There is little justification for society to make extraordinary efforts — especially at a great cost in money and jobs — to save endangered animal or plant species.
The author here states that society should not make any effort by going out-of-the-way to save the endangered plants and animals, especially if it has any negative impact on human beings in terms of money or jobs. Such a statement can never be agreed by any person with a reasonable state of mind. At the most, only a highly qualified version of this statement may be eligible for initiating a debate.
In the first place, all plants and animals, including us, are creations of nature. We have no right to harm other species, or take any steps that can make them extinct. Even then, we have made tens of thousands of fauna and flora extinct, or endangered. It is time when the great nations have realized this, and collaborative schemes are being launched to retain these species. We have at last realized that, creating a balance in nature is very much needed for our own benefit. At such a time, evoking a completely negative debate, as done by the author’s assertion here, can never be subscribed to.
It is quite possible that, in order to retain the endangered animals or plants, human kind may need some sacrifice. There are many places with man-animal conflict. In these places, if we want to save tigers, we have to give up land impacting the local people who may lose their earnings and also place of stay. There are waters across the world which are to be given to crocodiles, in order to enhance their numbers. But then, a number of fishermen’s lives will be in great trouble.
Our job is to strike a good balance between these issues, and probably the plants and animals should get priority, given the injustice that has been done to them over centuries. Men can move to other places with prospects of another professions, but tigers cannot leave forests or crocodiles cannot leave waters. Plants grow in specific climatic conditions, and we cannot outroot them. With all our new technological advances, it should not be very difficult to find an alternate home for a human, but our animals and plants do not entertain such advantages.
We keep missing the extinct species. We cannot afford to lose the endangered species. All over the world, tigers have been very few in numbers, and we should immediately take enough steps to rehabilitate them. So is true for many other gifts of nature. And the assertion made in the paragraph here cannot be disagreed more.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-09-01 | geek_devshree | 58 | view |
| 2019-07-17 | brijeshshah41 | 50 | view |
| 2019-07-17 | brijeshshah41 | 16 | view |
| 2019-07-17 | brijeshshah41 | 16 | view |
| 2019-06-10 | hvarpe | 16 | view |
- Colleges and universities should require their students to spend at least one semester studying in a foreign country. 66
- The most effective way to understand contemporary culture is to analyze the trends of its youth. 66
- It is no longer possible for a society to regard any living man or woman as a hero. 58
- Many important discoveries or creations are accidental: it is usually while seeking the answer to one question that we come across the answer to another. 16
- Many important discoveries or creations are accidental: it is usually while seeking the answer to one question that we come across the answer to another. 16
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 219, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s, if we want to save tigers, we have to give up land impacting the local people ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, may, so, then, in the first place
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 18.0 12.4196629213 145% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 11.3162921348 71% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 34.0 33.0505617978 103% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 58.6224719101 92% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 12.9106741573 54% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1988.0 2235.4752809 89% => OK
No of words: 413.0 442.535393258 93% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.81355932203 5.05705443957 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.50803742585 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.62289637381 2.79657885939 94% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 215.323595506 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.542372881356 0.4932671777 110% => OK
syllable_count: 633.6 704.065955056 90% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 10.0 1.77640449438 563% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 7.0 4.38483146067 160% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 23.0359550562 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 44.5995413948 60.3974514979 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 86.4347826087 118.986275619 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.9565217391 23.4991977007 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.39130434783 5.21951772744 46% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 7.80617977528 13% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.191758093077 0.243740707755 79% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0509613828881 0.0831039109588 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0492072243004 0.0758088955206 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.103571839429 0.150359130593 69% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0395080273468 0.0667264976115 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.2 14.1392134831 72% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 62.68 48.8420337079 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.7 12.1743820225 71% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.32 12.1639044944 85% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.07 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 100.480337079 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.2143820225 78% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
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.