Impact to wildlife specially birds with expansion of human population
The reading and the lecture are both about the harm to wildlife specially birds with expansion of human population. More specifically, in regard to passages, the writer puts forth the idea that expansion of human population has destroyed the bird’s population and supports his position by providing three arguments. However, the speaker is quick to point out that there are some serious flaws with arguments made by the author. He believes that there is no significant impact due to human activities, and addresses, in detail, the trouble with each point in the reading text.
Firstly, the author contends that with expansion of human population and settlements, more space is used for building homes, malls and offices. As a result, bird’s natural habitats such us wetland and forests are decreasing. Nevertheless, the speaker contradicts this point by mentioning that with urban development, there is better habitat for other type of birds such as seagull and pigeons. Additionally, he says that number of hawks and falcons in cities have also increased as these birds prey on pigeons whose population is in abundance in cities.
Secondly, the author claims that with increase in human population, agricultural lands as increasing as more food is required for growing number of people. Next, he explains that it further leads to destruction of bird’s habitat which are wild areas and bird’s population decreases. Yet, the speaker challenges this claim by revealing that in US, every year less and less land is used for agriculture. He further elaborates by bringing up that new and more productive variety of crop is grown which produces more food and there is no more need to convert wilds into agricultural lands.
Finally, the author wraps his argument by positing that with increase of agricultural lands, use of pesticides will increase. Moreover, in the article, it is stated that if birds will consume these pesticide food or will drink water having pesticides, it will kill them or will make them non-reproductive. Not surprisingly, in contrast to author’s point, the lecturer notes that scientists have come with better pesticides which are less toxic. Furthermore, he puts forward that no trend has been changed towards growing pest resistant crop which will use less pesticides and will not harm birds.
To sum up, the author and the lecturer have conflicting views regarding impact on bird’s population due to human activities. It is clear that they will have trouble finding common ground on this.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-29 | JohnSmith96 | 80 | view |
- Use of buildings of Chaco Canyon in New Mexico 80
- Should buzzing be banned. 80
- Implementation of four day work week. 73
- Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is better for children to grow up in the countryside than in a large city. Use specific reasons and examples to develop your essay. 80
- TPO-15 - Independent Writing Task Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? In order to become financially responsible adults, children should learn to manage their own money at young age. Use specific reasons and examples to support your ans 70
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 13, column 193, Rule ID: THIS_NNS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'this pesticide' or 'these pesticides'?
Suggestion: this pesticide; these pesticides
...it is stated that if birds will consume these pesticide food or will drink water having pestici...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 562, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun pesticides is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
...wing pest resistant crop which will use less pesticides and will not harm birds. ...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, moreover, nevertheless, regarding, second, secondly, so, in contrast, such as, as a result, in contrast to, in regard to, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 5.04856512141 178% => OK
Conjunction : 16.0 7.30242825607 219% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 20.0 12.0772626932 166% => OK
Pronoun: 36.0 22.412803532 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 51.0 30.3222958057 168% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 5.01324503311 259% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2156.0 1373.03311258 157% => OK
No of words: 407.0 270.72406181 150% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.2972972973 5.08290768461 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49157444576 4.04702891845 111% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.88343658594 2.5805825403 112% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 145.348785872 146% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.520884520885 0.540411800872 96% => OK
syllable_count: 645.3 419.366225166 154% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 3.25607064018 246% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 13.0662251656 138% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 21.2450331126 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.7116564719 49.2860985944 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 119.777777778 110.228320801 109% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.6111111111 21.698381199 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.4444444444 7.06452816374 148% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 4.33554083885 185% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.334161748695 0.272083759551 123% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107972280649 0.0996497079465 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.1127165148 0.0662205650399 170% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.202656930554 0.162205337803 125% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.143922899709 0.0443174109184 325% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.8 13.3589403974 111% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 53.8541721854 91% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 11.0289183223 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.76 12.2367328918 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.65 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 63.6247240618 159% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.498013245 103% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.2008830022 98% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.