It is observed that archaeologists have blatantly proposed that human were responsible for the extinct of mammal species. However, all evidences provided in the passage can also point to some different direction, through which can explain that humans might not be responsible for extinct of mammal.
First evidence that needs to be considered it that humans arrived in the Kaliko islands 70000 years ago, but it was after 3000 years that large mammal species became extinct. It is surprising to note that why did it take 3000 years for this incident? If humans were relying for their food by fishing and hunting, then mammals should have been extincted long back. One reason behind their being extinct is the conditions. It might be possible that conditions weren't favorable for these large species which lead them to die. Because, considering the human capability, it would be quite difficult for them to kill these large mammals.
Archaeologists also did not find any big or harmful weapons because just fetching stones and knifes won't ensure that humans used them to kill the species. As large species have extincted, humans would definitely need some big weapons for them. Did archaeologists find other reasons for humans using stones and knifes? It can also be explained that they used them for their normal mundane activities like cutting trees, plants for food, for shelter as well as for protection among themselves. As archaeologists found bones of fish, it can also be plausibly explained that large species were dependent on small fishes and they might have ran out of the stock. This can also be the main reason for such extinct.
Thus, considering all above factors, it can be explained that humans cannot be the only reason for the extinct of mammals as there could be several other factors behind this. Unfavorable weather conditions could have reduced the number of small fishes on whom large species depended a lot. Reduction in small ones can be the main reason for the reduction in large ones.
Essay evaluation report
flaws:
the arguments are not right on the point.
----------------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: ? out of 6
Category: Poor Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 17 15
No. of Words: 337 350
No. of Characters: 1649 1500
No. of Different Words: 166 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.285 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.893 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.457 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 111 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 81 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 42 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 34 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 19.824 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.213 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.471 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.348 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.53 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.178 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 459, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: weren't
...s. It might be possible that conditions werent favorable for these large species which...
^^^^^^
Line 5, column 637, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'run'.
Suggestion: run
...ent on small fishes and they might have ran out of the stock. This can also be the ...
^^^
Line 7, column 103, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...humans cannot be the only reason for the extinct of mammals as there could be sev...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, so, then, thus, well, as for, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.6327345309 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 12.9520958084 131% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 11.1786427146 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 38.0 28.8173652695 132% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 28.0 55.5748502994 50% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 5.0 16.3942115768 30% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1713.0 2260.96107784 76% => OK
No of words: 335.0 441.139720559 76% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.11343283582 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.27820116611 4.56307096286 94% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51206046129 2.78398813304 90% => OK
Unique words: 171.0 204.123752495 84% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.510447761194 0.468620217663 109% => OK
syllable_count: 503.1 705.55239521 71% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 4.96107784431 161% => OK
Article: 0.0 8.76447105788 0% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 17.0 19.7664670659 86% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 22.8473053892 83% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 43.0345479625 57.8364921388 74% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.764705882 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.7058823529 23.324526521 84% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.17647058824 5.70786347227 73% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 5.15768463074 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.20758483034 49% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.186264949296 0.218282227539 85% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0784693218031 0.0743258471296 106% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0804205377919 0.0701772020484 115% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.130875365536 0.128457276422 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0714797178689 0.0628817314937 114% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.3799401198 87% => 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: 12.36 12.5979740519 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.93 8.32208582834 95% => OK
difficult_words: 71.0 98.500998004 72% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.1389221557 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 62.5 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.75 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.