Society should make efforts to save endangered species only if the potential extinction of those species is the result of human activities.
The issue is to save the endengered species, we have to save them, but should we save the species which are in the red zone not because of human activities. I think we should save the endengered species regardless of our contribution in putting them in survival crisis.
Life was spawn on earth few billions of years ago, from that very date it is keep evolving itself to fit in the food chain. Human interruption is not before some millions of years ago, the time-period from when the food chain started breaking. Natures has gave each of the species enough time to evolve in the current form but for humans that process was fast-tracked because of our giant brains. Although there is no proper proof to support my claim, but I believe that due to our speedy evolution we interrupted the calculations of mother nature. Look at the examples a million year before no human tried to left the savanah of Africa but suddenly we started exploring and hunting down the animals in Europe and Asia, so their food chain got interrupted. Some historians even believe that our species Homo-Sepiens is the very reason that became reason behind the extinction of Neandethals and our other few human cousins. The era of 15th to 17th century was exploration era, During which we started the sailing and carrying animals from other continents, that again interrupted the food chain. The best example for this clain is the rabbits in Australia, After transfer of just half dozon Rabbits, current population is in millions and still counting, that has became the top problems for Australian agriculture and worth mentioning the very problem for native animals. After that comes the industrial age in 18th and 19th century, we started making ships and submarines. Although to make world better place, but also to win wars, The marine life is vastly slaughtererd because of this. The main reason is the marine life never developed abilities to tackle the threat abov ethe water as there was no threat for billions of years and suddenly in just few hundred years we evolved but the marine life can not match that evolution speed.
I think that we even can't decypher some of the old notes, we don't even know what happed before we started to write history, so there is no way to know that we were not the reason or the reason behind the extinction of other endengered species. And after getting the believable proof that we are the reason behi dthe extinction of our cousin species, I believe that we are behind the extinction of other species, directly or indirectly.
As I stated the the example above the rabbits in Australia, The dears in Andaman Nicobar are the feral animals which are putting the life of native animal in threat and they all introduced by us. So what I mean to say is saving the other animals is important and essential for our very existance, but to play with nature carelessly also brings destruction. The motive behind the transfer of animals fro one palace other may be good, but effects can be catastrophic. We are yet to know all the secrets of evolution and nature, so till then I think we should let earth as it is, the evolution will find its way. We should not be the part of threat to specie and we should not try to save them trasfering or experimenting on them carelessly.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 257, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'given'.
Suggestion: given
...ood chain started breaking. Natures has gave each of the species enough time to evol...
^^^^
Line 3, column 1264, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'become'.
Suggestion: become
...n millions and still counting, that has became the top problems for Australian agricul...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 1682, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[8]
Message: The proper name in singular (ethe) must be used with a third-person verb: 'waters'.
Suggestion: waters
...bilities to tackle the threat abov ethe water as there was no threat for billions of ...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 22, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...volution speed. I think that we even cant decypher some of the old notes, we dont...
^^^^
Line 5, column 36, Rule ID: SOME_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'some'.
Suggestion: some
.... I think that we even cant decypher some of the old notes, we dont even know what happe...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 62, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...cant decypher some of the old notes, we dont even know what happed before we started...
^^^^
Line 7, column 13, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a word
Suggestion: the
...directly or indirectly. As I stated the the example above the rabbits in Australia,...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 13, Rule ID: DT_DT[1]
Message: Maybe you need to remove one determiner so that only 'the' or 'the' is left.
Suggestion: the; the
...directly or indirectly. As I stated the the example above the rabbits in Australia,...
^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 400, Rule ID: FOR_FRO[1]
Message: Did you mean 'for'?
Suggestion: for
...e motive behind the transfer of animals fro one palace other may be good, but effec...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, if, look, may, so, still, then, i mean, i think
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 27.0 19.5258426966 138% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 9.0 12.4196629213 72% => OK
Conjunction : 26.0 14.8657303371 175% => OK
Relative clauses : 17.0 11.3162921348 150% => OK
Pronoun: 59.0 33.0505617978 179% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 74.0 58.6224719101 126% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 12.9106741573 108% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2717.0 2235.4752809 122% => OK
No of words: 578.0 442.535393258 131% => OK
Chars per words: 4.70069204152 5.05705443957 93% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.90322654589 4.55969084622 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.5320735643 2.79657885939 91% => OK
Unique words: 265.0 215.323595506 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.458477508651 0.4932671777 93% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 850.5 704.065955056 121% => 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: 9.0 4.99550561798 180% => OK
Subordination: 5.0 3.10617977528 161% => OK
Conjunction: 6.0 1.77640449438 338% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.38483146067 91% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 20.2370786517 99% => OK
Sentence length: 28.0 23.0359550562 122% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 48.6521068403 60.3974514979 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.85 118.986275619 114% => OK
Words per sentence: 28.9 23.4991977007 123% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.9 5.21951772744 56% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 9.0 7.80617977528 115% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 10.2758426966 39% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 11.0 5.13820224719 214% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.83258426966 103% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.135144398389 0.243740707755 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0513472135035 0.0831039109588 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0678933310626 0.0758088955206 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.110462325638 0.150359130593 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0840035651852 0.0667264976115 126% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 14.1392134831 108% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 51.52 48.8420337079 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.92365168539 111% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 12.1743820225 107% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.57 12.1639044944 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.03 8.38706741573 96% => OK
difficult_words: 110.0 100.480337079 109% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.8971910112 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 13.2 11.2143820225 118% => 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: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.