The author of this above letter clearly believes that we should invest our resources in manufacturing and sending unmanned probes and satellites into space instead of investing in manned satellites. He attributes this to the risks and cost involved in sending humans to outer space. He puts forth a valid point stating that the loss of valuable human resource is one that is not encouraged. However, in order to support his stand he makes certain invalid assumptions such as the successful unmanned projects and the reduction in cost for the same. This remains unwarranted as he fails to discuss the failure, if any and the significant advantages that unmanned space flights have over manned ones. To be able to state that more useful information is indeed obtained from machines, he has to provide us with more facts and examples. Thus he lacks support in his argument for the above mentioned reasons.
Firstly, although his statement that manned satellites are riskier as it concerns human life is compelling evidence for replacement by unmanned probes, it however precludes the exact danger that space travels poses for astronauts. More facts about how exactly astronauts face danger in space needs to be given, only with which a proper conclusion can be reached. Perhaps, if more research had been done by the author into how exactly lives are lost in space and the number of lives lost, then a proper consensus can be reached. The author is too vague about the comparisons between manned and unmanned travel.
Secondly, his insistence on the fact that machines will be able to get more useful information is unwarranted. There is only so much that a machine can be programmed to do without regular human intervention. Bots can perform meticulous experimental calculations much more efficiently than a human. But to be able to adapt to the ever-changing circumstances in outer space, the knowledge and spontaneity of a human is of much importance. If he had included sufficient proof regarding the superiority of information collected by machines compared to that of a human, he would have presented a better argument.
Thirdly, it is a wide known fact that space travel costs a lot to the nation conducting it. Whether there is a significant difference in the cost of sending just probes or probes with men in them, is not given exclusively. It is possible that the cost of sending humans and supplies in the satellites is almost equal to not sending them or is an insignificant addition to that of unmanned travel. It is also quite possible that the wealth of data that a human could extract from his travel much exceeds the cost that the trip would incur by sending humans.
One cannot however forget the matter that human life and the contribution that one makes in his lifetime is invaluable. If the author were to make a gripping argument, laying down figures concerning loss of human life in space travel then the solution could have been accepted. But the paucity of such figures, places doubt on the integrity of the solution. The main aim of travelling to space is to come across planets that have chances of supporting human life. Our planet as we know it is in a constant state of deterioration and to expedite this process of discovery, it is highly valuable if humans were to accompany bots on these missions.
Though the author desires for a change in allocating revenue, he fails to make a riveting case by not giving sufficient evidence to support his stand. In conclusion, the author failed in creating a solid case which demonstrates that unmanned flights are cost-effective, risk less and more capable of extracting information than manned flights.
- There is no need for newspapers in modern world. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 79
- Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be 50
- A nation should require all of its students to study the same national curriculum until they enter college. 66
- "Manned space flight is costly and dangerous. Moreover, the recent success of a series of unmanned space probes and satellites has demonstrated that a great deal of useful information can be gathered without the costs and risks associated with sending men 55
- "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 wit 49
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK. better:
the author assumes that in proportion to the growth of technology that makes unmanned space flight possible, there will not be a corresponding rise in technology & hence, safety levels, of manned space flight.
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- OK
argument 4 -- not OK
----------------
flaws:
No. of Words: 619 350 //the introduction is too long
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 27 15
No. of Words: 619 350
No. of Characters: 3003 1500
No. of Different Words: 280 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.988 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.851 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.73 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 212 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 161 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 110 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 67 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.926 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.475 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.593 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.278 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.518 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.167 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 833, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
...rovide us with more facts and examples. Thus he lacks support in his argument for th...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, regarding, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly, thus, as to, in conclusion, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 33.0 19.6327345309 168% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 11.0 12.9520958084 85% => OK
Conjunction : 17.0 11.1786427146 152% => OK
Relative clauses : 22.0 13.6137724551 162% => OK
Pronoun: 56.0 28.8173652695 194% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 88.0 55.5748502994 158% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3071.0 2260.96107784 136% => OK
No of words: 619.0 441.139720559 140% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.96122778675 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.98795655647 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80738167966 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 291.0 204.123752495 143% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.470113085622 0.468620217663 100% => OK
syllable_count: 979.2 705.55239521 139% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 13.0 4.96107784431 262% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 8.76447105788 57% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.70958083832 221% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 27.0 19.7664670659 137% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.8082269335 57.8364921388 71% => OK
Chars per sentence: 113.740740741 119.503703932 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.9259259259 23.324526521 98% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.81481481481 5.70786347227 84% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 8.20758483034 183% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => 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: 0.27869048325 0.218282227539 128% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0780433423596 0.0743258471296 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0614818756262 0.0701772020484 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.143861061237 0.128457276422 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0662079576153 0.0628817314937 105% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 14.3799401198 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.78 12.5979740519 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.5 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 148.0 98.500998004 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
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.