlier. Without these credentials it might not be a good idea to come to any conclusion.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-07 | Saket Choudhary | 78 | view |
| 2023-06-29 | Technoblade | 66 | view |
| 2022-10-23 | mausam | 30 | view |
| 2022-10-23 | mausam | 50 | view |
| 2021-11-18 | Rafid_Murshed | 78 | view |
- Critical judgment of work in any given field has little value unless it comes from someone who is an expert in that field Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the 83
- The following appeared in a memorandum from the manager of WWAC radio station To reverse a decline in listener numbers our owners have decided that WWAC must change from its current rock music format The decline has occurred despite population growth in o 73
- There is now evidence that the relaxed pace of life in small towns promotes better health and greater longevity than does the hectic pace of life in big cities Businesses in the small town of Leeville report fewer days of sick leave taken by individual wo 74
- The following memorandum is from the business manager of Happy Pancake House restaurants Recently butter has been replaced by margarine in Happy Pancake House restaurants throughout the southwestern United States This change however has had little impact 69
- Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state even if these areas could be developed for economic gain Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position 66
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 3 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 16 2
No. of Sentences: 23 15
No. of Words: 512 350
No. of Characters: 2492 1500
No. of Different Words: 224 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.757 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.867 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.793 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 154 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 126 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 98 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 69 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.261 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.868 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.565 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.286 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.523 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.059 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 4, 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.
...y sufficient critical reasoning. 1. The development of the land, small portion ...
^^^
Line 7, column 726, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...pment work with proper regulations then the accuse by the environment protection group wil...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 146, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...ey did before. But it also prevaricates the the possibility that - what if the hotel is...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 146, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...ey did before. But it also prevaricates the the possibility that - what if the hotel is...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, look, regarding, so, still, then, well, for instance, kind of, of course, as well as, in spite of, to begin with, that is to say
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 28.8173652695 115% => OK
Preposition: 72.0 55.5748502994 130% => OK
Nominalization: 25.0 16.3942115768 152% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2567.0 2260.96107784 114% => OK
No of words: 512.0 441.139720559 116% => OK
Chars per words: 5.013671875 5.12650576532 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75682846001 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88107927934 2.78398813304 103% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 204.123752495 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.455078125 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 770.4 705.55239521 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.9125516253 57.8364921388 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 128.35 119.503703932 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.6 23.324526521 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.15 5.70786347227 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 8.0 5.15768463074 155% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.238135532356 0.218282227539 109% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0805391298329 0.0743258471296 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0570429859899 0.0701772020484 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.109828134368 0.128457276422 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0687748114672 0.0628817314937 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.3550499002 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.24 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 109.0 98.500998004 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.