Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic regions. They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of the year. Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. Unfortunately, according to reports from local hunters, the deer populations are declining. Since these reports coincide with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, we can conclude that the purported decline in deer populations is the result of the deer's being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The author of the argument has cited that the deers in Canada's arctic region used to migrate from one island to another in search of food. But, increase in global warming issues has led to melting of the sea ice therefore they are not able to migrate from island to other island which are separated by sea which is the major factor in the decline of population of deers. The argument will look logical at first glance. However, critical justification of the argument presented by the author has highlighted many questions. The premise in their current form are not cogent and the argument is based on unwarranted assumptions which make the argument susceptible to attacks.
On the first facet, the author has mentioned reports from the hunters. But, he has not provided any evidence for that reports. He should have examine the reports and should have checked the realibilty of the reports given by the hunter. Maybe the numbers they have come up with is not correct or maybe they have studied superficially and has not done the complete analysis of the population of the deers. Therefore, argument is not convincing enough.
Moreover, the author has mentioned that the issue has been reported by the local hunters. It can lead to question, Are they practicing hunting now also? Whether they have started hunting more? There are myriads of possibility that can lead to decline in population of deers. Hunters themselves coming up with reports for the decline in population is like we are delegating responsibility of securing milk to cat. So, if they have hunted more in recent past then deriving conclusion on basis of global warming is not acceptable.
Additionally, there is a possibility that people living on the island have utilized the land for their own purposes and the vegetation on deers used to feed have declined. People have cut the forest and have build houses and societies which could have result in shortage of space for the deers and shortage of food for them. And a major reason in decile of their population.
In the crux, the author has failed to examine all the facts regarding the population decline and has derived the conclusion naively. He should have done complete analysis of the surroundings and the reports given by the hunters and should have provided evidence in support of his argument. However, the author's argument is not cogent and thereby rendering it as indefensible.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not OK
argument 2 -- not OK
argument 3 -- OK
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.0 out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 407 350
No. of Characters: 1965 1500
No. of Different Words: 188 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.492 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.828 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.573 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 145 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 108 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 67 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 37 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.5 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.218 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.314 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.515 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.127 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 143, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'examined'.
Suggestion: examined
...idence for that reports. He should have examine the reports and should have checked the...
^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 414, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[4]
Message: “So , if” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
...responsibility of securing milk to cat. So, if they have hunted more in recent past th...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 304, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...n support of his argument. However, the authors argument is not cogent and thereby rend...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, look, may, moreover, regarding, so, then, therefore, in short
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 19.6327345309 76% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 13.0 11.1786427146 116% => OK
Relative clauses : 9.0 13.6137724551 66% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 55.5748502994 112% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2014.0 2260.96107784 89% => OK
No of words: 407.0 441.139720559 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.9484029484 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.49157444576 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63190726858 2.78398813304 95% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 204.123752495 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.452088452088 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 643.5 705.55239521 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.70958083832 37% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 49.9080352596 57.8364921388 86% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.5454545455 119.503703932 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.5 23.324526521 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.18181818182 5.70786347227 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 8.20758483034 37% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 10.0 4.67664670659 214% => Less facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.229464220255 0.218282227539 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0637780233282 0.0743258471296 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.112445870464 0.0701772020484 160% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12195015212 0.128457276422 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.133981879599 0.0628817314937 213% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.1 14.3799401198 77% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.43 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.25 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 98.500998004 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.