Some people support development of agriculture like, factory farming and scientific creation of fruits and vegetables. While other oppose. Discuss both views and give your opinion.
<span style="font-size: 19.36px;">It </span>is argued<span style="font-size: 19.36px;"> that some development in agriculture </span>should be<span style="font-size: 19.36px;"> more supported, such as factory farming or scientific creation of unknown fruits and vegetables. Others, </span>on the other hand<span style="font-size: 19.36px;">, are strongly opposed to this aspect and support other types of progress. this essay will discuss both points of view and give reasons behind my opinion on the subject.
For decades factory farming </span>has been used<span style="font-size: 19.36px;"> both in agriculture and breeding with great success: the market's demands have always been exceeded, with the sale of thousands of tons of different fruits, veggies and every type of animal derivatives such as milk, cheese, eggs and meat. Furthermore, it is a faster way of growing and harvesting products and </span>is indeed<span style="font-size: 19.36px;"> cheaper than any other kind of agriculture. But factory farming is taking a toll on the planet and it is revealing </span>to be<span style="font-size: 19.36px;"> unsustainable for the vegetation and, in the long run, for us: deforestation, </span>the extinction of<span style="font-size: 19.36px;"> many species and climate changes are not the price to pay, but a red alert. Different from this aspect is the scientific creation of new vegetables, including new fruits: humans have bred new and appealing types of fruits and veggies since the 1600s by cross-pollinating crops. For example, </span>pomelos<span style="font-size: 19.36px;"> and tangerines, or the beloved peanuts that we all eat are all crossbred species of fruits and nuts. The scientific creation of this new eatable species could be used to have a smaller impact on the planet.
In opposition to those views are those who do not support factory farming, claiming it </span>to be<span style="font-size: 19.36px;"> unsustainable and dangerous for both the planet and us humans. They, instead, say that it would be so much better to invest in more sustainable farming methods, such as crops of local and seasonal fruits and veggies. The battle to intensive farming methods aims to stop </span>the exploitation of<span style="font-size: 19.36px;"> lands and animals </span><span style="font-size: 19.36px;">to</span><span style="font-size: 19.36px;"> </span>preserve<span style="font-size: 19.36px;"> what is left of the earth.
To sum up, I believe that we should all have an attack of conscience and really ask ourselves: is it really necessary to exploit our world and our animals this way, or can we </span>make a difference<span style="font-size: 19.36px;"> by choosing so support acceptable and sustainable farming methods? I choose to invest in our planet and fight to abolish factory farming methods. </span>
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 455, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: This
...ct and support other types of progress. this essay will discuss both points of view ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, if, really, so, for example, kind of, such as, to sum up, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 19.0 13.1623246493 144% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 29.0 10.4138276553 278% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 29.0 24.0651302605 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 50.0 41.998997996 119% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2579.0 1615.20841683 160% => OK
No of words: 410.0 315.596192385 130% => OK
Chars per words: 6.29024390244 5.12529762239 123% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49982852243 4.20363070211 107% => OK
Word Length SD: 4.78538139278 2.80592935109 171% => OK
Unique words: 218.0 176.041082164 124% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.531707317073 0.561755894193 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 698.4 506.74238477 138% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.10420841683 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 4.0 0.809619238477 494% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 29.0 20.2975951904 143% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 92.2292230903 49.4020404114 187% => OK
Chars per sentence: 184.214285714 106.682146367 173% => OK
Words per sentence: 29.2857142857 20.7667163134 141% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.64285714286 7.06120827912 94% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.9879759519 75% => OK
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: 0.100763391298 0.244688304435 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0641647792641 0.084324248473 76% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0430415826115 0.0667982634062 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.083140366488 0.151304729494 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0447616482357 0.056905535591 79% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 22.8 13.0946893788 174% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 33.58 50.2224549098 67% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.8 11.3001002004 140% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 19.79 12.4159519038 159% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.08 8.58950901804 106% => OK
difficult_words: 104.0 78.4519038076 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 9.78957915832 153% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.6 10.1190380762 134% => OK
text_standard: 23.0 10.7795591182 213% => The average readability is very high. Good job!
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.