Wild animals have no place in the 21st century, so protecting them is a waste of resources. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Some people argue that there is no importance to animals living in the wild and expenditure on saving them in the 21st century. I partly agree with the opinion, as wild animals and protecting them are not as crucial as many exaggerate.
I believe that people have no right to underestimate the appearance of wild animals. People may peacefully live with wild animals and do not need to hunt all kinds of species in the world. Moreover, wild animals can contribute to the diversity of the ecosystem, which is beneficial for people’s lives. For example, animals can help maintain ecological balance and keep the food chain stable in the wild. Thus, it seems useful to protect and give wild animals a place to coexist with people not only in this century but also in the future.
However, if wild animals disappear, it will not have any seriously dramatic consequences for our lives. Nowadays, people tend to face a variety of eco-social issues caused by overpopulation and a lack of natural resources. It is more necessary to allocate the resources of society to address the hottest issues, such as housing and food, than to focus them on protecting wild animals. Furthermore, the extinction of a wild creature might not always be a bad thing. Take the disappearance of dinosaurs as an example; it might generate a significant chance for other species, including humans, to evolve and develop. As a result, investing resources in protecting wild animals can be regarded as a waste to some extent.
In conclusion, I partly agree that wild animals and saving them are important since people should spend resources on other fields. So, the protection of wild animals should be invested reasonably.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-06-11 | Corn Cake | 61 | view |
| 2023-06-11 | Corn Cake | 73 | view |
| 2023-06-08 | Aung | 78 | view |
| 2023-01-06 | ielts_tony | 56 | view |
| 2022-10-31 | Charles Le | 56 | view |
- People naturally resist making changes in their lives What kind of problems can this cause What solution can you suggest 61
- Summarize
- Wild animals have no place in the 21st century so protecting them is a waste of resources To what extent do you agree or disagree 61
- Wild animals have no place in the 21st century so protecting them is a waste of resources To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
- In some countries many more people are choosing to live alone nowadays than in the past Do you think this is a positive or negative development 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, furthermore, however, if, may, moreover, so, thus, for example, in conclusion, such as, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 13.1623246493 61% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 7.85571142285 127% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 10.4138276553 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 37.0 41.998997996 88% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 8.3376753507 84% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1419.0 1615.20841683 88% => OK
No of words: 285.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.97894736842 5.12529762239 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81528606748 2.80592935109 100% => OK
Unique words: 156.0 176.041082164 89% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.547368421053 0.561755894193 97% => OK
syllable_count: 459.0 506.74238477 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.76152304609 42% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.2975951904 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 24.9431353282 49.4020404114 50% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 94.6 106.682146367 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.0 20.7667163134 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.33333333333 7.06120827912 104% => 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 : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.366876583882 0.244688304435 150% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.127284893631 0.084324248473 151% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.077183475829 0.0667982634062 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.236372825259 0.151304729494 156% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0327765286916 0.056905535591 58% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.5 13.0946893788 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 50.2224549098 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 11.3001002004 95% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.6 12.4159519038 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.51 8.58950901804 99% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 78.4519038076 91% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 9.78957915832 87% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.1190380762 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.