Based on the reading material, it is stated that there are 3 viable reasons emphasized by critics of the "let it burn" policy in order to cease it. However, the lecturer finds this idea bereft of sufficient reasoning and presents some ideas to the contrary.
Initially, the author argued that Yellowstone fires caused massive damages to the plant species, including vegetation and park's trees. That being said, the lecturer repudiated this idea by clarifying that the fire made an ideal opportunity for new plant species to grow, so that after the Yellowstone fires there were diverse vegetation and tress in the park. For example, after that the Yellowstone's land had been scorched, small plants, which needed unshaded spaces to grow, started flourishing. Also, there were no limitation for seeds of plants to spread out.
Another point mention by the author was that the Yellowstone fires had negative effects on the wildlife too. However, the lecturer rejected this one too by stating that those fires provided a great habitat for small animals, like rabbits and heirs, to grow. Also, after the Yellowstone fires, the food chains were more stronger and consequently, the variety of animals had been increased.
The final point advanced in the reading passage was that the Yellowstone fires had negative consequences for tourism and local economy. Yet again, the lecturer casted doubt on this idea. She said that the Yellowstone fires were a combination of unusual events, like low rainfall and strong winds, which were not frequent in every year and only happened once since 1988. So, the Yellowstone fires couldn't have any negative effects on tourist attraction and local economy, so that after 1988, more tourists have come to the Yellowstone park.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 314, Rule ID: MOST_COMPARATIVE[2]
Message: Use only 'stronger' (without 'more') when you use the comparative.
Suggestion: stronger
...Yellowstone fires, the food chains were more stronger and consequently, the variety of animal...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 396, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: couldn't
...e since 1988. So, the Yellowstone fires couldnt have any negative effects on tourist at...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, consequently, however, if, so, as to, for example
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 10.4613686534 115% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 5.04856512141 0% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 13.0 12.0772626932 108% => OK
Pronoun: 20.0 22.412803532 89% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 30.3222958057 109% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 5.01324503311 120% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1482.0 1373.03311258 108% => OK
No of words: 285.0 270.72406181 105% => OK
Chars per words: 5.2 5.08290768461 102% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.10876417139 4.04702891845 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56827724648 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 145.348785872 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.575438596491 0.540411800872 106% => OK
syllable_count: 458.1 419.366225166 109% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.55342163355 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 9.0 8.23620309051 109% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.25165562914 320% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 1.0 1.51434878587 66% => OK
Preposition: 5.0 2.5761589404 194% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 13.0 13.0662251656 99% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 21.2450331126 99% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.2851171121 49.2860985944 90% => OK
Chars per sentence: 114.0 110.228320801 103% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.9230769231 21.698381199 101% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.23076923077 7.06452816374 60% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 4.09492273731 98% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 4.19205298013 48% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 6.0 4.45695364238 135% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.27373068433 47% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.368038787179 0.272083759551 135% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.128469863711 0.0996497079465 129% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0632697877439 0.0662205650399 96% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.210827561803 0.162205337803 130% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0845750631311 0.0443174109184 191% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 13.3589403974 105% => 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: 12.88 12.2367328918 105% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 9.11 8.42419426049 108% => OK
difficult_words: 80.0 63.6247240618 126% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 14.0 10.7273730684 131% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.498013245 99% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.2008830022 125% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 80.0 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 24.0 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.