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.
The prompt suggests that the extinction of mammals in the Kaliko Island could not have been due to Human intervention, but due to the climate change or other environmental factor must have caused it. As archeaologist have found numerous sites with fish bones and no mammals bones. However, before this recommendation is properly evaluated some questions must be answered.
Firstly, the author provied us with the information that humans arrived in Kaliko Island about 7000 years ago. Here, neither the clear time is not provided nor any data to support the claim has been provided in the prompt. Moreover, author says that within the 3000 years of the arrival of human mammals began to extinct; however, we do not know if the information of human arrival was valid itself. So, based on that it is hard to believe that the extinction had nothing to do with humans. As, it could be that the proper exploration of the island is yet to be done, which later might prove that humans were there before 7000 years ago and promoted the extinction of mammals.
Secondly, author says that human had no significant contact with mammals as the significant evidence of contact with the mammals have not been discovered. However, the prompt fails to provie us with the infromation such as, the percentage of island that has been exploerd, methods and tools used in finding evidence and criteria that has been selected to find evidence and validate the research outcome that humans had no contact with the mammals. Also
Lastly, the author claims that although numerous sites have been discovered with the discarded bones of fish no other sites with the bones of mammals have been found. However, it is not taken in account that the bones of mammal could have been use in other things like tool for offence. Moreover, author has not taken in account that the bones are made up of elements like phosphorous that has property to ignite and burn in contact with air so it is highly likely that the bones may have perish.
In conclusion, the prompt as it is has many flaes in it due to its reliance on the unwarranted assumptions. So, to properly evaluate the prompts' validity author must provide us with the additional informatio and answer aforementioned questions.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 6 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 11 2
No. of Sentences: 16 15
No. of Words: 384 350
No. of Characters: 1826 1500
No. of Different Words: 173 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.427 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.755 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.481 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 126 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 88 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 53 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 27 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.269 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.812 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.343 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.589 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.141 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 453, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ns had no contact with the mammals. Also Lastly, the author claims that although ...
^^^^^
Line 7, column 490, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'perished'.
Suggestion: perished
...s highly likely that the bones may have perish. In conclusion, the prompt as it is ...
^^^^^^
Line 9, column 138, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'prompts'' or 'prompt's'?
Suggestion: prompts'; prompt's
...sumptions. So, to properly evaluate the prompts validity author must provide us with th...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, if, lastly, may, moreover, second, secondly, so, in conclusion, such as
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 : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 13.6137724551 125% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 16.3942115768 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1876.0 2260.96107784 83% => OK
No of words: 384.0 441.139720559 87% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.88541666667 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.4267276788 4.56307096286 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55289102865 2.78398813304 92% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 204.123752495 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.4609375 0.468620217663 98% => OK
syllable_count: 579.6 705.55239521 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 6.0 8.76447105788 68% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 19.7664670659 76% => 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: 25.0 22.8473053892 109% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.8544139308 57.8364921388 97% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.066666667 119.503703932 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.6 23.324526521 110% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.13333333333 5.70786347227 125% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.20758483034 61% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 6.88822355289 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.264986921616 0.218282227539 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0969150181655 0.0743258471296 130% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0891258064143 0.0701772020484 127% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.14454354648 0.128457276422 113% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.114752801953 0.0628817314937 182% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.3799401198 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 54.56 48.3550499002 113% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.197005988 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.38 12.5979740519 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.29 8.32208582834 100% => OK
difficult_words: 83.0 98.500998004 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 11.1389221557 108% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4 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.