Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities.
Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
Earth contains various creatures and each and every species play certain roles in the food chain. Food chain is a extremely intricate hierarchy where extermination of a single living creature can cause lethal consequences. I believe that the society should try their best to protect all species even if they are not on the verge of extinction due to human activities.
First of all, just as mentioned above, all species play their roles in the food chain. An extinction of a specie whether it is getting extinguished due to human activities or not, it might have great influence throughout all species and potentially influence the human species. I would like to mention pandas that once faced eternal extinction as an example. Even though they did not face endangerment due to human activities, scientists spent all their efforts in trying to save a number of pandas from getting eradicated. They had seen the potential lethal effect brought on to humans with the extermination of the pandas. If the pandas are eradicated from the Earth, bamboos which are their main food source would flourish in the forest, causing other trees and plants such as pine trees or flowers to forestall. This would cause other animals such as squirrels and bees to face lack of food supplies, and eventually their number would decline which leads to second level predators such as fox and wolves to decline. Then, their rivals such as tigers and lions would prosper consuming all the other preys, and eventually humans would no longer have enough food to consume unless we kill them.
Furthermore, I believe it is our responsibility to protect all species because we may not have figured out what potential the species that is facing endangerment contains. For example, we say that bananas are on the verge of extinction due to humans only allowing certain type of bananas to be bred. At first, we did not care even if environmentalists were concerned of the eradication of the bananas. However, scientists later found out that bananas are essential in humans' food dietary because it contains excessive amount of nutrients such as callium and are found rare in other consumable species. Just as this example, there may be other species that are being endangered in other reasons besides human activities, and we still might haven't figured out what benefits it can provide for humans.
To sum up, an extinction of a certain specie can bring lethal effects on the intricate food chain and eventually causes malignant consequences to human species. Also we may not have yet figured whether that certain specie has certain beneficial effects for human species. Due to such reasons, I believe the society should try to protect species that are facing potential extinction even if they are not caused by human activities.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 113, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'an' instead of 'a' if the following word starts with a vowel sound, e.g. 'an article', 'an hour'
Suggestion: an
... roles in the food chain. Food chain is a extremely intricate hierarchy where ext...
^
Line 3, column 740, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: haven't
...es human activities, and we still might havent figured out what benefits it can provid...
^^^^^^
Line 4, column 161, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Also,
...alignant consequences to human species. Also we may not have yet figured whether tha...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, first, furthermore, however, if, may, second, so, still, then, as to, for example, such as, first of all, to sum up
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.4196629213 129% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 14.8657303371 101% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.3162921348 97% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 33.0505617978 112% => OK
Preposition: 56.0 58.6224719101 96% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2334.0 2235.4752809 104% => OK
No of words: 466.0 442.535393258 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.00858369099 5.05705443957 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.64618479453 4.55969084622 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.6875932627 2.79657885939 96% => OK
Unique words: 212.0 215.323595506 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.454935622318 0.4932671777 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 719.1 704.065955056 102% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59117977528 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 6.24550561798 160% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 3.0 1.77640449438 169% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.38483146067 46% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.2370786517 94% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 40.5248120022 60.3974514979 67% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.842105263 118.986275619 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.5263157895 23.4991977007 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.84210526316 5.21951772744 131% => OK
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: 3.0 4.83258426966 62% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.183677540915 0.243740707755 75% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0673510856967 0.0831039109588 81% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.053840061635 0.0758088955206 71% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.128491020045 0.150359130593 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0261814621002 0.0667264976115 39% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 14.1392134831 102% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 55.58 48.8420337079 114% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 12.1743820225 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.07 12.1639044944 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.01 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 94.0 100.480337079 94% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => 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: 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.