It is now possible for scientists and tourists to travel to remote natural environments, such as the South Pole. Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages
Thanks to the advancement of technology and up gradation of transportation in recent years, remote areas are no longer inaccessible. Although there can be no doubt that this development can be beneficial to society to a certain extent, I hold the belief that this will do more harm than good.
The argument that visits pristine regions should be encouraged is reasonable to some extent. The first advantage of this is traveling to such engaging accommodations could be one of the recreational activities for visitors. This could be explained by the fact that with the increasing amusement demand on tourism, travelers are no longer attracted by common places, thus unclaimed lands such as the South Pole become conducive and attractive places to relax and repose after a tiring working day. The second advantage of this is wildlife areas are recognized to be favorable condition for scientists to acquire more knowledge about natural habitat. For example, considerable a quantity of rare herbs such as thyme, rosemary was explored and researched in order to gain scientific purposes.
Despite the above-mentioned benefits, I believe that this idea might be associated with a number of detrimental effects on society and environment. The first drawback relates to since visiting to isolated location might requires an extensive amount of investment in researching and ensuring the safety of travelers, the expenditure of travelling tend to be immense. Therefore, it might be recommended that organizations and authorities should spend their funding for raising environmental awareness of individuals or putting the massive deforestation under control. Indeed, according to some studies, the exploration of new regions in recent times has facilitated the wave of immigration, result in pressure on natural resources or the extinction of numerous species of animals and plants.
In conclusion, while there are many beneficial impacts regarding coming to destinations are the places that has not been investigated enough, I believe the downside that result from this trend is more vital significance.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-03-03 | kevann | 84 | view |
| 2023-08-30 | Lanlanlanlan | 78 | view |
| 2023-08-30 | Lanlanlanlan | 73 | view |
| 2023-07-17 | zhao_kangg | 89 | view |
| 2022-12-07 | maiduc | 89 | view |
- Some people say that too much attention and too many resources are given in the protection of wild animals and birds Do you agree and disagree about this option 73
- The top priority of businesses is making money and they do not need to have social responsibilities To what extent do you agree or disagree 11
- Some people think that there should be some strict controls on noise Others think that they could just make as much noise as they want Discuss both views and give your opinion 84
- The top priority of businesses is making money and they do not need to have social responsibilities To what extent do you agree or disagree 11
- Many museums and historical sites are mainly visited by tourists and not local people Why is the case What can be done to attract local people 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, regarding, second, so, therefore, thus, while, for example, in conclusion, no doubt, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 24.0651302605 83% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 41.998997996 121% => OK
Nominalization: 15.0 8.3376753507 180% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1782.0 1615.20841683 110% => OK
No of words: 324.0 315.596192385 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.5 5.12529762239 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.24264068712 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.15961962254 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 199.0 176.041082164 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.614197530864 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 574.2 506.74238477 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => 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 20.2975951904 133% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 49.7116686503 49.4020404114 101% => OK
Chars per sentence: 148.5 106.682146367 139% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.0 20.7667163134 130% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.58333333333 7.06120827912 122% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 3.9879759519 25% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.202290164162 0.244688304435 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0672337898547 0.084324248473 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0590936713799 0.0667982634062 88% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101369766924 0.151304729494 67% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0762265111427 0.056905535591 134% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 18.0 13.0946893788 137% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 27.15 50.2224549098 54% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 13.0 7.44779559118 175% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 16.2 11.3001002004 143% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.92 12.4159519038 120% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.82 8.58950901804 126% => OK
difficult_words: 120.0 78.4519038076 153% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.5 9.78957915832 128% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.1190380762 126% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => 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.