There is little justification for society to make extraordinary efforts — especially at a great cost in money and jobs — to save endangered animal or plant species.
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
Industrial development marked the beginning of the twentieth century. Technology has advanced at a pace unforeseeable. This development came at a cost, for which all the species on the planet earth are paying dearly, some more than others. The issue of saving endangered species from going extinct is hot button topic amongst environmentalists and scientists. The issue is a complex one and finding solution, even for the experts in the subject, is proving to be quite difficult. Some think it is better not to spend money and time to save endangered species, since it is a waste of resources.
I believe we need to handle this problem with utmost care and decide where to focus our resources. There area cases where our efforts, no matter how relentless, are fruitless.
Soon after the industrial development in the early 1900's, our impact on the planet has increased to the point of no return. Our lives has changes significantly from that of out ancestors. Unfortunately, we damaged the surroundings and various ecological systems while this 'progress'. This irreparable change in many ecological systems has put many species on the edge of extinction. For instance, the area surrounding thick forests of the amazon in southern American used to be home to thousands of species. However, due to human intervention in habitat of these species, they have gone extinct. Their extinction in turn has hurt the local economies. These local economies, in turn, switched to the alternate occupations. The above example illustrates that many species are going extinct because of our actions. Therefore is our duty to help them, irrespective of the cost.
However, even though it is our duty to help these species from going extinct, we must set the limit on how much resources are we going to spend. For instance, white Sumatran rhino is an endangered species found in Indonesian forests. Many environmental agencies came together and tried to save the species. However, all their efforts were in vain because the last couple of Rhinos couldn't cope with surroundings, which were not their original habitat. In cases similar to these, there is no point in putting in many and time amongst other resources.
In conclusion, we must decide whether to intervene or not when a species is going extinct. There is no one true solution for all cases. However, we must try to help as many species as possible, since they are the indirect victims of our actions.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 812, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Therefore,
...e going extinct because of our actions. Therefore is our duty to help them, irrespective ...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 6, column 108, Rule ID: MUCH_COUNTABLE[1]
Message: Use 'many' with countable nouns.
Suggestion: many
...g extinct, we must set the limit on how much resources are we going to spend. For in...
^^^^
Line 6, column 382, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
... vain because the last couple of Rhinos couldnt cope with surroundings, which were not ...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, however, if, so, therefore, while, for instance, in conclusion
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 20.0 19.5258426966 102% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 12.4196629213 32% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 14.8657303371 54% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 11.3162921348 62% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 34.0 33.0505617978 103% => OK
Preposition: 60.0 58.6224719101 102% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 12.9106741573 77% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2049.0 2235.4752809 92% => OK
No of words: 406.0 442.535393258 92% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.04679802956 5.05705443957 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.48881294772 4.55969084622 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.84274975832 2.79657885939 102% => OK
Unique words: 211.0 215.323595506 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.519704433498 0.4932671777 105% => OK
syllable_count: 644.4 704.065955056 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59117977528 101% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 12.0 6.24550561798 192% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.99550561798 80% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 3.10617977528 97% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.77640449438 0% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 4.38483146067 114% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 20.2370786517 128% => OK
Sentence length: 15.0 23.0359550562 65% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 27.496879866 60.3974514979 46% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 78.8076923077 118.986275619 66% => OK
Words per sentence: 15.6153846154 23.4991977007 66% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.57692307692 5.21951772744 49% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 10.2758426966 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 5.13820224719 136% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 9.0 4.83258426966 186% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0995893801536 0.243740707755 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0275669309078 0.0831039109588 33% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0348460021199 0.0758088955206 46% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0575904360098 0.150359130593 38% => Maybe some paragraphs are off the topic.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0500133915405 0.0667264976115 75% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.2 14.1392134831 72% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 56.25 48.8420337079 115% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.92365168539 39% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 12.1743820225 75% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.71 12.1639044944 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.27 8.38706741573 99% => OK
difficult_words: 100.0 100.480337079 100% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.8971910112 71% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.0 11.2143820225 71% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.7820224719 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 16.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.