Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
People can prove from the article that this "face" in mars was only a natural landform. We've been told that Earth and Mars used to be a like in many ways, like size, and also the fact that Mars used to have water. With that being said this means that probably both Earth and Mars can form mesas on thier planets. The way that the probes found it was a surprise, it was looking for its other Viking 2. The mission controllers were indeed surprised but wanted to look at it a little closer just to see what it was exactly. They found out that it wasn't a human or alien but a landform, that was made naturally.

After releasing the photo everyone came up with thier suspicions, which many disagree aren't true. The landform itself was about 2 miles or longer, after that being said it was and should've been clear it wasn't a mythical creature. NASA had only did this research for many peoples questions, it would pay off taxpayers. Telling from the pictures the "face" in the 1976 photo, agree does like like a face but over time in 2001 this face seemed to flaten. Also if if were a face, it would be late to actually go Mars and observe because it would've already faded or deformed. Judging by what's left of the evidence that is found by that time will not be able to prove if it was an ailen or not.

In conclusion, i think these people can be proven wrongly. One of the scientists said that in fact it was hard to keep taking the same pictures but in a better view. It was hard, because they didn't pass over it very often. It's a waste of energy for the probe and money for the company to keep sending it, just so people can make other assumptions and theories that are irrelevent.

Score: 3