Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Although science and technology will continue to improve, the most significant improvement for the quality of people’s lives have already taken place.
Science and technology, as we all know, are our wealth. Although it may seem exaggerated, at first sight, one may find the role of science and technology sensible. In this regard, many people support this opinion that the most important developments have been taken place for human life quality. Contrary to common belief. I believe that for human beings, there is a long way to expanding science and technology borders. I will delve into two conspicuous reasons to elaborate on my standpoint.
The first reason that makes me hold the belief that humankind stand just at the beginning of the science road is the advent of new fields of science. Undoubtedly, human beings are introduced to the modern era recently, so it is irrational if we think the most crucial steps took place. For instance, the development we have exposed to in medicine is deniable. Based on an experiment, which has been conducted in the genetic engineering field, results showed that the children in the next century will be produced in the labs. Likewise, scientists will remove defective gens and replace it with perfect and purified DNA. How would the world be with these perfect human kinds? It seems too soon to think the critical steps have been taken by a human, so far.
Another equally noteworthy reason to bear in mind is the contradiction between population and energy. On the one hand, the world is undergoing a population explosion in the recent century. On another hand, it exposes resources scarcity, which means there are less amount of natural sources sexist per everyone all around the world. Moreover, it seems that this trend will continue to the subsequent era and probably will become the most crucial concern of the next century. Regarding human beings' nature and the ability to think, it would be not out of the mind that people find a solution to this controversial concern. If scientists could found a way to reduce people's needs of energy, the possibility of increasing the earth's capacity not only intensified but also decreasing human dependency on nature would have been applicable. Indeed, when human beings can transform a threat like a shortage of natural resources into the opportunity of independence from nature, we can consider this step as a crucial one.
To summarize, contemplating all remarks, we can safely conclude that the advent of the new fields of science will put the human into the new era. Besides, only if human beings can solve the most concerned issue of life, we can say humankind take his important steps.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 13, column 265, Rule ID: THERE_RE_MANY[3]
Message: Possible agreement error. Did you mean 'amounts'?
Suggestion: amounts
...es scarcity, which means there are less amount of natural sources sexist per everyone ...
^^^^^^
Line 13, column 491, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'beings'' or 'being's'?
Suggestion: beings'; being's
...rn of the next century. Regarding human beings nature and the ability to think, it wou...
^^^^^^
Line 13, column 723, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'earths'' or 'earth's'?
Suggestion: earths'; earth's
...ergy, the possibility of increasing the earths capacity not only intensified but also ...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, besides, but, first, if, likewise, may, moreover, regarding, so, for instance
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 15.1003584229 106% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 17.0 9.8082437276 173% => OK
Conjunction : 9.0 13.8261648746 65% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 11.0286738351 100% => OK
Pronoun: 33.0 43.0788530466 77% => OK
Preposition: 51.0 52.1666666667 98% => OK
Nominalization: 14.0 8.0752688172 173% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2135.0 1977.66487455 108% => OK
No of words: 427.0 407.700716846 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.0 4.8611393121 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.54576487731 4.48103885553 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.68218699943 2.67179642975 100% => OK
Unique words: 230.0 212.727598566 108% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.538641686183 0.524837075471 103% => OK
syllable_count: 658.8 618.680645161 106% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.51630824373 99% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 9.59856630824 94% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 3.51792114695 114% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.86738351254 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 20.6003584229 107% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 20.1344086022 94% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.2152884819 48.9658058833 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.0454545455 100.406767564 97% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4090909091 20.6045352989 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.77272727273 5.45110844103 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.5376344086 54% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 3.85842293907 104% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.88709677419 123% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.154075698074 0.236089414692 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0459856532873 0.076458572812 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0402264120356 0.0737576698707 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10325055138 0.150856017488 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0593224584094 0.0645574589148 92% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.8 11.7677419355 100% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 60.65 58.1214874552 104% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.1575268817 94% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.72 10.9000537634 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.46 8.01818996416 106% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 86.8835125448 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.0 10.002688172 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 10.0537634409 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 10.247311828 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Better to have 5 paragraphs with 3 arguments. And try always support/against one side but compare two sides, like this:
para 1: introduction
para 2: reason 1. address both of the views presented for reason 1
para 3: reason 2. address both of the views presented for reason 2
para 4: reason 3. address both of the views presented for reason 3
para 5: conclusion.
So how to find out those reasons. There is a formula:
reasons == advantages or
reasons == disadvantages
for example, we can always apply 'save time', 'save/make money', 'find a job', 'make friends', 'get more information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
or we can apply 'waste time', 'waste money', 'no job', 'make bad friends', 'get bad information' as reasons to all essay/speaking topics.
Rates: 83.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 25.0 Out of 30
---------------------
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.