Three years ago, because of flooding at the Western Palean Wildlife Preserve, 100 lions and 100 western gazelles were moved to the East Palean Preserve, an area that is home to most of the same species that are found in the western preserve, though in larger numbers, and to the eastern gazelle, a close relative of the western gazelle. The only difference in climate is that the eastern preserve typically has slightly less rainfall. Unfortunately, after three years in the eastern preserve, the imported western gazelle population has been virtually eliminated. Since the slight reduction in rainfall cannot be the cause of the virtual elimination of western gazelle, their disappearance must have been caused by the larger number of predators in the eastern preserve.
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 says that the disappearance of the western gazelles was due to a large number of predators in the eastern preserve, based on the evidence that a slight decline in rainfall cannot be the cause of this elimination. Stated in this way, the argument fails to take several pivotal factors into consideration for which no transparent evidence is provided. Therefore, the argument remains fallacious and open for debate. Nevertheless, to make it more compelling, the following three pieces of evidence must be provided.
First of all, the author mentioned that 100 lions and 100 western gazelle were moved, but were there only 100 gazelles in the Western Palean Wildlife Preserve? If there were more than 100, why those 100 gazelles? Perhaps, the selected gazelles were delicate and ill. As a result, after the movement to Eastern Palean Preserve, they gradually died. No clear evidence is presented. If this is what is happening here, the conclusion made in the argument is fully weakened.
Furthermore, the author assumed that a slight reduction in the rainfall is not liable for the virtual elimination of western gazelles. However, the author failed to provide the reason behind it. These gazelles may prefer heavy rainfall (which can be predicted as flooding occurring at the western preserve). Therefore, a decline in the rain results in their disappearance of them. The author should delineate more tenable reasonings to make the argument more plausible.
Finally, another assumption is that the predators were the cause of gazelles' elimination, but the author scarcely provided any evidence for that. If predators were the main reason for their destruction, then how did eastern gazelles survive? Predators do not know which one is the eastern and western gazelles. In this scenario, both eastern and western gazelles could be the prey. Perhaps, there was a lack of food in the eastern zone and western gazelles could not adapt themselves to the new places, that's why they gradually decreased. If this is occurring here, the evidence provided in the argument does not hold true and thus flawed the whole conclusion.
In conclusion, the argument, as it stands now, is considerably flawed due to its reliance on many unwarranted assumptions. If the author is to offer more pursuable evidence (perhaps in the form of a systematic research study), it will be possible to assess and bolster the conclusion that predators were the main reasons for the disappearance, not the reduction in rainfall.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.0 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 4 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 4 2
No. of Sentences: 22 15
No. of Words: 406 350
No. of Characters: 2043 1500
No. of Different Words: 187 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.489 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.032 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.705 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 158 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 129 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 94 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 46 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 18.455 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.948 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.727 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.317 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.517 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.109 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 77, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...ance of the western gazelles was due to a large number of predators in the eastern preserve, base...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 471, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...made in the argument is fully weakened. Furthermore, the author assumed that a s...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 504, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: that's
...not adapt themselves to the new places, thats why they gradually decreased. If this i...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, finally, first, furthermore, however, if, may, nevertheless, so, then, therefore, thus, in conclusion, as a result, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 13.6137724551 73% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 25.0 28.8173652695 87% => OK
Preposition: 40.0 55.5748502994 72% => OK
Nominalization: 27.0 16.3942115768 165% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2108.0 2260.96107784 93% => OK
No of words: 406.0 441.139720559 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.1921182266 5.12650576532 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48881294772 4.56307096286 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.82342942946 2.78398813304 101% => OK
Unique words: 194.0 204.123752495 95% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.477832512315 0.468620217663 102% => OK
syllable_count: 655.2 705.55239521 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 4.96107784431 60% => OK
Article: 13.0 8.76447105788 148% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 2.0 1.67365269461 119% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 19.7664670659 116% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.8473053892 74% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 52.8901561733 57.8364921388 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.652173913 119.503703932 77% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.652173913 23.324526521 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.78260869565 5.70786347227 101% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 8.20758483034 24% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 12.0 6.88822355289 174% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.67664670659 192% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.21561611309 0.218282227539 99% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0620130075351 0.0743258471296 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.100028485777 0.0701772020484 143% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.122622218887 0.128457276422 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.120452746783 0.0628817314937 192% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 14.3799401198 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 48.3550499002 112% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 12.197005988 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.53 12.5979740519 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.1 8.32208582834 97% => OK
difficult_words: 93.0 98.500998004 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 12.3882235529 89% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 11.1389221557 79% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.9071856287 84% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 50.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.0 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.