Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
It's a waste of money for government to fund space travel or space exploration.
There is no shortage of opinion on the tremendous implications that scientific investigations bring about to humans' lives. In fact, it is only by the support of governments' subsidies or colossal funds that could a myriad of new facets be put to use or a host of applied apparatuses be invented. Despite the arguments asserting that governments' financial support for space expeditions is a waste of money, I agree otherwise, maintaining that space explorations will have a considerable impact. In the subsequent paragraphs, I will develop these ideas through two compelling reasons.
First and foremost, the act of extensively consuming the Earth's fuel supplies will have its inevitable detrimental effects. Needless to say, the pivotal role of various energy resources on the Earth is clear to everyone, yet, sooner or later, all these accumulations will come to an end. Hence, not only should people be concerned about their usage, but also there should be great endeavors to supplant these virtually used up materials with new replacements. On the contrary, there might be intact new energy resources on other planets, which is only by numerous expeditions and researches that could scientists figure that out, and once they ascertain different possibilities there, many obstacles relating to unrenewable energy issues would be alleviated. For instance, think of Mars as a planet which there might be indications of life or new energy sources. The only way to study this feasibility and Mars's potential to be exploited is by multiple costly explorations. It is clear to see why investigating space travel projects is not a waste of money. In addition, after being assured of the existence of rudiments requirements on other plants, they can also become new habitats for humanity.
Another reason to be mentioned is that searching on new planets might help explorers find clues indicating undiscovered creatures, which can be other organisms or aliens. As a result, communicating with other beings can seed the plants of a superior world that this is possible with new devices used by aliens or even novel techniques in healing different illnesses. Moreover, having contact with another creature can steer us to a whole other universe and corroborate several notions and theories about parallel universes. Consequently, a host of new aspects of science and physics would be illustrated through laborious examination and could also raise more questions about the world around us. For example, there could be a new world in which its people exert different ways for curing diseases that both have better long-term effects and less harm to the environment. Therefore, exploring space and spending huge amounts of money on it is of great importance.
Reflecting upon all reasons mentioned above, I firmly believe that the government should spend a substantial amount of money on space explorations on the grounds that first, there might be new resources or new environment to live and second, it can confirm the probability of the presence of new creatures.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, consequently, first, hence, if, moreover, second, so, therefore, for example, for instance, in addition, in fact, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 15.1003584229 166% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 22.0 9.8082437276 224% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 19.0 13.8261648746 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 11.0286738351 136% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 43.0788530466 70% => OK
Preposition: 69.0 52.1666666667 132% => OK
Nominalization: 10.0 8.0752688172 124% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2569.0 1977.66487455 130% => OK
No of words: 489.0 407.700716846 120% => OK
Chars per words: 5.25357873211 4.8611393121 108% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.70248278971 4.48103885553 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.99472117789 2.67179642975 112% => OK
Unique words: 270.0 212.727598566 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.552147239264 0.524837075471 105% => OK
syllable_count: 805.5 618.680645161 130% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.51630824373 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 7.0 9.59856630824 73% => OK
Article: 4.0 3.08781362007 130% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 3.51792114695 57% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 1.86738351254 107% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.94265232975 121% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 19.0 20.6003584229 92% => OK
Sentence length: 25.0 20.1344086022 124% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 60.0413984604 48.9658058833 123% => OK
Chars per sentence: 135.210526316 100.406767564 135% => OK
Words per sentence: 25.7368421053 20.6045352989 125% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.05263157895 5.45110844103 148% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.53405017921 88% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.5376344086 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 11.8709677419 101% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 3.85842293907 78% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.88709677419 82% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.168949044219 0.236089414692 72% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0624391189139 0.076458572812 82% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0929527511986 0.0737576698707 126% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.124667000386 0.150856017488 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0544288961205 0.0645574589148 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.2 11.7677419355 138% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 46.1 58.1214874552 79% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.10430107527 144% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 10.1575268817 128% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.47 10.9000537634 124% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.72 8.01818996416 121% => OK
difficult_words: 150.0 86.8835125448 173% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 10.002688172 115% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.0 10.0537634409 119% => 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: 90.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 27.0 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.