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.
We are currently living through what numerous environmental scientists consider a modern mass extinction with human manipulation of the environment as a primary source. The actions of mankind have wreaked havoc on ecosystems worldwide and upset natural equilibria, leading to a several hundred-fold uptick in the extinction rate of the preceding millennia. The prompt suggests that humans remedy this environmental catastrophe only in cases where the threat to endangered species is directly tied to human activities. There is some merit to this consideration, as it is the nature of species to go extinct in the vast majority of cases. Well over ninety percent of the species that have ever existed had already gone extinct before humans ever occupied the Earth. Survival of the fittest dictates that genetic mutations promoting traits suited to the environment will thrive, while those maladaptive to the current surroundings will fail and vanish. However, mankind has reshaped the planet so drastically that our role as stewards of nature must now extend beyond just the cases in which a clear cause and effect relationship of our harm to them can be established.
First, human activity on the planet has touched every inch of the surface, as well as much of the vast depths of the oceans, and therefore at least indirectly affects virtually all species. Pollution and massive carbon emissions into the atmosphere have reshaped the global climate: increasing average temperatures of the air, acidifying the oceans and presenting hazardous waste and plastic into globally circulating water sources. Even the depths of the deepest ocean on Earth have been littered with plastic debris. If we work to save any endangered animal species, we are working to save animal species affected by our actions.
Furthermore, because our impact has been so pervasive, we have a duty to preserve what biodiversity we can to atone for the thousands of species we have already harmed or completely eradicated. While humans have not contributed to dwindling panda populations as much as we have the populations of endangered birds whose eggs can no longer calcify correctly in acidic conditions, most humans can appreciate the value of keeping pandas around. Altruism begets a more wondrous natural environment than a tit-for-tat mentality.
Human globalization has irreversibly altered the landscape on which animals must live their lives, and for many of them, this new environment would lead to their downfalls. We must understand the impact that we have had on the world and take roles as preservers of the life that we have so deeply affected.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, first, furthermore, however, if, so, therefore, well, while, as to, at least, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 19.5258426966 41% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 10.0 12.4196629213 81% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 14.8657303371 67% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 33.0505617978 88% => OK
Preposition: 54.0 58.6224719101 92% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2219.0 2235.4752809 99% => OK
No of words: 421.0 442.535393258 95% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27078384798 5.05705443957 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.52971130743 4.55969084622 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.90478710002 2.79657885939 104% => OK
Unique words: 244.0 215.323595506 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.579572446556 0.4932671777 117% => OK
syllable_count: 711.9 704.065955056 101% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 6.24550561798 80% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.99550561798 40% => OK
Subordination: 6.0 3.10617977528 193% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.77640449438 113% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 4.38483146067 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 20.2370786517 79% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 26.0 23.0359550562 113% => OK
Sentence length SD: 49.0903185465 60.3974514979 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 138.6875 118.986275619 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.3125 23.4991977007 112% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.8125 5.21951772744 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.97078651685 80% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 7.80617977528 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 10.2758426966 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 8.0 5.13820224719 156% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.83258426966 41% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.130612714072 0.243740707755 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.045550563413 0.0831039109588 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0414802480338 0.0758088955206 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0762100977505 0.150359130593 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0353599548491 0.0667264976115 53% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.5 14.1392134831 117% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 36.63 48.8420337079 75% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 14.6 12.1743820225 120% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.1639044944 112% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.14 8.38706741573 121% => OK
difficult_words: 139.0 100.480337079 138% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 15.0 11.8971910112 126% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 11.2143820225 111% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => 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.