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.
The author of the argument claims 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. To support his claim, he stated the report that coincides with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt and resulted in a decline in the deer population.
To determine the validity of the argument, the author provided a flawed report to support his claim. He considered the reports from the local hunter to made his claim, which might not be true as these reports were not from the government or any reputed organization.
Secondly, he didn't elaborate the reason or provide any authentic evidence that why the dear population is decreasing like they are not able to sustain themselves because the ice starts melting an effect of global warming or they can provide some reports from government organization or report from UN to support his claim.
Thirdly, He says that the decline in the deer population is the result of the deer's being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea but this could not be the actual reason of decline in the beer population, there could be some other factors that author failed to mention.
In sum, the author's argument is based on unconfirmed and unsubstantiated evidence. To make the argument flawless we need more data and information in support of the evidence he mentions.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 2.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 8 15
No. of Words: 246 350
No. of Characters: 1188 1500
No. of Different Words: 123 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 3.96 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.829 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.557 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 95 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 62 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 38 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 22 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 30.75 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 14.763 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.25 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.46 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.801 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.258 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 14, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
... reputed organization. Secondly, he didnt elaborate the reason or provide any aut...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 13, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...uthor failed to mention. In sum, the authors argument is based on unconfirmed and un...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, second, secondly, so, then, third, thirdly
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 19.6327345309 56% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 23.0 28.8173652695 80% => OK
Preposition: 34.0 55.5748502994 61% => OK
Nominalization: 19.0 16.3942115768 116% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1216.0 2260.96107784 54% => More number of characters wanted.
No of words: 245.0 441.139720559 56% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.96326530612 5.12650576532 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.95632099841 4.56307096286 87% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.60490038949 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 125.0 204.123752495 61% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.510204081633 0.468620217663 109% => OK
syllable_count: 377.1 705.55239521 53% => syllable counts are too short.
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 3.0 8.76447105788 34% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 19.7664670659 40% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 30.0 22.8473053892 131% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 84.4111033869 57.8364921388 146% => OK
Chars per sentence: 152.0 119.503703932 127% => OK
Words per sentence: 30.625 23.324526521 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.875 5.70786347227 103% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.25449101796 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 4.67664670659 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0872580745767 0.218282227539 40% => The similarity between the topic and the content is low.
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0373688191968 0.0743258471296 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0355561373344 0.0701772020484 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0496612646206 0.128457276422 39% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0370023284108 0.0628817314937 59% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 17.2 14.3799401198 120% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.49 48.3550499002 102% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.197005988 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.08 12.5979740519 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.73 8.32208582834 105% => OK
difficult_words: 56.0 98.500998004 57% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 12.3882235529 109% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.0 11.1389221557 126% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum 250 words wanted.
Rates: 33.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 2.0 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.