Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear.
Eiffel Tower was not built in a day. It was a result of months of planning and hardwork to construct a wonder like that. So is true for most of the innovations and masterpieces that we come across. Research is the pith of every invention hence, government shouldn't stop funding any scientific researches whose consequences aren't clear. What may be ambiguous today may shape into a magnificent product/result that people failed to envision now.
Discovery of electricity, invention of phone or the first airplane were all a result of research by great scientists of that time. Even though they faced a lot of hurdles on their path to making these great discoveries, but today we are extremely thankful the authority at that time, the Church who couldn't foresee what he was trying to explain because of their dogmatic beliefs. But it is our good fortune that he didn't give up. Times have changed now where are societies are now open and unbiased to new inventions and hence, what happened with Albert Einstein is not what we want to happen with our budding scientists and their reseach therefore, governments cannot not sponsor researches which are in need.
Humans have always been very curious about studying and exploring the universe since the medieval times. From Aryabhatta's times' primitive telescope to the today's advanced telescopes, it has been a long evolving journey based on research. If such initiatives were not supported by the government, humanity would have never landed on Moon and Mars or discovered the vastness of the Universe. Designing the perfect air craft, right accessories to capture, stimulating favourable environment for the astronauts travelling etc. is all a result of humongous amount of research sponsored by the National Governments to make these missions a great success. Be it NASA of USA or ISRO of India, none of them had been successful if not for funds from their respective governments.
Only a few countable exceptions may be called as eureka moments like Archeimedy's Buoyancy Principle but even then, the development of its entire premises and scientific explanantion required a lot of research and time. Thereby, it can be concluded that setting aside one off exceptional cases, all major scientific researches requires patience and resources to reach to the final product state. And often, not everyone will be able to see the worth of an idea. So what would help government is to recruit a committee of worthy and visionary erudites who can evaluate the merit of a research proposal on lucidly across some measurable performance metrics and accordingly advice the government.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 257, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: shouldn't
...th of every invention hence, government shouldnt stop funding any scientific researches ...
^^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 324, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: aren't
...cientific researches whose consequences arent clear. What may be ambiguous today may ...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 300, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
... authority at that time, the Church who couldnt foresee what he was trying to explain b...
^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 416, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...efs. But it is our good fortune that he didnt give up. Times have changed now where a...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, but, first, hence, if, may, so, then, therefore, as a result
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.5258426966 118% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 19.0 14.8657303371 128% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 11.3162921348 106% => OK
Pronoun: 28.0 33.0505617978 85% => OK
Preposition: 57.0 58.6224719101 97% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 12.9106741573 85% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2203.0 2235.4752809 99% => OK
No of words: 429.0 442.535393258 97% => OK
Chars per words: 5.1351981352 5.05705443957 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.55107846309 4.55969084622 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.8764323196 2.79657885939 103% => OK
Unique words: 263.0 215.323595506 122% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.613053613054 0.4932671777 124% => OK
syllable_count: 689.4 704.065955056 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 6.24550561798 48% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 1.0 4.38483146067 23% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 23.0359550562 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 65.7319748735 60.3974514979 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.947368421 118.986275619 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.5789473684 23.4991977007 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.84210526316 5.21951772744 74% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 7.80617977528 51% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 15.0 10.2758426966 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 5.13820224719 58% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.83258426966 21% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.194087633415 0.243740707755 80% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0527009103361 0.0831039109588 63% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.105415410417 0.0758088955206 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116256102591 0.150359130593 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0685395119111 0.0667264976115 103% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.1 14.1392134831 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 49.15 48.8420337079 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.9 12.1743820225 98% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.83 12.1639044944 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.66 8.38706741573 115% => OK
difficult_words: 134.0 100.480337079 133% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 11.8971910112 59% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.2143820225 96% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.7820224719 93% => 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: 83.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.