The author states the evidence of the cloud seeding which has been effective in protecting crops from hail. As opposed to, the lecturer who counter-argues that viewpoint trying to prove that these three evidence do not seem convincing.
First and foremost, the writer mentions that one of the evidence is laboratory experiments. Experiments in the laboratory support the idea that cloud seeding is effective. Additionally, when they added silver iodide to cold water they observed light snow instead of hail pellets. On the contrary, the professor cannot disagree more, reasoning that the snow may be created in laboratory condition, but not in real life. The precipitation of the silver iodide cause drought. Therefore, they have lack of water.
The second argument the author gives is the evidence from Asia. The usage of cloud seeding is seen to be effective in urban areas of some Asian countries. These positive results could also be effective for the farms of the United States. However the lecturer cannot be more outraged, explaining that the conditions are not the same in both countries. For example, in the cities, the air pollution is high, which may cause the favorable condition for the cloud seeds.On the other hand in the US farms are not that much polluted as the Asian cities are, Therefore, this evidence overturns writer's concept.
Lastly, on one hand , the passage points that local studies has been a good evidence. For example, monitoring crop damage due to hail, it is found that the use of cloud seeding made it possible to reduce hail damage compare to previous years. Nevertheless, the professor declares that this result were seen in hole area in the East also in the South not only in one part. So, the evidence is not enough persuasive.
Although, the text suggests three evidence in supporting the usage of cloud seeds, the lecturer believe that none of them are convincing.
The reading passage presents three evidences supporting using the method of cloud seeding to defend crops from hail damage. The lecturer thinks none of the three evidences is reasonable. she refutes them one by one.
First of all, she points out that laboratory results of effectiveness of adding silver iodide into cloud seeds does not apply to real life situation. In reality, cloud seeding can prevent precipitation at any level. it could create snow, rain or hail. such is bad, if applied to area with little could seeds it will end up with drought which can harm the crops due to lack of water. So even through as stated in the passage in laboratory by adding silver iodide into cold water vapor, we could transform hail into light snow, but it will not work in reality.
Moreover, the lecturer says that evidence from Asian cannot represent situation in us. Because such practices are conducted in urban areas of asia, in cities where have high level of air pollutions created by cars and industrial activities. clouds of those areas have large amount of chemical which is quite different from the unpolluted clouds in farming area of America. Thus, with different conditions, the asia evidence presented in the passage cannot prove it is going to work in USA.
Last, the lecturer argues that the local studies are not convincing. she notes that the reduced hail damaged mentioned in the passage to that area did not only happen to the area where could seeding was conducted, it also happened to its nearby areas, including its north, east and south regions. This suggests that such consequence is due to natural variation of local weather, and has nothing to do with cloud seeding.
- The author states the methods of protecting the forest trees oaks from the spread of dangerous P. ramorum fungus. As opposed to, the lecturer who counter - argues that viewpoint trying to prove these three methods do not seem convincing.First and foremost 68
- The author states the evidence of the cloud seeding which has been effective in protecting crops from hail. As opposed to, the lecturer who counter-argues that viewpoint trying to prove that these three evidence do not seem convincing.First and foremost, 75
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 189, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
... of the three evidences is reasonable. she refutes them one by one. First of...
^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...onable. she refutes them one by one. First of all, she points out that labora...
^^^^
Line 5, column 219, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: It
...an prevent precipitation at any level. it could create snow, rain or hail. such i...
^^
Line 5, column 255, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Such
...l. it could create snow, rain or hail. such is bad, if applied to area with little ...
^^^^
Line 5, column 305, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'seed'
Suggestion: seed
...d, if applied to area with little could seeds it will end up with drought which can h...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...now, but it will not work in reality. Moreover, the lecturer says that evidenc...
^^^^
Line 9, column 244, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: Clouds
...ted by cars and industrial activities. clouds of those areas have large amount of che...
^^^^^^
Line 11, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...not prove it is going to work in USA. Last, the lecturer argues that the local...
^^^^
Line 13, column 70, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...t the local studies are not convincing. she notes that the reduced hail damaged ...
^^
Line 13, column 72, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: She
...the local studies are not convincing. she notes that the reduced hail damaged men...
^^^
Line 13, column 194, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'could' requires the base form of the verb: 'seed'
Suggestion: seed
...not only happen to the area where could seeding was conducted, it also happened to its ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, moreover, so, thus, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 10.4613686534 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 5.04856512141 198% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 7.30242825607 68% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 12.0772626932 83% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 22.412803532 94% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 30.3222958057 165% => OK
Nominalization: 7.0 5.01324503311 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1419.0 1373.03311258 103% => OK
No of words: 288.0 270.72406181 106% => OK
Chars per words: 4.92708333333 5.08290768461 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.11953428781 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42375039396 2.5805825403 94% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 145.348785872 118% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.59375 0.540411800872 110% => OK
syllable_count: 432.9 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 3.25607064018 215% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.51434878587 132% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 13.0662251656 115% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 21.2450331126 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 52.5912540257 49.2860985944 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.6 110.228320801 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.2 21.698381199 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.6 7.06452816374 51% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 11.0 4.19205298013 262% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 4.45695364238 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.27373068433 164% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.238766512178 0.272083759551 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0820428977723 0.0996497079465 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0624912064686 0.0662205650399 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.143588305295 0.162205337803 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0570522534415 0.0443174109184 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.4 13.3589403974 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 53.8541721854 113% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 11.0289183223 86% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 12.2367328918 92% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.47 8.42419426049 101% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 63.6247240618 112% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.7273730684 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.498013245 91% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.2008830022 89% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 75.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.5 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.