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.
In the given argument, the author asserts that having the similar climatic condition except for rainfall pattern, the virtual elimination of Western Gazelle is not a plausible cause; instead predatory action must have found its pace in due course of time. Though the given conclusion ostensibly convinces the facts, however it rests on many unwarranted assumption which when deliberately substantiated weakens the veracity of the conclusion. Therefore, the following questions must be answered.
First of all, every animal in the wild have their own territory and dominance. The addition of 100 western gazelle in the already existing area of eastern gazelle might have cause a competition among the same species. The completion lies in term of land, food and shelter they need. A dominating group of animals never accept some foreigners in their space. If this animal behavior have prevailed in the western preserve then the chances of survival of the western gazelle is questionable thus leading to its ultimate elimination. Like Darwin said, survival of the fittest. The one which is already familiar to the space is much likely to fit than the deported ones. If this situation is proven to be true, then the claim made by the author does not hold water.
Secondly, the climatic variation though little significantly cause struggle in animals at the beginning until they are adapted to it. As the author mentions that little rainfall might not be a cause for its elimination, but variation in the climate at the beginning of their shift might be a great challenge for the western gazelle especially for the young ones. If the climate needed for western gazelle is temperate but the eastern gazelle has some tropical or semi tropical climatic condition then the chances of young western gazelle to survive the climatic differences is lower. As the argument does not provide any of such evidences, then the statement thus made is fallacious and does not hold water to be true.
Lastly, for waning in the animal’s number, poaching can be another reason for this. Animal’s accessories are of primal importance in smuggling world in terms of monetary and medicinal value. So, there might be excessive hunting of the animal as the number increased significantly with addition from western preserve providing poacher with a wonderful opportunity to hunt down a large number. If this situation prevails, then the persuasiveness of the argument is seriously weakened.
To sum up, as the argument stands for now, it considerable relies on many unfolded assumptions which when corroborated with other evidences hampers its standing and veracity.
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 426 350
No. of Characters: 2170 1500
No. of Different Words: 220 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.543 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.094 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.738 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 165 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 137 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 93 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 56 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 21.3 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 9.793 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.7 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.277 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.277 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.045 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 1 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 358, 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.
... accept some foreigners in their space. If this animal behavior have prevailed in ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, however, if, lastly, second, secondly, so, then, therefore, thus, except for, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 18.0 19.6327345309 92% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.9520958084 62% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 11.1786427146 72% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 13.6137724551 51% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 18.0 28.8173652695 62% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 55.5748502994 97% => OK
Nominalization: 21.0 16.3942115768 128% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2224.0 2260.96107784 98% => OK
No of words: 426.0 441.139720559 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.220657277 5.12650576532 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54310108192 4.56307096286 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.7917618423 2.78398813304 100% => OK
Unique words: 225.0 204.123752495 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.528169014085 0.468620217663 113% => OK
syllable_count: 702.9 705.55239521 100% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 4.96107784431 20% => OK
Article: 8.0 8.76447105788 91% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 4.22255489022 71% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 19.7664670659 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.8473053892 92% => OK
Sentence length SD: 61.6034901609 57.8364921388 107% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.2 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.3 23.324526521 91% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.65 5.70786347227 99% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.25449101796 19% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 9.0 8.20758483034 110% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.67664670659 43% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.1531150075 0.218282227539 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0403072683207 0.0743258471296 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0634570630616 0.0701772020484 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0753633160822 0.128457276422 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0507465586414 0.0628817314937 81% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.8 14.3799401198 96% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 48.3550499002 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.197005988 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.0 12.5979740519 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.79 8.32208582834 106% => OK
difficult_words: 111.0 98.500998004 113% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 11.1389221557 93% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 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.