Some people believe that society should try to save every plant and animal species, despite the expense to humans in effort, time and financial well-being. Others believe that society need not make extraordinary efforts, especially at a great cost in money and jobs, to save endangered species.
Awed by the large scale of global ecology, geologists are often keen to believe that the gradual transformation of Earth has not much relationship with human activity. In contrast, however, biologists who are looking at grandiose changes of decades contend that the influence of human forces has gained its weight to an unimaginable amount. The statement shows how both positions differ, requiring us wary vigilance. The thesis of this essay states as follows that it is not less safe to emphasize the importance of biodiversity rather than diffidently turning our faces against the issue due to possible costs.
Admittedly, for the others who argue that taking effort to restore biodiversity requires a significant amount of costs in practical issues, fulfilling basic standards of living should be focused on the most. That is, if imminent shortcomings are predicted in the near future, the priority is to resolve the problems and take pragmatic steps such as recovering financial bankruptcy or alleviating unemployment. For instance, in cases where the significant spread of Avian Influenza has resulted in tremendous loss of human infrastructure, the government cannot help but implement a mass disposal of chicken that are infected. Thus certain circumstances allow only a single option - the perseverance of human species or championing human resources over other animal or plant species - because of the imminence of disastrous effects.
Nevertheless, society is responsible for preserving as many natural species as it can simply because most of the catastrophe on earth has happened mainly due to the destructive behavior of human species during the last several centuries. Take, for example, the massive extinction of endangered species due to global warming and environmental change. It is almost fully revealed that industrial exploitation is one of the major culprits of the recent climate change. Many environmentalists throughout the world have started to take significant political action in order to stop destroying the ecosystem. That is, notwithstanding the substantial costs for taking initiatives to preserve endangered species, responsibility lies on the society due to its past commitment in environmental destruction.
Furthermore, saving as much as natural species and protecting a diverse ecosystem not only helps the human species to survive on resources but accelerates a flourishing culture and a promising future for our descendants. Throughout history, human civilization has depended upon agricultural resources and hunting plants of species. This means that without natural resources human species are not able to survive even a single second on the coarse planet called Earth. We ourselves are parasites of the globe, relying on nutritious resources. Thus, in order to maintain our survival we need to consistently be aware of the fact that the natural resources and living species do not lose their original track. In addition, by guaranteeing sustainable resonance with other species, human cultures can be vitalized through the aesthetical and educational value of nature.
We may now conclude that taking efforts to eco diversity is worth implementing despite the potential costs in practical approaches. While in the short-term the cost may seem significant, residing among a well-balanced nature shall bring long-term prosperity.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 2, column 626, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Thus,
... disposal of chicken that are infected. Thus certain circumstances allow only a sing...
^^^^
Line 4, column 260, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
.... Throughout history, human civilization has depended upon agricultural resources...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, furthermore, however, if, look, may, nevertheless, second, so, thus, well, while, for example, for instance, in addition, in contrast, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 19.5258426966 87% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 12.4196629213 64% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 14.0 11.3162921348 124% => OK
Pronoun: 27.0 33.0505617978 82% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 58.6224719101 126% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 12.9106741573 139% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2863.0 2235.4752809 128% => OK
No of words: 511.0 442.535393258 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.60273972603 5.05705443957 111% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75450408675 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.19243617202 2.79657885939 114% => OK
Unique words: 302.0 215.323595506 140% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.590998043053 0.4932671777 120% => OK
syllable_count: 903.6 704.065955056 128% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.59117977528 113% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.99550561798 100% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.10617977528 64% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.38483146067 137% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.6111915167 60.3974514979 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 136.333333333 118.986275619 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.3333333333 23.4991977007 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.0 5.21951772744 134% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 7.80617977528 26% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 10.2758426966 107% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.83258426966 83% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.200205953628 0.243740707755 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0477320131547 0.0831039109588 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0380146143484 0.0758088955206 50% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0945447670313 0.150359130593 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0276821058113 0.0667264976115 41% => 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: 17.1 14.1392134831 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 30.2 48.8420337079 62% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 12.1743820225 123% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.5 12.1639044944 127% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.33 8.38706741573 123% => OK
difficult_words: 178.0 100.480337079 177% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.5 11.8971910112 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 15.0 11.7820224719 127% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.