Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
The Face on Mars is just a natural landform there was no real evidence of it being showned to be formed by aliens.

As

I looked at the evidence and the photos that the scienctist gave me they showed that in 1976 the face was full of dust and etc. Which could have formed the face from probably erosion of the dust or even the illusion of the human eyes,mouth, and nose .

For Example in the article I read a passage that said "Although few scientists believed the Face was an alien artifact" , they had no real proof of it being this .

Then another photo that I recieved from the team in 1998 showed that Face started to show as if it was unmasking itself for us to see, which had probably given NASA the thought of it being an alian artifact , but still they had no real proof of it being this .

I read a passage and it said " And so on April 5,1998 , when Mars Global Surveyor few over Cydonia for the first time ,Miachael Malin and his Mars Orbiter Camera (MOC) team snapped a picture ten times sharper than the original Viking photos .Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the first image appeared on JPL web site, revealing . . . a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all.

But still not evryone was actually satisfied . So on April 8,2001 (MGS) drew close enough for a second look . And Malin's team captured an extraordinary photo using the camera's absolute maximum resolution. Each Pixel in the 2001 image spans 1.56 meters , compared to 43 meters per pixel in the best 1976 Viking photo.

In Conlusion, there was never any real proof of the Face on Mars being an alien monument the only proof that NASA had was based off of opinions. They had no Factual evidence.

Score: 3