Some people say that too much attention and too many resources are given in the protection of wild animals and birds. Do you agree or disagree about this opinion?
Many people believe that the amount of efforts and resources spending on the conservation of wild animals and birds are too massive. While I accept that people have some reasons to say that, I would argue that the benefits of maintaining the biodiversity outweigh its drawbacks.
On the one hand, there are reasons why people think it is a waste spending money and attention on wild animals and birds. The first reason is that not the whole society get beneficial from this policy. In contemporary society, with the rise of technology, people tend to become less dependent on natural world. As a result, the conservation of wildlife will not affect the majority of people. The second reason is that the negative impacts of wildlife extinction are barely visible. It usually takes more than a decade before any adverse effects of the extinction of an animal become noticeable. Therefore, people don't feel the need to spending money and efforts on wildlife conservation.
On the other hand, I believe that governments should allocate resources to protect wildlife. Firstly, it is essential to keep the ecosystem balance. The natural world is one big circle and each species is a single chain link so the disappearing of one species could have negative impacts on others. For example, in 1950s, China experienced the worst infestation ever recorded as a result of the sparrow terminate campaign from the government. Secondly, keeping the biological diverse can have some positive aspects. A rich and varied ecosystem with many species us a great source of knowledge for scientists, which could lead to future breakthroughs in different fields. In fact, the first vaccine was found by Jenner in 1796 was made from cowpox virus.
In conclusion, while I accept that wildlife protection could be a waste of resources to some extent, but I believe that the benefits it brings are more significant.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 615, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...al become noticeable. Therefore, people dont feel the need to spending money and eff...
^^^^
Line 5, column 313, Rule ID: IN_1990s[1]
Message: The article is probably missing here: 'in the 1950s'.
Suggestion: in the 1950s
...egative impacts on others. For example, in 1950s, China experienced the worst infestatio...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, while, for example, in conclusion, in fact, as a result, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 7.30460921844 137% => OK
Pronoun: 21.0 24.0651302605 87% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 41.998997996 95% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1587.0 1615.20841683 98% => OK
No of words: 312.0 315.596192385 99% => OK
Chars per words: 5.08653846154 5.12529762239 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.20279927342 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7805868029 2.80592935109 99% => OK
Unique words: 174.0 176.041082164 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.557692307692 0.561755894193 99% => OK
syllable_count: 500.4 506.74238477 99% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.384769539078 0% => OK
Article: 6.0 2.52805611222 237% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 4.76152304609 147% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 16.0721442886 106% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 32.0330711462 49.4020404114 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 93.3529411765 106.682146367 88% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.3529411765 20.7667163134 88% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.76470588235 7.06120827912 110% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.67935871743 92% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 3.4128256513 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.184627531547 0.244688304435 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0513511129686 0.084324248473 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0682243856296 0.0667982634062 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.118259682687 0.151304729494 78% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0732907407599 0.056905535591 129% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 13.0946893788 89% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 50.2224549098 106% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.44779559118 42% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 11.3001002004 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.24 12.4159519038 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.43 8.58950901804 98% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 78.4519038076 98% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 9.78957915832 112% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.