Scientists and tourists can travel to remote natural environments such as the South Pole Do you think the advantages outweigh its disadvantages

As technology has developed, people can now travel to remote natural areas. Both the advantages and disadvantages of this trend will be thoroughly discussed in this essay.
On the one hand, visiting isolated natural places has some benefits. Firstly, this is a newer and more interesting type of travelling. Going to other cities or countries has been too common for most people, so it might be more exciting for them to explore new places such as the South Pole or the Amazon rainforest. This gives them valuable experiences and unforgettable memories. Secondly, when visiting remote areas, people, especially scientists, might acquire more knowledge about the natural habitat. For example, when coming to the North Pole, scientists can learn about the life of polar bears which live far away from humans.
On the other hand, I believe there are some drawbacks of this development. The first one is that travelling to remote natural areas can be risky if the travellers are not sufficiently prepared. For instance, the temperature at the South Pole is usually very low, which adversely affects people's health. Travelling to forests can also be dangerous as people have to face the risk of being attacked by animals. Also, since visiting isolated places often requires a large amount of investment in researching and ensuring the safety of travellers, the costs of travelling tend to be high. Therefore, it seems like only scientists and rich people can afford this activity, so this development is likely to benefit only a small group of individuals.
In conclusion, I believe the disadvantages of people being able to travel to remote areas outweigh its advantages, and this is a negative development.

Votes
Average: 7.8 (1 vote)

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, firstly, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, for example, for instance, in conclusion, such as, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 15.0 13.1623246493 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 10.4138276553 77% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 7.30460921844 68% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 24.0651302605 66% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 41.998997996 79% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 8.3376753507 60% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1430.0 1615.20841683 89% => OK
No of words: 277.0 315.596192385 88% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.16245487365 5.12529762239 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07962216107 4.20363070211 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86741246472 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 163.0 176.041082164 93% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.58844765343 0.561755894193 105% => OK
syllable_count: 459.0 506.74238477 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 2.10420841683 190% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 15.0 16.0721442886 93% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 20.2975951904 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 38.4461528201 49.4020404114 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 95.3333333333 106.682146367 89% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.4666666667 20.7667163134 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.46666666667 7.06120827912 120% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.67935871743 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.9879759519 100% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 3.4128256513 29% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.239030385975 0.244688304435 98% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0771721762671 0.084324248473 92% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0654766547314 0.0667982634062 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.161286474658 0.151304729494 107% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0278068658237 0.056905535591 49% => 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: 12.1 13.0946893788 92% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 44.75 50.2224549098 89% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.3001002004 102% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.4159519038 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.86 8.58950901804 103% => OK
difficult_words: 76.0 78.4519038076 97% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 9.78957915832 77% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.1190380762 91% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------

Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.