In the future, it seems more difficult to live on the Earth. Some people think more money should be spent on researching other planet to live, such as Mars. To what extend do you agree or disagree with this statement?
These days, many people accept the fact that our planet is not a place for us to live eternally. Therefore, solutions for this issue have aroused considerable public debate. Although the idea of discovering the second Earth seems plausible, its merits do not justify the downsides.
There is no denying that our living habitat becomes more unsustainable. First, since the urban expansion and industrialization have been ubiquitous, huge plots of wild forests around the world have been cleared up for human purposes such as planting crops, raising livestock or mining, severely compromising the natural environment. Consequently, a sheer volume of carbon and chemical toxic are released into the air, which leads to the global warming and poses serious hazard to the human and other species. Second, overexploitation is also to blame for the depletion of natural resources, such as fossil fuels. That means, in the future, these essential elements will be no longer able to maintain production and transportation.
However, I would argue that the programs seeking new planet to survive is meaningless due to some compelling reasons below. First, a vast amount of funding is required to finance space projects with no guarantee. In fact, beside the exorbitant cost for conducting research, the salaries and wages paid for astronomers and universe science are proved to be the highest among industries, which would cause financial burdens to the national budget deficits. Second, plenty of scientific evidence suggest that the chance of discovering the Earth-like planet is extremely slender, and even if humans succeeded, bringing humans there would be out of question. In fact, the nearest planet takes us millions of years to reach, by which time, human would no longer survive. Therefore, solving the current environmental problems appears more realistic, for example, climate change and recycle energy alike, since they are the factors affecting directly all creatures on our green shelter.
In conclusion, I firmly believe that finding extraterrestrial life is not a promising solution for the issues we are facing, costing a hefty amount of money but will offer little returns. To make our planet friendlier to live in, money and efforts should be concentrated on tackling current problems.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-12-13 | hana99 | 73 | view |
| 2019-11-21 | vantran2297 | 89 | view |
| 2019-10-15 | Vu Thi Hoang Ngan | 84 | view |
| 2018-11-26 | dungha23 | 73 | view |
| 2018-02-21 | sho2501 | 89 | view |
- Many employees may work at home with modern technology Some people claim that it benefits only worker but not employers Do you agree or disagree 81
- Some people believe that the range of technology available to individuals today is increasing the gap between rich people and poor people. To what extent do you agree or disagree? 84
- Sending criminals to prison is not the best method of dealing with them. Education and job training are better ways to help them. Do you agree or disagree? 84
- Pollution of rivers, lakes and seas is a major concern for people who seek to protect the environment. What are the possible causes of water pollution, and what effects does this have on animal life and human society? 84
- It is often thought that the increase in juvenile crime can be attributed to violence in the media. What do you think is the reason for a growth in the rate of juvenile crime? What solutions can you offer to deal with this situation? 84
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, however, if, second, so, therefore, for example, in conclusion, in fact, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 7.30460921844 123% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 41.998997996 98% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1954.0 1615.20841683 121% => OK
No of words: 360.0 315.596192385 114% => OK
Chars per words: 5.42777777778 5.12529762239 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.35587717469 4.20363070211 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90586757407 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 233.0 176.041082164 132% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.647222222222 0.561755894193 115% => OK
syllable_count: 598.5 506.74238477 118% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 5.43587174349 110% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.76152304609 189% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 16.0721442886 100% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 20.2975951904 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 58.6831734294 49.4020404114 119% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.125 106.682146367 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5 20.7667163134 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 7.06120827912 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.67935871743 104% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.181469080414 0.244688304435 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0558096629402 0.084324248473 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0444380545197 0.0667982634062 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.106957916268 0.151304729494 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0180461999189 0.056905535591 32% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.4 13.0946893788 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 40.69 50.2224549098 81% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.1 11.3001002004 116% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.51 12.4159519038 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.47 8.58950901804 122% => OK
difficult_words: 131.0 78.4519038076 167% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.1190380762 107% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 10.7795591182 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.