In the preceeding argument, the author claims that the declining population of arctic deer in Canada can be attributed to global warming, citing the temporal correlation of the two. The argument seems to be quite plausible at first glance; however, a closer review sheds light on a plethora of facts that require concrete evidence for support.
To begin with, the author only adduces reports from local hunters that arctic deer population is shrinking. Nonetheless, it is not clear whether these reports and reliable. Experienced as the hunters are, there are still many factors that affect the observation and counting of arctic deers. For instance, the timing and location of hunting may not be suitable for meeting the deers. That hunters encountered fewer deers does not necessarily mean that the population of arctic deer is actually decreasing. To draw this conclusion wifh confidence, evidence must be gathered by a methodical and scientific investigation carried out by professional ecologists.
What is more, even if the number of arctic deers in Canada has witnessed a decline in the past, the real causes of this phenomenon still remain elusive. The author believes that the deer population dwindled due to global warming simply based on the concurrence of these two events. This is problematic because it lacks both logic and evidence, and is over-general. It is not impossible that the deer population is suffering a drop just because it is over-hunted by local residents and tourists. Without additional evidence, the claim is not validated at all, although global warming may well serve as a factor contributing to the dying of deers.
Last but not least, warmer environment can exert multifarious influences on the survival of arctic deers, unble to migrate between islands through ice on the sea perhaps being only one of them. Meanwhile, global warming is also likely to make the plants that arctic deers feed on more scarce by altering their growing environment, which absolutely diminishes the deer population. Therefore, it is ungrounded to assert that global warming endangers arctic deers by restricting their mobility across the sea.
In conclusion, while global warming appears to be a compelling player in the declining population of arctic deer in Canada, the analysis and statements are not supported by evidence proffered in the passage. More endeavours are expected to figure out whether arctic deers are really dying out and what are the reasons leading to this.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, however, if, may, nonetheless, really, so, still, therefore, well, while, for instance, in conclusion, to begin with, what is more
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 24.0 19.6327345309 122% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 24.0 28.8173652695 83% => OK
Preposition: 58.0 55.5748502994 104% => OK
Nominalization: 23.0 16.3942115768 140% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2108.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 400.0 441.139720559 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.27 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.472135955 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8397843228 2.78398813304 102% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 204.123752495 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.5375 0.468620217663 115% => OK
syllable_count: 653.4 705.55239521 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.76447105788 103% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.22255489022 118% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 37.8696595061 57.8364921388 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.111111111 119.503703932 98% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.2222222222 23.324526521 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.77777777778 5.70786347227 154% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.206323967308 0.218282227539 95% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.063361282232 0.0743258471296 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0406868917733 0.0701772020484 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11685707149 0.128457276422 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0484778138209 0.0628817314937 77% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 14.3799401198 101% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.23 8.32208582834 111% => OK
difficult_words: 114.0 98.500998004 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.