The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine.
"In 1975 a wildlife census found that there were seven species of amphibians in Xanadu National Park, with abundant numbers of each species. However, in 2002 only four species of amphibians were observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. There has been a substantial decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide, and global pollution of water and air is clearly implicated. The decline of amphibians in Xanadu National Park, however, almost certainly has a different cause: in 1975, trout-which are known to eat amphibian eggs-were introduced into the park."
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 editorial attribute the dropping number of extant amphibians and shrinking numbers in existing species of amphibians to the newly introduced trout, which feed on their eggs. However, more evidence are required on at least three questions regarding amphibians to assert such claim is sound.
Firsly and most importantly, will there be any other threaten to the survive of amphibians other than trout? Besides the air and water pollution mentioned in the statement, the climate change can also be a possible cause, as it caused the extinctions of many other species already. The author managed to claima causation, which still has other feasible explanations. If the evidence shows that the climate change also exacervate the living condition of amphibians, then it would weak the conclusion by the editorial,
Additionally, wether the attribution is tenable still require more evidence about the trout. If the trout only eat eggs of one specific amphibian instead all kinds of them, then the assertion would be fallacious since all species of amphibians are affected. Even though that trouts eat eggs from all amphibians, there are still doubts casted on how large is the trouts' appetite. Unless it is proved that they are gluttons and eat so many eggs that would influence of amphibians, the results are unsound as diminutive amout loss on their eggs will not have such strong impact on their proliferation.
In the end, there are still wanting evidence on the trout, because the editorial's statement assumed that they propagated well so that their existance is influential to the survival of amphibians. The logic behind is that there could also have predators for touts so that it extincted soon after its introduction, and such evidence would mightly discredit the validity of the statement,
In summary, there are many altervatives, that could explain the decreasing trend of amphibians, are also reasonable. Therefore, it would be too facile to make such attribution and a more salient approach is to glean further evidence on above three aspects.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-30 | tomlee0205 | 54 | view |
| 2023-04-16 | AtharvaKale | 55 | view |
| 2023-01-02 | mahyarr | 58 | view |
| 2023-01-02 | mahyarr | 83 | view |
| 2022-10-20 | TE | 54 | view |
- The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine In 1975 a wildlife census found that there were seven species of amphibians in Xanadu National Park with abundant numbers of each species However in 2002 only four species of amphibians 54
- Over the past year our late night news program has devoted increasingly more time to covering national news and less time to covering weather and local news During the same time period most of the complaints we received from viewers were concerned with th 78
- Fifteen years ago Omega University implemented a new procedure that encouraged students to evaluate the teaching effectiveness of all their professors Since that time Omega professors have begun to assign higher grades in their classes and overall student 66
- The following appeared in a memorandum from the mayor of Wistfold A recent study revealed that the number of children requiring medical attention for illnesses in our town is 40 percent higher than in the neighboring town of Champsfield Last year the Cham 60
- Teachers salaries should be based on the academic performance of their students Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take In developing and 67
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 66, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ly, will there be any other threaten to the survive of amphibians other than trout? Besides...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 363, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'trouts'' or 'trout's'?
Suggestion: trouts'; trout's
...still doubts casted on how large is the trouts appetite. Unless it is proved that they...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 19, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...eir proliferation. In the end, there are still wanting evidence on the trout, because the edit...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 72, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'editorials'' or 'editorial's'?
Suggestion: editorials'; editorial's
...ting evidence on the trout, because the editorials statement assumed that they propagated ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, however, if, regarding, so, still, then, therefore, well, at least, in summary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 55.5748502994 72% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1738.0 2260.96107784 77% => OK
No of words: 331.0 441.139720559 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25075528701 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26537283232 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79048776257 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 204.123752495 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.540785498489 0.468620217663 115% => OK
syllable_count: 535.5 705.55239521 76% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => 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: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.7676537968 57.8364921388 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.833333333 119.503703932 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.5833333333 23.324526521 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.16666666667 5.70786347227 143% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.101077930815 0.218282227539 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0431027378733 0.0743258471296 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0659556665708 0.0701772020484 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0607834786677 0.128457276422 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0657554884787 0.0628817314937 105% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.1 14.3799401198 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.3550499002 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.13 8.32208582834 110% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 98.500998004 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 66, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ly, will there be any other threaten to the survive of amphibians other than trout? Besides...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 363, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[2]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'trouts'' or 'trout's'?
Suggestion: trouts'; trout's
...still doubts casted on how large is the trouts appetite. Unless it is proved that they...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 19, Rule ID: PROGRESSIVE_VERBS[1]
Message: This verb is normally not used in the progressive form. Try a simple form instead.
...eir proliferation. In the end, there are still wanting evidence on the trout, because the edit...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 72, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'editorials'' or 'editorial's'?
Suggestion: editorials'; editorial's
...ting evidence on the trout, because the editorials statement assumed that they propagated ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, however, if, regarding, so, still, then, therefore, well, at least, in summary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 19.6327345309 97% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.9520958084 77% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 22.0 28.8173652695 76% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 55.5748502994 72% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1738.0 2260.96107784 77% => OK
No of words: 331.0 441.139720559 75% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.25075528701 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26537283232 4.56307096286 93% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.79048776257 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 179.0 204.123752495 88% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.540785498489 0.468620217663 115% => OK
syllable_count: 535.5 705.55239521 76% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 19.7664670659 61% => 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: 27.0 22.8473053892 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.7676537968 57.8364921388 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 144.833333333 119.503703932 121% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.5833333333 23.324526521 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.16666666667 5.70786347227 143% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 6.88822355289 87% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.101077930815 0.218282227539 46% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0431027378733 0.0743258471296 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0659556665708 0.0701772020484 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0607834786677 0.128457276422 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0657554884787 0.0628817314937 105% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.1 14.3799401198 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 44.07 48.3550499002 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 12.5979740519 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.13 8.32208582834 110% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 98.500998004 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 11.1389221557 115% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.