Hail—pieces of ice that form and fall from clouds instead of snow or rain—has always been a problem for farmers in some areas of the United States. Hail pellets can fall with great force and destroy crops in the field. Over the last few decades, a met

Essay topics:

Hail—pieces of ice that form and fall from clouds instead of snow or rain—has always been a problem for farmers in some areas of the United States. Hail pellets can fall with great force and destroy crops in the field. Over the last few decades, a method of reducing hail, called "cloud seeding," has been tried. In cloud seeding, the chemical silver iodide is sprayed on storm clouds from an airplane. This makes the clouds produce harmless rain or snow instead of hail. Several pieces of evidence suggest that cloud seeding has been effective in protecting crops from hail. Laboratory experiments Experiments in the laboratory support the idea that cloud seeding is effective. Hail usually forms water vapor that is close to the freezing point However, when experimenters added silver iodide to cold water vapor in the laboratory, they often observed light snow forming instead of hail pellets. Evidence from Asia There is evidence about the effectiveness of cloud seeding from several countries around the world. In some Asian countries, for example, cloud seeding has been successfully used to control precipitation in urban areas. These positive results suggest that cloud seeding should also be effective in protecting fields and farms in the United States. Local studies A few local studies also support the value of cloud seeding. One study conducted in a farming region in the central United States, for example, directly monitored crop damage due to hail. The study found that in an area where cloud seeding was used there was reduced hail damage compared to previous years.

Essay topics in audio

The main idea of both the passage and the lecture is about the effects of cloud seeding to prevent damaging the seed land with hail. In this line of thought, the reading states that using cloud seeding is useful and cites some reasons which cloud seeding is employed and reaching the good results. The lecturer, on the other hand, casts doubt on all of the three episodes of arguments mentioned in the passage, believing that none of these strategies are practical and lead to the real world. In the rest of the passage, a comparison between them is provided.

First of all, the reading and the listening materials talk about laboratory experiment which efficiently of the cloud seeding has been check. The author explains that Hail usually forms water vapor that is close to the freezing point, However, when experimenters added silver iodide to cold water vapor in the laboratory, they often observed light snow forming instead of hail pellets. Thus, the author contends that Experiments in the laboratory support the idea that cloud seeding is effective. On the contrary, the lecturer believes that laboratory experiment is different from real conditions. Although, laboratory experiment may prevent hail to damage seed or agricultural lands in the real case may prevent any preoccupations and not only seeds but also lands may damage. This directly contradicts what the passage indicates.

Second, both the text and the talk discuss evidence of the Asia cloud seeding employment. The author points out that in some Asian countries, for example, cloud seeding has been successfully used to control precipitation in urban areas. Therefore, the author elaborates that these positive results suggest that cloud seeding should also be effective in protecting fields and farms in the United States. However, the lecture notes that the cloud seeding procedure is done in the urban area in Asia which has a good condition for cloud seeding because air is polluted; while, the cloud seeding procedure will be done in the unpolluted area in the United State. This was another place where experience contradicted the theory.

Eventually, local studies in the United State farmlands which are discussed by both the passage and the lecture. The author mentions that A few local studies also support the value of cloud seeding. One study conducted in a farming region in the central United States, for example, directly monitored crop damage due to hail. Hence, the author suggests that the study found that in an area where cloud seeding was used there was reduced hail damage compared to previous years. The lecturer rebuts this argument. The lecturer states that local experience is done in the special area of the United State, so it isn’t very reliable. The professor thinks that this experiment should be done in the whole of the universe and then the reliability of the cloud seeding could be check. This opinion directly contradicts the passage presented and making it infeasible.

Sum up, although the passage provides some reasons to the usefulness of the cloud seeding in dealing with the hail, the lecture opposes about the effectiveness and possibility of those reasons.

Votes
Average: 7.3 (1 vote)
Essay Categories
Essays by the user:

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 347, Rule ID: ALL_OF_THE[1]
Message: Simply use 'all the'.
Suggestion: all the
...urer, on the other hand, casts doubt on all of the three episodes of arguments mentioned i...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 636, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... State, so it isn't very reliable. The professor thinks that this experiment s...
^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, hence, however, if, may, second, so, then, therefore, thus, while, for example, first of all, on the contrary, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 21.0 10.4613686534 201% => Less to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 7.0 5.04856512141 139% => OK
Conjunction : 14.0 7.30242825607 192% => OK
Relative clauses : 23.0 12.0772626932 190% => OK
Pronoun: 29.0 22.412803532 129% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 60.0 30.3222958057 198% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 5.01324503311 219% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2675.0 1373.03311258 195% => OK
No of words: 518.0 270.72406181 191% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.16409266409 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.77070365392 4.04702891845 118% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59280783417 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 244.0 145.348785872 168% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.471042471042 0.540411800872 87% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 826.2 419.366225166 197% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 3.25607064018 123% => OK
Article: 18.0 8.23620309051 219% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 1.25165562914 160% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 1.51434878587 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 2.5761589404 155% => OK

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 24.0 13.0662251656 184% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 55.4071890392 49.2860985944 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.458333333 110.228320801 101% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5833333333 21.698381199 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.08333333333 7.06452816374 86% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 11.0 4.33554083885 254% => Less positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 4.45695364238 202% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.27373068433 94% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.162436729267 0.272083759551 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0476960601549 0.0996497079465 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0413928291519 0.0662205650399 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101809156533 0.162205337803 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0176230989259 0.0443174109184 40% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.7 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 50.16 53.8541721854 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 5.55761589404 158% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.5 11.0289183223 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.65 12.2367328918 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.4 8.42419426049 100% => OK
difficult_words: 122.0 63.6247240618 192% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 10.7273730684 121% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.2008830022 116% => OK
What are above readability scores?

---------------------
Write the essay in 20 minutes.

Rates: 73.3333333333 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 22.0 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.