Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
The author propounds that the governor should allocate the funding over the scientific activities which possesses the lucid outcome. This is the claim with which I generally do not concur, among the countless rearing reasons which give adherence to my viewpoint, I will delve into the most conspicuous ones in the following paragraphs, to support my standpoint.
The first striking reason which should be considered is the prolonged duration of scientific exploration and investigation. Indeed, none of the scientific events does appear overnight and requires a long investigation and examination until ended to the goal. An explicit instance, for this reason, is the period for configuration of the periodic table, this table is arranged and rearranged over the 78 years. Different chemists had a role for fulfillment of a part of this table; therefore, the ultimate achievement is not achieved during a solo governing period by a specified individual. In this scenario, according to the author’s advice, the first endeavors of the first chemists for the sake of their incomplete table should not be supported by the governors. However, this consul overlooks the effect of these activities over the future chemists who completed the table.
Another equal crux reason is the none existence of the well-defined outcome for any activity. Especially in the field of science, various factors possess control over the terminal achievement, which is out of the scientist’s control. Therefore, the probability of ending the different type of result from the proposed one in the initial step of the activities is so high, or even because of these varied environmental factors, there is the possibility of the facing the failure. In this case, the altered outcome or defeated consequence should not be valued as an unimportant event and underestimate them. Actually, all of that weakness and alterations pave the path for future endeavors, an reduce the ratio of the distractive elements from the path of scientific activity. For example, the defeated activities by Brendlinger or Hasan Celebi caused by the identification of the issues over the invention of the airplane and made the future inventors eliminate the possible errors. That they faced.
Finally, the effect of money over mankind’s daily life should not be underestimated. The fact that money provides the human’s demand is undeniable; in addition, a sufficient financial source for fulfillment of these requirements also reduce the man’s concern over this need. Consequently, by leaders support from the scientist’s financial need, there will be the omission of stress cause of the financial issue in inventors’ life; thus, they will have more chance for the flourishment and exploration over the unknown realms in science for the sake of the existence of the full concentration. Therefore, the ratio of the success of these activities will be increased.
To wrap it up, all the aforementioned reasons explicitly depict the effect of the financial support over the scientific activities and impossibility of prediction of result in the field of science. So, the governor should rear all the activities in the field of science to gain more feats in this area.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 695, Rule ID: EN_A_VS_AN
Message: Use 'a' instead of 'an' if the following word doesn't start with a vowel sound, e.g. 'a sentence', 'a university'
Suggestion: a
...ons pave the path for future endeavors, an reduce the ratio of the distractive ele...
^^
Line 3, column 695, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
...ons pave the path for future endeavors, an reduce the ratio of the distractive elements f...
^^^^^^^^^
Line 5, column 303, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...cience to gain more feats in this area.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, consequently, finally, first, however, if, look, so, therefore, thus, well, for example, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.5258426966 82% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 12.4196629213 97% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 14.8657303371 81% => OK
Relative clauses : 10.0 11.3162921348 88% => OK
Pronoun: 26.0 33.0505617978 79% => OK
Preposition: 74.0 58.6224719101 126% => OK
Nominalization: 26.0 12.9106741573 201% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2745.0 2235.4752809 123% => OK
No of words: 510.0 442.535393258 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.38235294118 5.05705443957 106% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.75217629947 4.55969084622 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.17462122393 2.79657885939 114% => OK
Unique words: 252.0 215.323595506 117% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.494117647059 0.4932671777 100% => OK
syllable_count: 865.8 704.065955056 123% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59117977528 107% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 6.24550561798 96% => OK
Article: 14.0 4.99550561798 280% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 0.0 3.10617977528 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.77640449438 56% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 4.38483146067 182% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 21.0 20.2370786517 104% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 23.0359550562 104% => OK
Sentence length SD: 66.2100690426 60.3974514979 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 130.714285714 118.986275619 110% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.2857142857 23.4991977007 103% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.52380952381 5.21951772744 106% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.97078651685 101% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 7.80617977528 38% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 10.2758426966 68% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 5.13820224719 117% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.83258426966 166% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0992047085895 0.243740707755 41% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0311596409456 0.0831039109588 37% => Sentence topic similarity is low.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.037377175581 0.0758088955206 49% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0659335212016 0.150359130593 44% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0476141650834 0.0667264976115 71% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.1 14.1392134831 114% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 38.66 48.8420337079 79% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.92365168539 141% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.8 12.1743820225 113% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 14.22 12.1639044944 117% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.38 8.38706741573 112% => OK
difficult_words: 147.0 100.480337079 146% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.8971910112 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.2143820225 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.7820224719 102% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.