Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.
The statement poses a positive stance that we should protect the environment instead of utilizing the land for the economic purpose. The economy is important based on the very fact that it is hard to live a good life without money. This dilemma is prominent especially in the developing country where people there remain poor and are struggling for daily life. Thus, it is necessary to scrutinize scrupulously on the detail.
Firstly the most prevalent issue in this quagmire is global warming. Since the industrial revolution, human beings are able to harness natural resources with machine power, and thus, myriads of innovation help to produce all kinds of products and not only satisfy human needs but also the vast majority can live a better life. Unfortunately, the mechanized power has its side-effect. By using fuel or coal as sources, it emits a huge amount of carbon dioxide in the same time, which is one of the main greenhouse gasses that contributes to global warming.
Global warming is one of the primary threat for human races in this century. As scientists indicated, if the air temperature increases 2 Celsius, the process of global warming won’t be able to reverse, resulting in irremediable disaster, and the truth is that we are actually nearly on the verge of breaking point. Considering the survival of human races, I don’t think it is judicious to do more harm to a natural area for the economy.
Secondly, assume an extreme case what if all of the wild areas were to be razed in replacement of land for economy usage. The landscape would become literally dreary and lifeless. No one would expect to live in such dreary places. In addition, there are lots of nature lover, who enjoy the spectacular view from the power of nature, their human right to visit the wonder will be damaged. To make a compromise, nature itself can also be profitable. For example, the Yosemite National Park, in the Unite State, attracts millions of travelers from all over the world and creates huge revenue can be used to protect the environment.
Thirdly, there are still a lot of species and myths in the forest remain unknown for the scientists to unravel. Exploiting those wild land for the economy purpose is short-sighted. It is said that there are high chances that some of the substances within those unknown species would be the key to inventing new medicine to cure some human diseases such as cancer or AIDS.
To sum up, I strongly agree with the statement to protect the nature from the economic purpose for the following purpose. From the security perspective, nature is a friend of the human race to defy against global warming. From medication point of view, nature can be a key to helping in remedying human disease. Moreover, I don’t want to live in a world without magnificent natural spectacle, and it is excruciating boredom without nature.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 372, Rule ID: AFFECT_EFFECT[14]
Message: Did you mean 'side effect' (=adverse effect, unintended consequence)? Open compounds are not hyphenated.
Suggestion: side effect
...rtunately, the mechanized power has its side-effect. By using fuel or coal as sources, it e...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 42, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...econdly, assume an extreme case what if all of the wild areas were to be razed in replacem...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 493, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...example, the Yosemite National Park, in the Unite State, attracts millions of travelers f...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 226, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
...s said that there are high chances that some of the substances within those unknown species...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, firstly, if, moreover, second, secondly, so, still, third, thirdly, thus, for example, in addition, such as, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.5258426966 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 14.8657303371 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 11.3162921348 80% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 33.0505617978 76% => OK
Preposition: 71.0 58.6224719101 121% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 12.9106741573 70% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2406.0 2235.4752809 108% => OK
No of words: 488.0 442.535393258 110% => OK
Chars per words: 4.93032786885 5.05705443957 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70007681154 4.55969084622 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.71003924045 2.79657885939 97% => OK
Unique words: 262.0 215.323595506 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.536885245902 0.4932671777 109% => OK
syllable_count: 782.1 704.065955056 111% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 6.24550561798 128% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.740449438202 135% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.99550561798 120% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 4.38483146067 205% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 20.2370786517 119% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 23.0359550562 87% => OK
Sentence length SD: 56.1428609294 60.3974514979 93% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.25 118.986275619 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3333333333 23.4991977007 87% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.08333333333 5.21951772744 117% => OK
Paragraphs: 6.0 4.97078651685 121% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 5.13820224719 195% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.18720280376 0.243740707755 77% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0466865739716 0.0831039109588 56% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0407519692705 0.0758088955206 54% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0898873857985 0.150359130593 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0411645255364 0.0667264976115 62% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.0 14.1392134831 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 51.18 48.8420337079 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.1743820225 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 12.1639044944 93% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.77 8.38706741573 105% => OK
difficult_words: 128.0 100.480337079 127% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.8971910112 76% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.2143820225 89% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 70.83 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.25 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.