Government funding for pure science endeavors, such as space exploration, should be reduced in order to direct more funding towards humanitarian science projects.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. Indeveloping and supporting your position, be sure to consider specific instances for which this statementmay or may not be true.
Innovation is the key to research projects. There is always a science, cognitive science, behind every innovation. Motivation to achieve goals, comes from the support of erudite people and government. Technology plays an important role in spreading the thought and implementation of this innovative idea in the rest of the world.
Though, Government can only provide support and funding to these science projects. These projects can be a huge success with government's help in one way or other or be a big failure when government does not help economically. This is because science projects are started for a good cause, demand a large amount of funding, involved a large number of resources. If we look at pure science endeavors like space exploration, why is this important? The reason is it helps us to know more about our universe. We are able to understand how gravity works and how satellites are sent into the space to process information sent to it and helps in communication.The recent Mars Orbiter Mission 2, to know about the existence of life on Mars, which is done by ISRO is a great example to understand why government funding is important for pure science endeavors. This project would not have been successful if government would have thought to fund humanitarian projects at this time because government need to work according to the requirement at current time.
However, Humanitarian science projects also need attention of government. Projects like Disaster Management, Food and Agriculture Management, Environmental and Climatic Issues and Social Science are equally important because these projects directly affect any society. We need GIS (Geographical Information System) experts to process data and predict natural calamities. An agronomist, an environmentalist or an anthropologist or a sociologist to do humanitarian science projects but to make use of their expertise we need technologies, equipments or laboratories or classrooms or NGOs. For all this, we need government funding which can help in set-up. Based on the current need, government can manage its funding. For example, if there is a prediction that there is going to be a world war for water, so government should start funding to get hydrologists to seek their help in saving water and making people aware of this. At this time, government should reduce its funding on space exploration projects.
In my opinion, Government should fund projects based on priority of projects and priority changes with time. We cannot always claim that government should not spend much on pure science endeavors. Things, people, circumstances and even technology change with time. Government should do more funding on projects which are going to affect the society in near future and reduce its funding when it is over. Hence, priority of projects should be a determining factor for funding.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 333, Rule ID: LARGE_NUMBER_OF[1]
Message: Specify a number, remove phrase, or simply use 'many' or 'numerous'
Suggestion: many; numerous
...and a large amount of funding, involved a large number of resources. If we look at pure science e...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 653, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...n sent to it and helps in communication.The recent Mars Orbiter Mission 2, to know ...
^^^
Line 5, column 910, Rule ID: IF_WOULD_HAVE_VBN[1]
Message: Did you mean 'had thought'?
Suggestion: had thought
... not have been successful if government would have thought to fund humanitarian projects at this t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, hence, however, if, look, so, for example, in my opinion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 19.5258426966 108% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 19.0 12.4196629213 153% => OK
Conjunction : 21.0 14.8657303371 141% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 30.0 33.0505617978 91% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 58.6224719101 106% => OK
Nominalization: 39.0 12.9106741573 302% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2424.0 2235.4752809 108% => OK
No of words: 458.0 442.535393258 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.29257641921 5.05705443957 105% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.62611441266 4.55969084622 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.04877385595 2.79657885939 109% => OK
Unique words: 227.0 215.323595506 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.495633187773 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 749.7 704.065955056 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 6.24550561798 112% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 23.0 20.2370786517 114% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 23.0359550562 82% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 74.5582580096 60.3974514979 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.391304348 118.986275619 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.9130434783 23.4991977007 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.91304347826 5.21951772744 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 10.2758426966 127% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.83258426966 145% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.289185987019 0.243740707755 119% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0873315001359 0.0831039109588 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0674893732135 0.0758088955206 89% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.17470967459 0.150359130593 116% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0950247871463 0.0667264976115 142% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.4 14.1392134831 95% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 52.19 48.8420337079 107% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.1743820225 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.4 12.1639044944 110% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.23 8.38706741573 98% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 100.480337079 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 9.6 11.2143820225 86% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 11.7820224719 85% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5/6 paragraphs with 3/4 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: reason 4. address both of the views presented for reason 4 (optional)
para 6: conclusion.
Rates: 54.17 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.25 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.