Recent incursions by deep-sea fishermen into the habitat of the Madagascan shrimp have led to a significant reduction in the species population. With the breeding season fast approaching, the number of shrimp should soon begin to increase. Nonetheless, the population should not return to the levels before the fishing boats arrived. Because this trend is expected to continue over the next several years, the Madagascan shrimp will quickly become an endangered species.
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.
At first glance it seems to be blatant that the species of the Madagascan shrimp is exhausting due to recenr recursions by deep-sea fishermen, but if we try to justify the situation, t he following argument seems to be flawed for numerous reasons. Primarily, the argument is saying that the significant reduction in the species population is the result of deep-sea fishermen incursions, rendering its main conclusion that the Madagascan shrimp will quickly become an endangered species.
Firstly, we don't have any evidence regarding if the fishermen are the only reason behind the dip in the species population. There might be other reasons also behind the cause. For example: some predator, who also breed its species nearby and feed on the Madagascan shrimp in order to survive which is one of the many reasons for the species decrement. In this case, the argument failed to provide necessary details and hence attacking the conclusion. Furthermore, if these predators are one of the reason, then it leads us to think that feeding on some species is a natural process and will not lead to the significant reduction in the species population, because as a part of the nature's cycle, these species will again proliferate themselves.
Moreover, the argument would have been more justified if it has provided us the information about the climatic conditions when the breeding season. Because, the argument is saying that if the fishing boats arrive, then the shrimps population will decrease and eventually become endangered, but we don't have any clue at which time of the season these boats arrived. May be the species breed during winters and the fishing boats might arrived in summers and that too for entertainment reasons. For example: people have holidays during summers and doing a little fishing for fun will not cause much harm to the species which results that the argument is not properly justified if these fishing boats are completely responsible for the species being endangered. This case leads us to think that there are definately other reasons behind the upcoming extinction of the species.
Overall though, the argument is lacking evidences for advent that the Madagascan
shrimp will quickly become an endangered species, and the population should not return to the levels before the fishing boats arrived. It would be unwarranted to agree with the argument when it is lacking proofs behind the cause.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-15 | Deepanshu Dewangan | 37 | view |
| 2019-09-13 | bharadwaj98 | 65 | view |
| 2019-09-13 | solankis304 | 23 | view |
| 2019-09-03 | aneela | 23 | view |
| 2019-08-27 | Lutfor Rahman Rony | 58 | view |
- Recent incursions by deep-sea fishermen into the habitat of the Madagascan shrimp have led to a significant reduction in the species population. With the breeding season fast approaching, the number of shrimp should soon begin to increase. Nonetheless, th 70
- The following was presented as part of a business plan by Apex Corporation."To answer the increased demand for artisan coffee, Apex Corporation is releasing a new line of coffee, "Gourmet Select." Apex Corporation will first introduce the coffee into majo 66
- The following is a memorandum from the business manager of a television station."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 period, most of the complaint 70
- People who make decisions based on emotion and justify those decisions with logic afterwards are poor decision makers.Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the pos 50
- An international development organization, in response to a vitamin A deficiency among people in the impoverished nation of Tagus, has engineered a new breed of millet high in vitamin A. While seeds for this new type of millet cost more, farmers will be p 66
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 13, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...e an endangered species. Firstly, we dont have any evidence regarding if the fish...
^^^^
Line 5, column 224, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'shrimps'' or 'shrimp's'?
Suggestion: shrimps'; shrimp's
...t if the fishing boats arrive, then the shrimps population will decrease and eventually...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 298, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...nd eventually become endangered, but we dont have any clue at which time of the seas...
^^^^
Line 5, column 370, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[8]
Message: The proper name in singular (May) must be used with a third-person verb: 'is'.
Suggestion: is
... of the season these boats arrived. May be the species breed during winters and th...
^^
Line 7, column 81, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...evidences for advent that the Madagascan shrimp will quickly become an endangered...
^^^
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'firstly', 'furthermore', 'hence', 'if', 'may', 'moreover', 'regarding', 'so', 'then', 'for example', 'in conclusion']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.242990654206 0.25644967241 95% => OK
Verbs: 0.165887850467 0.15541462614 107% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0630841121495 0.0836205057962 75% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0490654205607 0.0520304965353 94% => OK
Pronouns: 0.035046728972 0.0272364105082 129% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.126168224299 0.125424944231 101% => OK
Participles: 0.0420560747664 0.0416121511921 101% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.68641356043 2.79052419416 96% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0280373831776 0.026700313972 105% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.140186915888 0.113004496875 124% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0257009345794 0.0255425247493 101% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0140186915888 0.0127820249294 110% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2426.0 2731.13054187 89% => OK
No of words: 395.0 446.07635468 89% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 6.1417721519 6.12365571057 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.45809453852 4.57801047555 97% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.40253164557 0.378187486979 106% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.316455696203 0.287650121315 110% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.205063291139 0.208842608468 98% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.129113924051 0.135150697306 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68641356043 2.79052419416 96% => OK
Unique words: 185.0 207.018472906 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.46835443038 0.469332199767 100% => OK
Word variations: 50.0567279236 52.1807786196 96% => OK
How many sentences: 14.0 20.039408867 70% => OK
Sentence length: 28.2142857143 23.2022227129 122% => OK
Sentence length SD: 71.6872458983 57.7814097925 124% => OK
Chars per sentence: 173.285714286 141.986410481 122% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.2142857143 23.2022227129 122% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.0 0.724660767414 138% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 3.58251231527 140% => OK
Readability: 59.8598553345 51.9672348444 115% => OK
Elegance: 1.64485981308 1.8405768891 89% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.55458043843 0.441005458295 126% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.171729799851 0.135418324435 127% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0635745533086 0.0829849096947 77% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.674486230888 0.58762219726 115% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.149979776446 0.147661913831 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.294638061846 0.193483328276 152% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0934264248736 0.0970749176394 96% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.476090911039 0.42659136922 112% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.148970046011 0.0774707102158 192% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.401821302651 0.312017818177 129% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.103086886532 0.0698173142475 148% => OK
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.33743842365 48% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.87684729064 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.82512315271 104% => OK
Positive topic words: 4.0 6.46551724138 62% => OK
Negative topic words: 5.0 5.36822660099 93% => OK
Neutral topic words: 4.0 2.82389162562 142% => OK
Total topic words: 13.0 14.657635468 89% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.