Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
The Face on Mars is nothing but a natural occurance. On Mars, there are things called a buttle or mesa. Which in fact, is what this "face" really is. I know this because in the article, that was based off NASA's own research, "Unmasking the Face on Mars" it says, "What the picture actually shows is the martian equivalent of a buttle or mesa-landforms common around the American West." We have these landforms on our very own planet, so its understandable as to how we can recognize one on another planet.

On top of that, we used top quality equipment to study and research the Face on Mars. This is backed up by how in the article it says, "Mars Global Surveyor drew close enough for a second look. 'We had to roll the space craft 25 degrees to center the face in the field of view,' said Gavin. '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 photo."

In the article itself it even says that the face is no alien monument. "Thousands of anxious web surfers were waiting when the image first appeared on a JPL website, revealing... a natural landform. There was no alien monument after all." With all that being said, with all the proof NASA gathered, its impossible for the "Face on Mars" to be anything but a natural occurance.

Score: 3