The author states about the three kinds of damages caused by the " let it burn" policy. As opposed to, the lecturer who counter- argues that viewpoint trying to prove that these damages do not seem convincing.
First and foremost, the writer mentions that the fires caused tremendous damage to the park's tree and other vegetation at Yellowstone Park. On the contrary, the professor cannot disagree more, reasoning that the fires brought the diversity on the species that are currently in that park. For instance, same seeds of different species require high temperatures to germinate and exist. So, fires have create that condition for them to thrive. As a result this reason seem baseless.
The second argument that the author gives is that fires have affected the park wildlife as well. Animals such as deer and elk were seen fleeing the fire. As a result, the food chains would make it impossible for the animals to survive. However, the lecturer cannot be more outraged, explaining that the fire has created new opportunities for ideal habitat for small animals. Therefore, the food chains have become stronger for different types of animals.
Lastly, on one hand, the reading passage points out that these fires had a negative impact for the local economy. Since the several thousand acres of the park engulfed in flames, the value of the park as a tourist attraction is compressed. Nevertheless, the professor declared that these fires are not happening every year, so, this does not affect the entire value of the park. Furthermore, it makes it more attractive because of the variety of new species that people would be able to see.
The author states about the three kinds of damages caused by the " let it burn" policy. As opposed to, the lecturer who counter- argues that viewpoint trying to prove that these damages do not seem convincing.
First and foremost, the writer mentions that the fires caused tremendous damage to the park's tree and other vegetation at Yellowstone Park. On the contrary, the professor cannot disagree more, reasoning that the fires brought the diversity on the species that are currently in that park. For instance, same seeds of different species require high temperatures to germinate and exist. So, fires have create that condition for them to thrive. As a result this reason seem baseless.
The second argument that the author gives is that fires have affected the park wildlife as well. Animals such as deer and elk were seen fleeing the fire. As a result, the food chains would make it impossible for the animals to survive. However, the lecturer cannot be more outraged, explaining that the fire has created new opportunities for ideal habitat for small animals. Therefore, the food chains have become stronger for different types of animals.
Lastly, on one hand, the reading passage points out that these fires had a negative impact for the local economy. Since the several thousand acres of the park engulfed in flames, the value of the park as a tourist attraction is compressed. Nevertheless, the professor declared that these fires are not happening every year, so, this does not affect the entire value of the park. Furthermore, it makes it more attractive because of the variety of new species that people would be able to see.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 400, Rule ID: HAVE_PART_AGREEMENT[1]
Message: Use past participle here: 'created'.
Suggestion: created
... to germinate and exist. So, fires have create that condition for them to thrive. As a...
^^^^^^
Line 3, column 442, Rule ID: SENTENCE_FRAGMENT[1]
Message: “As” 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.
...eate that condition for them to thrive. As a result this reason seem baseless. ...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, furthermore, however, if, lastly, nevertheless, second, so, therefore, well, for instance, such as, as a result, on the contrary
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 10.4613686534 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 4.0 5.04856512141 79% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 7.30242825607 55% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 14.0 12.0772626932 116% => OK
Pronoun: 23.0 22.412803532 103% => OK
Preposition: 25.0 30.3222958057 82% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1392.0 1373.03311258 101% => OK
No of words: 275.0 270.72406181 102% => OK
Chars per words: 5.06181818182 5.08290768461 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.07223819929 4.04702891845 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.51321400364 2.5805825403 97% => OK
Unique words: 160.0 145.348785872 110% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.581818181818 0.540411800872 108% => OK
syllable_count: 431.1 419.366225166 103% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 3.25607064018 61% => OK
Article: 11.0 8.23620309051 134% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 2.5761589404 116% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 16.0 13.0662251656 122% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 21.2450331126 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 32.1178858854 49.2860985944 65% => OK
Chars per sentence: 87.0 110.228320801 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.1875 21.698381199 79% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.4375 7.06452816374 119% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 4.33554083885 161% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.27373068433 70% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.264697811493 0.272083759551 97% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0898226411373 0.0996497079465 90% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.183818043927 0.0662205650399 278% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.255854094591 0.162205337803 158% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.367128777376 0.0443174109184 828% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.0 13.3589403974 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 54.22 53.8541721854 101% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.9 11.0289183223 90% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.77 12.2367328918 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.42419426049 103% => OK
difficult_words: 73.0 63.6247240618 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 10.7273730684 75% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.498013245 84% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.2008830022 80% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 60.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 18.0 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.