Some people think that human needs for farmland housing and industry are more important than saving land for endangered animals Do you agree or disagree with this point of view
In this age of change, many believe that the necessity of farmlands, housing, and industry are much more essential for mankind than it is for those animals that are in danger of exctinction. I firmly disagree with this statement and this essay will provide justification for the case.
Not controlling cities growth and using up lands on a large scale lead to a range of conundrums. First of all, the more people buy lands, the less animals’ habitats get. More specifically, they need enough of space to generate and preserve their species in lands, however, if we keep insisting on exploiting the lands among cities, ultimately, not only will we end up having too megacities, but also we will destroy the wildlife sanctuaries. Secondly, due to the advancement of infrastructures of building tall towers, it is quite possible that we can house more and more people who need a place to live. That said, legislatores are now able to prevent the exploition of lands, and in turn, both the society and animals can keep their homes. Fanally, in terms of agricultrul development, we have achieved to the level that we can pruduce crops and seeds much more in smaller lands, thanks to the new technological equipment in the agricultrul industry. In addition, now we even are able to plant seeds on the roof of the buildings, and it means there is much more space than we imagined.
Granted, it is logical that humans are thriving to make progress in creation of more advanced environment for themselves. Nevertheless, this purpos could be fulfilled without putting animals lives in danger of dying out just by well-managment of rural and urban areas.
In conclusion, although humans’ apetite for development is never ends, the importance of animals’ right for living should not be ignored. As a consequence, I would like to assert that the wildlife habitats must be respected, protected, and preserved.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 143, Rule ID: FEWER_LESS[2]
Message: Did you mean 'fewer'? The noun animals is countable.
Suggestion: fewer
... of all, the more people buy lands, the less animals’ habitats get. More specificall...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, nevertheless, second, secondly, so, well, in addition, in conclusion, first of all
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 13.0 13.1623246493 99% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 12.0 7.85571142285 153% => OK
Conjunction : 12.0 10.4138276553 115% => OK
Relative clauses : 8.0 7.30460921844 110% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 24.0651302605 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 47.0 41.998997996 112% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.3376753507 168% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1595.0 1615.20841683 99% => OK
No of words: 318.0 315.596192385 101% => OK
Chars per words: 5.01572327044 5.12529762239 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.22286093782 4.20363070211 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93147379757 2.80592935109 104% => OK
Unique words: 184.0 176.041082164 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.578616352201 0.561755894193 103% => OK
syllable_count: 493.2 506.74238477 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.60771543086 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 8.0 5.43587174349 147% => OK
Article: 3.0 2.52805611222 119% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.10420841683 143% => OK
Conjunction: 5.0 0.809619238477 618% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 4.0 4.76152304609 84% => 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: 24.0 20.2975951904 118% => OK
Sentence length SD: 51.4743573778 49.4020404114 104% => OK
Chars per sentence: 122.692307692 106.682146367 115% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.4615384615 20.7667163134 118% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.69230769231 7.06120827912 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 5.01903807615 20% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 8.67935871743 58% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 3.9879759519 125% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.4128256513 88% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.261475911361 0.244688304435 107% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0909074628442 0.084324248473 108% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0728205750311 0.0667982634062 109% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.163582645266 0.151304729494 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0728965201242 0.056905535591 128% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.4 13.0946893788 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 50.2224549098 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 11.3001002004 112% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.13 12.4159519038 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.58950901804 104% => OK
difficult_words: 82.0 78.4519038076 105% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 9.78957915832 107% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.1190380762 115% => 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.