WAŻNE sprawdzenie !!!

Temat przeniesiony do archwium.
witam
proszę o szybkie sprawdzenie eseju

It is wrong to kill animals for their fur. Do you agree ?

1. There are no doubts that animals Animals suffer after excision of the skin and die. Skin of the animals are very valuable so poachers do not have pity. I agree with that it is wrong to kill animals for their fur and should the fight.
2. First of all, animals want to live like humans and not to die for the skin. Most people think that killing animals does not affect the nature of the crash but it could lead to risk of extinction of the species. People need to protect wild animals and not kill them. My sentence should be more talk about ocgronie animals on television and radio by what people can change their attitudes towards animals.
3. However, we can not forget poachers who kill animals for their fur and money. Should be strictly punish people who kill wild animals. Poachers should be put in prison and give them heavy penalties. Can then understand his mistake and will try not to make it next time.
4. In coclusion, nowadays a lot of wild animals are killed. Fortunately, there are organizations that are struggling with these people. Revolt more and more nature reserves where wild animals can feel safe and nobody did not threaten them. Each of us should care about this because no one would want to be killed for skinned for the money. I hope that in future it will change and it will not kill animals for fur

z góry dzięki za pomoc
potrzebuje to na jutro !!!
1. There are no doubts that 'animals Animals' (dlaczego to masz 2 razy?) suffer after 'excision' (co to jest - ortog-popraw) of the skin and die. THE 'Skin' (tutaj l. mnoga, bo przeciez piszesz 'animalS') of the animals are very valuable so poachers do not have pity (nad czym - trzeba napisac). I agree with (ale kim? trzeba napisac?) that it is wrong to kill animals for their
fur and 'should the fight' (tego nie rozumiem).
2. First of all, animals want to live like humans and not to die for
theIR skin. Most people think that killing animals does not affect the
'nature of the crash' (tego calkowicie nie rozumiem) but it could lead to (tu cos brakuje, ale o przedimkach juz nie bede pisala, bo NIKT sie nie chce ich nauczyc!!) risk of extinction of the species.
My 'sentence' (calkowicie zle slowo- prosze nie uzywac kiepskich translatorow-i napisac to poprawnie) should be more TO talk about 'ocgronie' (to jest po polsku- napisz po ang) animals on television and radio by 'what' (kalka z polskiego 'co' pomysl i popraw) people can change their attitudes towards (tu cos brakuje) animals.
3.
(ale kto? nie napisalas) Should 'be strictly punish' (pomysl i popraw) people who kill wild animals.
Poachers should be put in prison and 'give them' (pomysl i popraw, kto niby ma to zrobic?) heavy penalties.
(ale kto? musisz napisac) Can then understand his mistake and will try not to 'make' DO it next time.
4. In 'coclusion' (ortog), nowadays a lot of wild animals are killed.
Fortunately, there are organizations that are struggling with 'these
people' (o jakich people tutaj mowa?). (zly poczatek zdania) Revolt more and more nature reserves where wild animals can feel safe and nobody 'did not' (pomysl, poczytaj o tym i popraw) threaten them. Each of us should care
about this because no one would want to be killed 'for' (zle slowo-popraw) skinned for 'the' (niepotr) money. I hope that in (tu cos brakuje) future it will change and 'it' (do czego to 'it' sie odnosi? nie jest jasne, napisz) will not kill animals for fur.

« 

Pomoc językowa - tłumaczenia

 »

Pomoc językowa - tłumaczenia