abmittal

Hi, Please critique my argument essay. I am unable to write at length. Please suggest ways to do so. Topic: The following appears in a letter to the editor for the West Lansburg News: "The tufted groundhog lives in the coastal wetlands of West Lansburg. Ancient records suggest that the tufted groundhog once numbered in the millions. Since they were declared a wildlife sanctuary in 2004, development along the coastal wetlands has been prohibited. Now local development interests are lobbying for the West Lansburg council to allow an access road to be built along the edge of wetlands. Neighboring Eastern Carpenteria, which had a similar sanctuary, has seen its sea otter population decline since the repeal of its sanctuary status in 1978. In order to preserve the region's biodiversity and ensure a healthy environment, the West Lansburg council should not allow the road to be built." Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument. Response: Though the letter may be presenting genuine claims but it does not provide enough evidence and hence, does not seem cogent enough to act on it. The evidence required for various claims is presented in the following paragraphs. First of all, there is nothing to validate what are those ancient records. They may even turn out to be apocryphal. Thus, we can not be sure whether the tufted groundhog once numbered in millions. The second missing evidence is regarding the point that the development along the coastal wetlands has been prohibited because the tufted groundhogs were declared a sanctuary. Maybe it was not possible to create buildings with a strong foundation because of the wetness of the terrain. Furthermore, no evidence has been provided that the decline of sea otter population in Eastern Carpenteria occured because the sanctuary status of sea otters was revoked. Also, even if this case is true, the author assumes that the building of a road is same as revoking the sanctuary status of tufted groundhogs. There is no evidence stating that in order to build a road, the sanctuary status of tufted groundhogs must be revoked. The last question that I would like to ask is How will building a road effect the biodiversity of the region? Creation of a road does not imply the creation of an unhealthy environment. Also, since the road is being created on the edge of the wetlands, it may have no effect on the region. Sufficient evidence needs to be provided for the before mentioned claims in order to determine the validity of the claims presented in the letter and decide whether to cancel the proposition to build a road along the edge of the wetlands. Thanks :)

Hi, Please critique this essay. I am in urgent need of help for AWA. I don't get many ideas always get stuck on one or two. Please suggest me a way to fix this problem. Also, please suggest how do I increase the length of my essays. Topic: The real talent of a popular musician cannot accurately be assessed until the musician has been dead for several generations, so that his or her fame does not interfere with honest assessment. Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position. Response: An honest assessment of any artist is very necessary in order to get a true sense of the quality of his work. But saying that an honest assessment of a musician can not be performed till he has been dead for several generations is fallacious. There are numerous musicians who were popular when they were alive and still are counted among the best. Take the example of Mozart, No one can deny his popularity when he was alive. But today also, prospective musicians worship him as their idol. His classical symphonies are still played and considered to be the culmination of musical genius. Another example can be taken of Beethoven, the effect whose symphonies and the sonatas has not reduced with time. A musician gets his fame only when he produces quality music. Thus an accurate analysis can be done even when the musician is alive. Sometimes people tend to estimate the talent of a musician based on his one or two works which made him famous. A great example of this is Psy, who became famous with his song titled "Gangnam style". People started calling him a great musician based on just a single work. In the end, I would like to state that an honest assessment can be performed even when the musician is alive. We have had numerous musicians who were considered great when they were alive and are still counted as one of the best. Thanks :)