Many animals are endangered. Some people argue that we should only protect animals that are useful to humans. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
In many parts of the world, animal species are inclined to become extinct. Many hold a belief that individuals and governments should only preserve animals that are economically beneficial to human. However, to the best of my knowledge, all animals that are being threatened should be protected.
Firstly, it is noteworthy that the interdependence of species is the main characteristic of eco-balance. Many zoological studies have shown that although it is invisible, the survivals of living species are closely intertwined in one way or another. Therefore, it is a grave mistake to overlook that fact that the extinction of one species is accompanied by demise of other species. For example, poisonous snakes are widely considered as dangerous animals; however, the underpopulation of snakes in farming regions has resulted in the overpopulation of rats, which have chronic effects on agricultural yields. This example is the illustration of the fact that all threatened animals should be preserved.
Secondly, the counter-argument raised by objectors to this is that we should only protect animals that are useful to humans, because individuals and governments that are on tight budget have to spend money in various social aspects, typically education and medication. This argument is reasonable to some degree; however, it is incomplete, what they fail to take into account is
the fact that despite the high expenses of animal preservation, deterring the extinction of threatened animals should be regarded as the top priority to all governments. Futhermore, we are not able to predict the future and some species that are classify as unuseful to humans.
According to the above analysis, we can conclude that all animals in danger of extinction should be protected.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-07-09 | maiphuong0610 | 67 | view |
| 2021-07-09 | maiphuong0610 | 56 | view |
| 2021-07-09 | maiphuong0610 | 73 | view |
| 2021-07-09 | maiphuong0610 | 67 | view |
| 2021-07-09 | maiphuong0610 | 67 | view |
- A table shows the percentage of employment in Australia for different age groups A bar graph shows the percentage of part time employment in Australia by gender 84
- People used to live in the same city throughout their lives but now they change where they live several times What is the cause Do you think it is a positive or negative trend 67
- Some people think that the most important thing about being rich is it gives a person the opportunity to help other people Do you agree or disagree 67
- Many animals are endangered Some people argue that we should only protect animals that are useful to humans To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
- The chart below shows the average cost of monthly contract for four different mobile in a European country from January to September 2002 measured in euro 87
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 76, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun hold seems to be countable; consider using: 'Many holds'.
Suggestion: Many holds
...species are inclined to become extinct. Many hold a belief that individuals and governmen...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 247, Rule ID: BEEN_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Consider using a past participle here: 'classified'.
Suggestion: classified
...ct the future and some species that are classify as unuseful to humans. According to th...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, however, if, look, second, secondly, so, therefore, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 13.1623246493 182% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 7.85571142285 89% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 10.4138276553 48% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 7.30460921844 205% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 26.0 24.0651302605 108% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 41.998997996 93% => OK
Nominalization: 13.0 8.3376753507 156% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1498.0 1615.20841683 93% => OK
No of words: 278.0 315.596192385 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.38848920863 5.12529762239 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.08329915638 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.17364868257 2.80592935109 113% => OK
Unique words: 148.0 176.041082164 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.532374100719 0.561755894193 95% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 487.8 506.74238477 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 4.0 2.52805611222 158% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.809619238477 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.76152304609 63% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 16.0721442886 75% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 23.0 20.2975951904 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 67.7254978243 49.4020404114 137% => OK
Chars per sentence: 124.833333333 106.682146367 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.1666666667 20.7667163134 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.58333333333 7.06120827912 93% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.38176352705 114% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.67935871743 35% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.264413000654 0.244688304435 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0976695164494 0.084324248473 116% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0747983393417 0.0667982634062 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.159511374272 0.151304729494 105% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0649233783185 0.056905535591 114% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.5 13.0946893788 118% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 31.21 50.2224549098 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 11.3001002004 129% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.28 12.4159519038 115% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.49 8.58950901804 110% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 78.4519038076 106% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 9.78957915832 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.1190380762 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 10.7795591182 139% => 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.