Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic regions. They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of the year. Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. Unfortunately, according to reports from local hunters, the deer populations are declining. Since these reports coincide with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, we can conclude that the purported decline in deer populations is the result of the deer's being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.
The author of this argument states that the recent decline in arctic deer populations is a direct result of their unability to follow the old migration pattern, which included moving over ice from island to island in Canadas artic region, searching for food. While the pattern abandoning statement may be true, there are also some other possible explanations for the decline in animal populations. We need several missing evidence in order to properly evaluate this argument.
First, we need to question the assumption that global warming trends and ice melting are the most important factor that led to dying of arctic deer. The author does not offer any evidence for this statement. If we could not find evidence that this assumption is true, we cannot name ice melting as the reason for worrying trend. Moreover, if there is some evidence that, for example, the number of hunters who kill arctic deer has tripled compared to last month, we could easily conclude that hunting is another major factor that contributes to artic deer endangerment.
Furthermore, the author does not explain to what extent has the sea ice melted and, more importantly, does not offer evidence that melting of sea ice is forcing arctic deer to change their migration patterns. If we could prove that there is still some ice left in Canadas artic regions and that animals are still capable of moving over these small blocks of ice searching for food, the argument would fall apart.
Lastly, the author of the statement is assuming that deer have enough plants on which they feed. This may or may not be true. We just do not know, because the author does not offer any evidence for his assumption. If we could find the evidence that, for example, major fires have destroyed large fields of grass that deer eat, declinement in food supplies would become one of the obvious reasons for dying of the deer. Thus, the argument would once again be unwarranted.
The author of this argument has based his conclusion on a number of assumptions that are likely to be wrong. In order to strengthen the argument, he needs to question other factors that led to a decline in deer population and also offer evidence that deer are truly unable to follow their migration patterns.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-28 | jenniferjack07 | 55 | view |
| 2020-01-28 | lanhhoang | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-19 | ken10091995 | 50 | view |
| 2019-12-12 | nimesh94 | 50 | view |
| 2019-11-30 | farhadmoqimi | 63 | view |
- Workers in the small town of Leeville take fewer sick days than workers in the large city of Masonton, 50 miles away. Moreover, relative to population size, the diagnosis of stress-related illness is proportionally much lower in Leeville than in Masonton. 63
- To understand the most important characteristics of a society, one must study its major cities. 75
- Claim: In any field—business, politics, education, government—those in power should step down after five years.Reason: The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership 83
- As people rely more and more on technology to solve problems, the ability of humans to think for themselves will surely deteriorate. 50
- Educational institutions have a responsibility to dissuade students from pursuing fields of study in which they are unlikely to succeed. 34
Discourse Markers used:
['also', 'but', 'first', 'furthermore', 'if', 'lastly', 'may', 'moreover', 'so', 'still', 'then', 'thus', 'while', 'for example']
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance in Part of Speech:
Nouns: 0.235714285714 0.25644967241 92% => OK
Verbs: 0.183333333333 0.15541462614 118% => OK
Adjectives: 0.0761904761905 0.0836205057962 91% => OK
Adverbs: 0.0642857142857 0.0520304965353 124% => OK
Pronouns: 0.0357142857143 0.0272364105082 131% => Less pronouns wanted. Try not to use 'you, I, they, he...' as the subject of a sentence
Prepositions: 0.128571428571 0.125424944231 103% => OK
Participles: 0.0428571428571 0.0416121511921 103% => OK
Conjunctions: 2.42156932218 2.79052419416 87% => OK
Infinitives: 0.0333333333333 0.026700313972 125% => OK
Particles: 0.0 0.001811407834 0% => OK
Determiners: 0.0904761904762 0.113004496875 80% => OK
Modal_auxiliary: 0.0261904761905 0.0255425247493 103% => OK
WH_determiners: 0.0190476190476 0.0127820249294 149% => OK
Vocabulary words and sentences:
No of characters: 2253.0 2731.13054187 82% => OK
No of words: 383.0 446.07635468 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.88250652742 6.12365571057 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.42384287591 4.57801047555 97% => OK
words length more than 5 chars: 0.342036553525 0.378187486979 90% => OK
words length more than 6 chars: 0.22454308094 0.287650121315 78% => OK
words length more than 7 chars: 0.154046997389 0.208842608468 74% => OK
words length more than 8 chars: 0.0861618798956 0.135150697306 64% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42156932218 2.79052419416 87% => OK
Unique words: 180.0 207.018472906 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.469973890339 0.469332199767 100% => OK
Word variations: 49.769706223 52.1807786196 95% => OK
How many sentences: 16.0 20.039408867 80% => OK
Sentence length: 23.9375 23.2022227129 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 69.7494399619 57.7814097925 121% => OK
Chars per sentence: 140.8125 141.986410481 99% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.9375 23.2022227129 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 0.875 0.724660767414 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.14285714286 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 3.58251231527 0% => OK
Readability: 46.391808094 51.9672348444 89% => OK
Elegance: 1.43697478992 1.8405768891 78% => OK
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.3903144937 0.441005458295 89% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence: 0.117692820369 0.135418324435 87% => OK
Sentence sentence coherence SD: 0.0601706586716 0.0829849096947 73% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence: 0.570861879142 0.58762219726 97% => OK
Sentence paragraph coherence SD: 0.176181851531 0.147661913831 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.161901334109 0.193483328276 84% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.103599562681 0.0970749176394 107% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence: 0.366361907842 0.42659136922 86% => OK
Paragraph paragraph coherence SD: 0.0761311798772 0.0774707102158 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.26948278528 0.312017818177 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.038972130433 0.0698173142475 56% => The ideas may be duplicated in paragraphs.
Task Achievement:
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.33743842365 60% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 6.87684729064 116% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.82512315271 62% => OK
Positive topic words: 5.0 6.46551724138 77% => OK
Negative topic words: 8.0 5.36822660099 149% => OK
Neutral topic words: 3.0 2.82389162562 106% => OK
Total topic words: 16.0 14.657635468 109% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
Note: This is not the final score. 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.