It is a natural process for animal species to become extinct. There is no reason why people try to prevent them from happening. Do you agree or disagree with it?
Some people believe that the occurrence of extinction of species is compatible with rules of nature. Personally, however, a sharp disagreement is my point of view as the speed of extinction becomes faster than the pre-human times.
It is true that according to science journals, the earth suffered a major extinction event over 65 million years ago because of meteoroids disaster, which wiped out to 76% of ancient fauna and flora system. Nevertheless, these environmental factors are not the critical contributor to the vanishing of certain species nowadays. In fact, industrial and residential activities of human beings have been devastating the natural habitats of wildlife, thousand tons of various toxic pollutants are drained into the atmosphere, domestic rivers, and sea during date and night. Consequently, the species are going extinct faster 1000 times than their natural rate, calculated from the fossil data, according to the Center of Biological Diversity.
Furthermore, the extinction also affects negatively the loss of food web and biodiversity. In detail, the animal world divides into two main kinds, predator and prey. Hence, a severe decline of prey in the ecosystem is able to cause the unbalance of other related species. In the USA in the 1890s, for example, a fish called “harelip sucker” enjoyed eating the snails. However, as the waste was discharged into the rivers where they lived, the snails ceased to exist, as a result, fish also starved to death. So, preventing from extinction is to ensure global food security as well.
In conclusion, pursuant to the above analysis, the extinction mostly is due to human-caused, but no longer a natural process, it would be human turn in the future if no actions or proper measures from now.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 448, Rule ID: NODT_DOZEN[1]
Message: Use simply: 'a thousand'.
Suggestion: a thousand
...ating the natural habitats of wildlife, thousand tons of various toxic pollutants are dr...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, furthermore, hence, however, if, nevertheless, so, well, for example, in conclusion, in fact, as a result, it is true
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 13.1623246493 91% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 7.85571142285 13% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 7.30460921844 55% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 8.0 24.0651302605 33% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 41.998997996 102% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1499.0 1615.20841683 93% => OK
No of words: 284.0 315.596192385 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.27816901408 5.12529762239 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10515524023 4.20363070211 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91192499579 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 187.0 176.041082164 106% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.658450704225 0.561755894193 117% => OK
syllable_count: 467.1 506.74238477 92% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 5.43587174349 55% => OK
Article: 9.0 2.52805611222 356% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 2.10420841683 95% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.809619238477 247% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 4.76152304609 105% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 16.0721442886 81% => 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: 21.0 20.2975951904 103% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.9148141574 49.4020404114 105% => OK
Chars per sentence: 115.307692308 106.682146367 108% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.8461538462 20.7667163134 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 10.9230769231 7.06120827912 155% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 8.67935871743 46% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 3.4128256513 59% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.204110505302 0.244688304435 83% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0608483115918 0.084324248473 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0536507969366 0.0667982634062 80% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.115040030277 0.151304729494 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0306336749744 0.056905535591 54% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.0946893788 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 50.2224549098 100% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.34 12.4159519038 107% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.02 8.58950901804 117% => OK
difficult_words: 96.0 78.4519038076 122% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.1190380762 103% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.7795591182 111% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 Out of 9
---------------------
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.