Some people want government to spend money on life on other planets. However, others think it is a waste of public money when the earth already has so many problems. Discuss both views and give you own
In today’s technologically advanced world, where field of astronomy has reached the zenith of success, making it possible for man to reach other planets of the universe. Some section of the society supports this development. Whereas, others have contrasting views. In my opinion. Research investments in such an important field is crucial. However, it should be carried out by only developed and affluent nations, having ample resources to meet the basic necessities of its citizenry.
Firstly, considering the current global challenges related to fossil fuel depletion, shortage of natural energy, water scarcity etc. it is imminent that natural resources would soon be depleted. Therefore, it is must for scientist to explore alternate means of energy, for which other planets are inevitably the first potential candidates for natural resources. For instance, scientist have recently discovered a special chemical on planet Venus, which has potential of being useful in treating various diseases. Secondly, with ever increasing population on earth, sooner or later additional space would be required, for which life on other objects is first and only option. Furthermore, with development of technology, we can consider other planets to be a good future tourist spot, provided we successfully identify one at first place.
On the other hand, considering the current global economic unrest. Especially in numerous African and Asian countries, some people expects government to solve bigger social problems such as, unemployment, scarcity in food supplies, falling adult literacy rates etc. More importantly, Earth is currently under haunting threats of various environmental challenges in the form of global warming, endangered species, and damage to ecosystem etc. which require immediate attention, in the form of public funding to conduct better research. Therefore, considering these factors, certain people believe it is waste of tax payer’s money to be invested on space exploration which does not have immediate tangible results.
To conclude, it is important for humanity to be prepared and be ready with alternate sources of energy. To do so, huge investments be done on space exploration programs. However, only affluent nations, capable of handling such a huge scale of research must take part in this cause.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 231, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “Whereas” at the beginning of a sentence requires a 2nd clause. Maybe a comma, question or exclamation mark is missing, or the sentence is incomplete and should be joined with the following sentence.
... the society supports this development. Whereas, others have contrasting views. In my o...
^^^^^^^
Line 1, column 455, Rule ID: BASIC_FUNDAMENTALS[1]
Message: Use simply 'necessities'.
Suggestion: necessities
...ons, having ample resources to meet the basic necessities of its citizenry. Firstly, consideri...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, firstly, furthermore, however, if, second, secondly, so, therefore, whereas, for instance, such as, in my opinion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 13.1623246493 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 7.85571142285 76% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 10.4138276553 58% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 7.0 7.30460921844 96% => OK
Pronoun: 14.0 24.0651302605 58% => OK
Preposition: 53.0 41.998997996 126% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.3376753507 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1989.0 1615.20841683 123% => OK
No of words: 353.0 315.596192385 112% => OK
Chars per words: 5.63456090652 5.12529762239 110% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.33454660006 4.20363070211 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.94186871944 2.80592935109 105% => OK
Unique words: 217.0 176.041082164 123% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.614730878187 0.561755894193 109% => OK
syllable_count: 620.1 506.74238477 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.8 1.60771543086 112% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 5.43587174349 92% => OK
Article: 0.0 2.52805611222 0% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 2.10420841683 48% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.809619238477 124% => OK
Preposition: 11.0 4.76152304609 231% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 20.0 16.0721442886 124% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 20.2975951904 84% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 54.3492410251 49.4020404114 110% => OK
Chars per sentence: 99.45 106.682146367 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.65 20.7667163134 85% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.95 7.06120827912 98% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.38176352705 91% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 5.01903807615 40% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 14.0 8.67935871743 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 3.9879759519 50% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 3.4128256513 117% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.119642696955 0.244688304435 49% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0339538129705 0.084324248473 40% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.029942218964 0.0667982634062 45% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0696426378112 0.151304729494 46% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0326118693752 0.056905535591 57% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.9 13.0946893788 106% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 37.3 50.2224549098 74% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.44779559118 118% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 11.3001002004 109% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 15.08 12.4159519038 121% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 10.12 8.58950901804 118% => OK
difficult_words: 126.0 78.4519038076 161% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.0 9.78957915832 61% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.1190380762 87% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 10.7795591182 83% => 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.