After the evolution of mankind, the activities of humans have led to an adverse effect on the bio-diversity. Some individuals opine that a lot of irreversible damage has been done, whereas others think that adequate measures can be employed to mitigate this problem. Both the contrasting views are discussed in this essay, and I believe that we can protect endangered plant and animal species with a collaborative effort.
In the past four to five decades, there has been an enormous development in humankind, like urbanization, to make human lives better. This has led to many species of plants and animals standing on the brink of extinction because many big industries and co-operations, without thinking about the environment, have deteriorated the ecosystem by cutting trees and polluting the ocean. Consequently, many species of birds, which were commonly seen in the past, are rarely spotted nowadays because the actions of humans have led to irreversible damage to the habitat of these species. A study by Oxford University, London, for example, has shown that every thirty minutes, a species of plants is getting extinct, and nothing can be done to prevent this damage.
On the contrary, some people think that we still have time left to eradicate this problem by introducing stringent policies for industries and big co-operations to prevent them from exploiting our ecosystem. This can also be achieved by educating people about the importance of endangered species of plants and animals in the food chain, and how people can contribute to this cause by bringing a change in their lifestyles. In the United States of America, for example, many NGO's have started awareness campaigns on the significance of plants and animals, which helped the country to control the extinction of forest birds to some extent.
In a nutshell, many individuals think that human actions have led to catastrophic damage to many threatened species of plants and animals, and nothing can be done about it. On the other hand, people believe that humans still have a lot of time left to take adequate steps for the prevention of our environment. I believe that, with a positive approach and a collaborative effort, people can put their best efforts to save endangered birds, animals, and plants. And, this can be achieved by making people aware of the significance of these creatures in our lives.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, consequently, if, so, still, whereas, for example, on the contrary, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 11.0 13.1623246493 84% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 8.0 7.85571142285 102% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 10.4138276553 134% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 7.30460921844 151% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 24.0651302605 121% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 64.0 41.998997996 152% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 8.3376753507 132% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1953.0 1615.20841683 121% => OK
No of words: 380.0 315.596192385 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.13947368421 5.12529762239 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.41515443553 4.20363070211 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.86382901384 2.80592935109 102% => OK
Unique words: 182.0 176.041082164 103% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.478947368421 0.561755894193 85% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 629.1 506.74238477 124% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.60771543086 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 5.43587174349 74% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 0.809619238477 618% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 10.0 4.76152304609 210% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 16.0721442886 87% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 20.2975951904 133% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 37.8647566468 49.4020404114 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 139.5 106.682146367 131% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.1428571429 20.7667163134 131% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.42857142857 7.06120827912 91% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.01903807615 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 8.67935871743 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 3.9879759519 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 0.0 3.4128256513 0% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.296139176649 0.244688304435 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.114424288581 0.084324248473 136% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0748608483691 0.0667982634062 112% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.210266319038 0.151304729494 139% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0568337606564 0.056905535591 100% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.3 13.0946893788 124% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 35.61 50.2224549098 71% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.44779559118 150% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 15.0 11.3001002004 133% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.83 12.4159519038 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.76 8.58950901804 102% => OK
difficult_words: 91.0 78.4519038076 116% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 9.78957915832 123% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.8 10.1190380762 126% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 10.7795591182 121% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 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.