It is now possible for scientists and tourists to travel to remote natural environment, such as the South Pole. Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages?
As technology has developed, people can now travel to remote natural areas. While this trend is beneficial to some extent, I would argue that its disadvantages are more significant.
On the one hand, visiting isolated natural places has some benefits. Firstly, this is a newer and more interesting type of travelling. Since going to other cities or countries has been too common for most people, it might be more exciting for them to explore new places such as the South Pole or the Amazon rainforest. This gives them valuable experiences and unforgettable memories. Secondly, when visiting remote areas, people, especially scientists, might acquire more knowledge about the natural habitat. For example, when coming to the North Pole, scientists can learn about the life of polar bears which live far away from humans.
On the other hand, I believe this development has far more drawbacks. The first one is that travelling to remote natural areas can be risky if the travellers are not sufficiently prepared. For instance, the temperature at the South Pole is usually very low, which adversely affects people's health. Travelling to forests can also be dangerous as people have to face the risk of being attacked by animals. Also, since visiting isolated places often requires a large amount of investment in researching and ensuring the safety of travellers, the costs of travelling tend to be high. Therefore, it seems like only scientists and rich people can afford this activity, so this development is likely to benefit only a small group of individuals.
In conclusion, I believe the disadvantages of people being able to travel to remote areas outweigh its advantages.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-08-30 | Saeedeamani | 78 | view |
| 2019-08-30 | Saeedeamani | 56 | view |
| 2019-03-24 | mayankmm | 89 | view |
| 2019-02-12 | dqhungdl | 67 | view |
| 2019-02-12 | dqhungdl | 67 | view |
- It is now possible for scientists and tourists to travel to remote natural environment, such as the South Pole. Do the advantages of this development outweigh the disadvantages? 67
- It is observed that in many countries not enough students are choosing to study science subject. What are causes? And what will be effects on society? 73
- Students today can easily access information online so libraries are no longer necessary Do you agree or disagree 59
- Scientists predict in the near future cars will be driven by computers, not people. Why? Do you think it is a positive or negative development? 53
- Many museums and historical sites are mainly visited by tourists but not local people. Why is this the case, and what can be done to attract more local people to visit these places? 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 14.0 13.1623246493 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 7.30460921844 82% => OK
Pronoun: 17.0 24.0651302605 71% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 41.998997996 76% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 8.3376753507 48% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1415.0 1615.20841683 88% => OK
No of words: 272.0 315.596192385 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.20220588235 5.12529762239 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.06108636974 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.83674669512 2.80592935109 101% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 176.041082164 91% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.588235294118 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 451.8 506.74238477 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Interrogative: 2.0 0.384769539078 520% => Less interrogative sentences wanted.
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 2.10420841683 285% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.6684955308 49.4020404114 76% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.3333333333 106.682146367 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.1333333333 20.7667163134 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.93333333333 7.06120827912 127% => 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 : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => 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: 0.290396309728 0.244688304435 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0907175925108 0.084324248473 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0479524698121 0.0667982634062 72% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.17712179136 0.151304729494 117% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0112608558517 0.056905535591 20% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.1 13.0946893788 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 50.2224549098 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.58 12.4159519038 101% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.83 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 74.0 78.4519038076 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.