Humans arrived in the Kaliko Islands about 7,000 years ago, and within 3,000 years most of the large mammal species that had lived in the forests of the Kaliko Islands had become extinct. Yet humans cannot have been a factor in the species’ extinctions, because there is no evidence that the humans had any significant contact with the mammals. Further, archaeologists have discovered numerous sites where the bones of fish had been discarded, but they found no such areas containing the bones of large mammals, so the humans cannot have hunted the mammals. Therefore, some climate change or other environmental factor must have caused the species’ extinctions.
Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
In the argument, the author states that the humans who lived on the Kaliko islands since 7000 years ago, have nothing to do with the extinction of large mammals and this is the result of climatic or environmental factors. The author came to this conclusion because of the lack of evidence that humans had strong contact with big mammals. Also, the absence of their fossils that would exist if the humans were hunting them. In order to check the viability of this conclusion, Three assumptions need to be examined.
First of all, one of the assumptions the author made is that the increase in contact with large mammals is directly proportional to their extinction. However, it's possible that humans have no contact at all with large mammals and still affects their existence. For example, the residents of the island may utilize their living environment and food resources in a negative way by cutting the trees for building the houses. Also, they may extensively use the plants and "small-sized mammals" that they feed on, for producing the needed food or medicines. So if one of these examples is valid then this conclusion is weakened.
Secondly, because the archeologists failed to find any bones for large mammals, does that mean that the humans never hunt them? There is a possibility that the humans hunted these mammals and make use of their bones in making necklaces for the females or by burning them to use in any kind of rituals like what used to happen in old times. So the bones are no more exist in their raw form. If the above is true, then the argument doesn't hold water.
Finally, If the author's conclusion is assumed to be true: the extinction of these large mammals is due to climatic or environmental factors. Is this imply that the residents of the island do not have any attribution? This may not be true. For instance, the residents may throw some harmful wastes in water sources leading to the poisoning of these mammals. Another probable scenario is that extinction may be caused because of climate change that resulted from the human activity of cutting the forests. if either of these is true then the whole argument falls down.
In conclusion, the argument as it stands now is considerably flawed due to the reliance on several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to provide us with more reliable evidence besides taking into account the above scenarios that weaken his conclusion. Then we may be able to consider the possibility of the argument.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 21 15
No. of Words: 428 350
No. of Characters: 2018 1500
No. of Different Words: 203 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.548 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.715 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.526 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 138 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 106 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 63 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 36 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.381 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.979 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.81 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.297 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.513 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.103 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 359, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a negative way" with adverb for "negative"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...r living environment and food resources in a negative way by cutting the trees for building the h...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 564, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[3]
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.
...producing the needed food or medicines. So if one of these examples is valid then thi...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 431, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...If the above is true, then the argument doesnt hold water. Finally, If the author...
^^^^^^
Line 8, column 17, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'authors'' or 'author's'?
Suggestion: authors'; author's
...doesnt hold water. Finally, If the authors conclusion is assumed to be true: the e...
^^^^^^^
Line 8, column 505, Rule ID: UPPERCASE_SENTENCE_START
Message: This sentence does not start with an uppercase letter
Suggestion: If
... human activity of cutting the forests. if either of these is true then the whole ...
^^
Line 8, column 505, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “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.
... human activity of cutting the forests. if either of these is true then the whole ...
^^
Line 11, column 125, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “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.
...nce on several unwarranted assumptions. If the author is able to provide us with m...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, finally, first, however, if, may, second, secondly, so, still, then, for example, for instance, in conclusion, kind of, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.6327345309 107% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 11.1786427146 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 13.6137724551 103% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 28.8173652695 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 62.0 55.5748502994 112% => OK
Nominalization: 17.0 16.3942115768 104% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2088.0 2260.96107784 92% => OK
No of words: 427.0 441.139720559 97% => OK
Chars per words: 4.88992974239 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54576487731 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.67954788258 2.78398813304 96% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 204.123752495 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.496487119438 0.468620217663 106% => OK
syllable_count: 653.4 705.55239521 93% => OK
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: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 2.70958083832 185% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 49.3414691564 57.8364921388 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 94.9090909091 119.503703932 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4090909091 23.324526521 83% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.90909090909 5.70786347227 121% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 7.0 5.25449101796 133% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 8.20758483034 73% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => 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: 0.160704779187 0.218282227539 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0444983799146 0.0743258471296 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0643650994724 0.0701772020484 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0908147422 0.128457276422 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0757288106494 0.0628817314937 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 14.3799401198 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 48.3550499002 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 12.197005988 78% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.08 12.5979740519 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.05 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 98.500998004 95% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 12.3882235529 85% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.