In the lecture, the professor argues against the three solutions in the reading passage because they are not practical.
First, it's true that reducing the peseicides might benefit the frogs, but such strict laws are not ecnomicaly practical and not fair for the farmers that rely on peeticides to ensure the crops yield. If the farmers follow the rules and cease to use the pesticides, they will encounter crop loss, which is a severe advantage for the farmers. Therefore, prohibiting the farmers from using harmful pestices is not practical.
Furthuermore, there is several problems with the second solution to treat each infetced frogs. On one hand, treating each individuals can be veay difficult, becuase there are a huge amout of the infected frogs. On the other hand, there is no gurantee that the fungus would not pass from one frog to another, so the treating process has to be applied many times, which is too expensive to excute. So, the second solution to cure the infected frogs one by one is neither practical.
Last but not the least, the third solution argues to protect the water and wertland habitats so that the frogs can be secured. However, it is the global warming in stead of the use of water that results into habitat loss. Along with the glaobal warming, many waterlands has been threateded and many species are exetinct, so protecting the key water habitats from excessive water use will not server to slow down the global waring and thus can't ensure the safety of water habits and the species living in these locations. So, the thrid solution is also impractical because of the wrong cause-and-effect analysis.
In conclusion, according the analysis in the lecture, the three methods proposed by the reading passage are not practical to alleviate or prevent the decline of the frogs population.
- asteroids establishing colonies 3
- when there is a new technological device available, some people will buy it immediately, while others will wait until many others have adopted it. Which view do you agree more. 70
- The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor of a scientific journal.*"A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating sit 35
- work together, creativity, work alone 66
- # do you think exercise is important to older people than younger people. 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 15, Rule ID: THERE_S_MANY
Message: Did you mean 'there are several problems'?
Suggestion: there are several problems
...ices is not practical. Furthuermore, there is several problems with the second solution to treat each ...
Line 7, column 162, Rule ID: IN_STEAD_OF
Message: Did you mean 'instead of'?
Suggestion: instead of
...ured. However, it is the global warming in stead of the use of water that results into hab...
Line 7, column 173, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
...er, it is the global warming in stead of the use of water that results into habit...
Line 7, column 441, Rule ID: CANT
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...to slow down the global waring and thus cant ensure the safety of water habits and t...
Line 9, column 166, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'frogs'' or 'frog's'?
Suggestion: frogs'; frog's
...alleviate or prevent the decline of the frogs population.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, however, if, second, so, therefore, third, thus, as to, in conclusion, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 17.0 10.4613686534 163% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 5.04856512141 119% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 7.30242825607 137% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 12.0772626932 58% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 10.0 22.412803532 45% => OK
Preposition: 35.0 30.3222958057 115% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 5.01324503311 100% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1527.0 1373.03311258 111% => OK
No of words: 306.0 270.72406181 113% => OK
Chars per words: 4.99019607843 5.08290768461 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.18244613648 4.04702891845 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.58187514914 2.5805825403 100% => OK
Unique words: 164.0 145.348785872 113% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.535947712418 0.540411800872 99% => OK
syllable_count: 473.4 419.366225166 113% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.55342163355 97% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 3.25607064018 92% => OK
Article: 5.0 8.23620309051 61% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.25165562914 80% => OK
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: 23.0 21.2450331126 108% => OK
Sentence length SD: 60.051063084 49.2860985944 122% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.461538462 110.228320801 107% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.5384615385 21.698381199 108% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.15384615385 7.06452816374 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 4.09492273731 122% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 4.19205298013 119% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 4.33554083885 115% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 4.45695364238 157% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 1.0 4.27373068433 23% => More facts, knowledge or examples wanted.
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.336631758961 0.272083759551 124% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.104232103634 0.0996497079465 105% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0612419450755 0.0662205650399 92% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.146802757625 0.162205337803 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0772517927144 0.0443174109184 174% => OK
automated_readability_index: 13.8 13.3589403974 103% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.59 53.8541721854 105% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 5.55761589404 56% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 11.0289183223 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.96 12.2367328918 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.75 8.42419426049 104% => OK
difficult_words: 77.0 63.6247240618 121% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 10.7273730684 103% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 10.498013245 107% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.2008830022 107% => 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.