Global problems are related to governments and international organizations. What are the problems and what is your opinion?
Recently, the phenomenon of emphasizing global issues by governments and international organizations and their corresponding impact has sparked a heated debate. Although contested by many that the matter of special attention to poverty is highly beneficial, such issue is regarded thoroughly both constructive and positive by a substantial number of individuals. I am inclined to believe that global warming can be a point, and I will analyze that throughout this essay.
From a social standpoint, helping underdeveloped countries by international organizations such as UNICEF can provide society with some noticeable effects which are rooted in the fact that the merits of healthy nutrition, as well as clean water, are inextricably bound up. According to my own experience, when I was a university student, I performed an academic experiment that discovered 35% of people in Africa are illiterate. Thus, beneficial ramifications of both comprehensive plans for education and supplying healthy food apparently can be seen.
In addition, within the realm of science, prioritizing global warming by the governments might increase the consequences of climate change. Moreover, the fundamental aspects of increasing global temperature could relate to this reality that the demerits of air pollution pertain to producing greenhouse gases. As a tangible example, some scientific research undertaken by UCLA university has asserted that the 65% of pollution is related to burning fossil fuels by cars and trucks. Hence, it is correct to presume the preconceived notion of using renewable energy sources.
To conclude, while there are several compelling arguments on both sides, I profoundly believe that considering global warming and improving the condition of poor countries have the same priority. Not only do the advantages of a healthy world prove the significance of enhancing the quality of life, but also pinpoint reducing the pollution implications.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, apparently, but, hence, if, moreover, so, thus, well, while, in addition, such as, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 10.5418719212 104% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 6.10837438424 98% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 8.36945812808 96% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 5.94088669951 168% => OK
Pronoun: 18.0 20.9802955665 86% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 31.9359605911 128% => OK
Nominalization: 12.0 5.75862068966 208% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1662.0 1207.87684729 138% => OK
No of words: 294.0 242.827586207 121% => OK
Chars per words: 5.65306122449 5.00649968141 113% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.14082457966 3.92707691288 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.27135918548 2.71678728327 120% => OK
Unique words: 191.0 139.433497537 137% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.649659863946 0.580463131201 112% => OK
syllable_count: 530.1 379.143842365 140% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.57093596059 115% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.6157635468 87% => OK
Article: 2.0 1.56157635468 128% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 1.71428571429 292% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 0.931034482759 215% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.65517241379 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 12.0 12.6551724138 95% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 20.5024630542 117% => OK
Sentence length SD: 45.6024487647 50.4703680194 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.5 104.977214359 132% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5 20.9669160288 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.25 7.25397266985 114% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.12807881773 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.33497536946 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 6.9802955665 100% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 2.75862068966 36% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 2.91625615764 137% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.116938037656 0.242375264174 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0383116509293 0.0925447433944 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0458943193008 0.071462118173 64% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0621950246957 0.151781067708 41% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0343651228882 0.0609392437508 56% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.4 12.6369458128 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 53.1260098522 57% => Flesch_reading_ease is low.
smog_index: 11.2 6.54236453202 171% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 10.9458128079 137% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.79 11.5310837438 137% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.9 8.32886699507 131% => OK
difficult_words: 113.0 55.0591133005 205% => Less difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 15.5 9.94827586207 156% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.3980295567 112% => OK
text_standard: 16.0 10.5123152709 152% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 88.8888888889 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 80.0 Out of 90
---------------------
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.