"Most homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold, have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating. Last heating season that region experienced 90 days with below-normal temperatures and climate forecasters predict that this weather pattern will continue for several more years. Furthermore, many new homes are being built in the region in response to recent population growth. Because of these trends, we predict an increased demand for heating oil and recommend investment in Consolidated Industries, one of whose major business operations is the retail sale of home heating oil."
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 author of the argument purportedly highlights that as climate get colder during winter many homes need oil in order to heat their houses. For this reason, they should invest in the sale of home heating oil to make a good profit. However, the premises upon which he/she puts his/her claim are fallacious. For the support of which more well-established evidence should be given.
First, the author contends that the most homes in the northeastern United States traditionally used oil in order to heat their homes. However, it does not lend credence to the argument since there is no sufficient evidence to support if oil is still popular among people with the advent of new and modern technology for heating homes. One point that should be considered is that there is a possibility that majorities of people prefer to use gas in order to heat their homes. Indeed, nowadays, gas is used popularly among people, which is cheaper than oil. It is also important to say that the author does not show to the extent homes in that region use oil during winter. Maybe they use oil for other purposes, not to heating homes. Or perhaps they just save oil in their reservoirs for repairing things.
The author also asserts that climate predictors anticipated that weather might get colder for many years. Although it might seem tenable at the face, it has some defects due to the paucity of evidence that would consolidate the premise the otherwise. One of the main, if not the only, problem with the premise is that we all know that forecasters just predict the climate condition and what if their prediction do not come true? What if the weather gets milder or even warmer? Indeed, the prediction could not guarantee that people will need oil in many years. Alongside that, perhaps the climate get colder just for a short time not too many years who knows?
Finally, as set forth by the author as population increase in this region, crowds of homes are building in the response to population growth. Nevertheless, the rationale behind this premise could be challenged owing to an inadequate evidence to support if these homes are building traditionally or with the latest modern technology. One point that should not go unnoticed is that new construction are based on new technology and new technology include new heating condition. There is a possibility that new homes do not need to be heated by oil due to the fact that modern technology heats the homes better than oil or perhaps cheaper. In this situation, investment in home heating oil will not be profitable.
Having scrutinized all the premises, a logical conclusion that can be drawn is that there is some evidence, having been ignored by the author while the presence of which could add to the logic of each premise.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 8, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...me heating oil will not be profitable. Having scrutinized all the premises, a l...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, first, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, still, well, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 11.1786427146 63% => OK
Relative clauses : 25.0 13.6137724551 184% => OK
Pronoun: 42.0 28.8173652695 146% => OK
Preposition: 55.0 55.5748502994 99% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2309.0 2260.96107784 102% => OK
No of words: 476.0 441.139720559 108% => OK
Chars per words: 4.85084033613 5.12650576532 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.67091256922 4.56307096286 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58159258208 2.78398813304 93% => OK
Unique words: 215.0 204.123752495 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.451680672269 0.468620217663 96% => OK
syllable_count: 717.3 705.55239521 102% => 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
Interrogative: 1.0 0.471057884232 212% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.1984705023 57.8364921388 80% => OK
Chars per sentence: 100.391304348 119.503703932 84% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.6956521739 23.324526521 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.30434782609 5.70786347227 58% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
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: 0.242062946697 0.218282227539 111% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0759778449692 0.0743258471296 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0599366774019 0.0701772020484 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.12527137324 0.128457276422 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0733447024958 0.0628817314937 117% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 14.3799401198 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 59.64 48.3550499002 123% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.85 12.5979740519 86% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.78 8.32208582834 93% => OK
difficult_words: 95.0 98.500998004 96% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6 -- The score is based on the average performance of 20,000 argument essays. This e-grader is not smart enough to check on arguments.
---------------------
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.