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 argument tries to put global warming under the noose as a reason for the declining of Arctic Deer’s population in Canada’s Arctic region. This statement can be true but the evidence provided by the argument stating the same cannot be taken as a reliable source of veracity. The argument, by referring to the reports provided by the local hunters and seeing the trends of global warming in the region tries to draw concomitance between two events, the latter being the reason for the former. But before coming to that conclusion it is necessary to clear out the following three points of contention.
First of all, the report provides us with the necessary condition required for the survival of the Arctic Deer. This condition being, requiring the habitat to be warm enough to produce plants which are their primary intake and cold enough to freeze the sea ice which they use for migration. It can very well be possible that the temperature in the Canadian Arctic’s have not increased but decreased to such an extent that it does not allow the plants to thrive. Lack of the primary source of the food can also be the reason for the decline of their population. To solve this, reports stating the habitat’s temperatures are required to achieve the surety about the reason behind the fall of deer’s population.
Secondly, the decline of population is based on the reports provided by the local hunters of that region. A report from an authority which cannot be trusted should not be used to base your argument on. These reports can be contorted so as to dissemble any misdeeds caused by the hunters themselves. It can be possible that the hunters are dealing with some illegal trafficking of deer and may have provided with a canard report. If the reports were provided by a trustworthy source, preferably by someone working under the government’s authority then it can be deemed as a paragon. Reports provided by the local hunters can be full of malice and should not be used as a deciding factor.
And lastly, the argument fails to provide with reasons why there cannot be some other reasons for the population decline. There can be a scenario where packs of other predators, like Polar Bears or Arctic Wolves have infested the local habitat of the deer and are hunting them down. Another possible reason can be a disease outbreak in that province which is spreading throughout their species and causing their death. The argument needs to provide with strong reports which deny the probability of such aforementioned events taking place in order to put the bullet of the blame on global warming.
So, if the argument is able to provide the evidence which is required then it will be safe to say that the decline of population is indeed due to the global warming’s prevalence in the area. But until then the argument does not carry much value.
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 492 350
No. of Characters: 2320 1500
No. of Different Words: 224 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.71 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.715 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.467 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 179 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 120 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 76 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 23.429 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 6.645 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.571 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.321 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.536 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.092 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 234, Rule ID: SO_AS_TO[1]
Message: Use simply 'to'
Suggestion: to
...ment on. These reports can be contorted so as to dissemble any misdeeds caused by the hu...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, if, lastly, may, second, secondly, so, then, well, as to, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 29.0 19.6327345309 148% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 28.8173652695 90% => OK
Preposition: 73.0 55.5748502994 131% => OK
Nominalization: 24.0 16.3942115768 146% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2404.0 2260.96107784 106% => OK
No of words: 492.0 441.139720559 112% => OK
Chars per words: 4.88617886179 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70967865282 4.56307096286 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68194426452 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 224.0 204.123752495 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.455284552846 0.468620217663 97% => OK
syllable_count: 756.9 705.55239521 107% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 4.96107784431 101% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 19.7664670659 106% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.9070641039 57.8364921388 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.476190476 119.503703932 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.4285714286 23.324526521 100% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.19047619048 5.70786347227 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 6.88822355289 160% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.67664670659 86% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.125575783545 0.218282227539 58% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0456544523216 0.0743258471296 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0576279088564 0.0701772020484 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0834136491337 0.128457276422 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0621740801058 0.0628817314937 99% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.3 14.3799401198 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 48.3550499002 117% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 12.197005988 91% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.38 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.02 8.32208582834 96% => OK
difficult_words: 101.0 98.500998004 103% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 12.3882235529 113% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.