Wild animals have no place in the 21st century, so protecting them is a waste of resources. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is true that wild animals have no place in today’s modern era. Therefore, there is an opinion asserting that trying to protect them is a waste of natural and financial resources. I, for one, entirely disagree with the given statement on the basis of some compelling reasons.
To begin with, as well as other creatures, wild animals have every right to live. First and foremost, they are created by God. It would be morally and ethically wrong not to pay attention to their conservation. As a result, all individuals and federal authorities ought to shoulder the responsibility to raise funds in order to save them. Second, trying hard to create new habitats in which they can continue regenerations is a must for the environment. It is well-justified that the cycle of wildlife in nature must be maintained. Ignoring the importance of wild animals is aking to tipping the balance of the ecology. Thus, protecting all animals, especially the wild groups, is essential.
I also contend that allocating a budget to save wild animals can have financial benefits. Through holding regular animal exhibitions and constructing zoos in which entail various animals of prey, such as lions, tigers, and bears, many people would love to be near them and see them up close. That being said, by purchasing the passes by the public, a huge amount of profits would be made. A considerable proportion amount of this income can be spent back on these wild animals’ protection. Producing wildlife documentaries could be another money-making project in this respect. Were these animals not exist, there would not be interesting subjects to make films associated with the environment. As a result, trying to save them not only is not a waste of resources, but it is a logical investment.
In conclusion, I firmly believe that law-making institutions should provide enough funds in order to protect any kinds of wild animals as they are both vital living creatures for the ecosystem and an investment opportunity.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2022-02-14 | vonhuquynh | 84 | view |
| 2021-11-01 | mahyarr | 84 | view |
| 2020-11-27 | Chirag Bhardwaj | 67 | view |
| 2020-07-22 | RS1 | 56 | view |
- Some people think that all university students should study whatever they like Others believe that they should only be allowed to study subjects that will be useful in the future each as those related to science and technology Discuss both views and give 89
- Some people believe that having sport in schools is a waste of time and resources whilst other people believe that sport is a vital part of education Discuss both views and give your opinion 78
- More and more people are migrating to cities in search of a better life but cities can be extremely difficult Explain some of the difficulties of living in a city How can governments make urban life better for everyone 89
- You have eaten at a restaurant and it was such a terrible experience that you have decided to inform the manager by letter of what happened And that you want your money back Things to include facts You need to be concise but explain what happened Politene 84
- An increasing number of people are buying what they need online What are the advantages and disadvantages for individuals and companies to shopping online 73
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, second, so, therefore, thus, well, in conclusion, such as, as a result, as well as, it is true, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1673.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 331.0 315.596192385 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05438066465 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26537283232 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93931465654 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 176.041082164 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.577039274924 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 526.5 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.7870210072 49.4020404114 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.0526315789 106.682146367 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.4210526316 20.7667163134 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.89473684211 7.06120827912 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.211414536064 0.244688304435 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.064906802094 0.084324248473 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0629066872581 0.0667982634062 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.137605879834 0.151304729494 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.061875577541 0.056905535591 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.0946893788 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 50.2224549098 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.71 12.4159519038 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.63 8.58950901804 100% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 78.4519038076 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.
Hi. Nice work. Where are you…
Hi.
Nice work.
Where are you from?
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, second, so, therefore, thus, well, in conclusion, such as, as a result, as well as, it is true, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 13.1623246493 152% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 10.4138276553 86% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 25.0 24.0651302605 104% => OK
Preposition: 44.0 41.998997996 105% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1673.0 1615.20841683 104% => OK
No of words: 331.0 315.596192385 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.05438066465 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.26537283232 4.20363070211 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93931465654 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 176.041082164 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.577039274924 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 526.5 506.74238477 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 5.43587174349 129% => OK
Article: 2.0 2.52805611222 79% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 16.0721442886 118% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.7870210072 49.4020404114 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 88.0526315789 106.682146367 83% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.4210526316 20.7667163134 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.89473684211 7.06120827912 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.67935871743 138% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.211414536064 0.244688304435 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.064906802094 0.084324248473 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0629066872581 0.0667982634062 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.137605879834 0.151304729494 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.061875577541 0.056905535591 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 13.0946893788 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 50.2224549098 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.3001002004 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.71 12.4159519038 94% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.63 8.58950901804 100% => OK
difficult_words: 87.0 78.4519038076 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 9.78957915832 72% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.