Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
The "face" on Mars has become something of an controversy since an image of it was released back in 1976. The fact that people to this day believe it is still something created by ancient alien life bewilders NASA. Conspiracy theorists have concoted thousands of theories relating to NASA withholding information about extra-terrestrial life from the general public. None of which, have ever been proven, and/or ever had any solid evidence to back them up. Therefore, the face on mars is not the result of extra terrestrial life, but more of the result of hundreds of years of weathering and shaping.

As stated above, many conspiracy theorists believe that the "face" on Mars is the result of an utterly alien civilization. That is just not true. They accuse NASA of trying to hide it, yet, there is no evidence to support this. The discovery of an ancient alien civilization would greatly benefit NASA. The amount of funding and support they would recieve would be massive. Those within NASA's ranks that believe there is extra-terrestrial life out in space would have reached their lifelong goal of discovering it. There would be a huge incline of investors and programs willing to support and back-up NASA in all their endevours. Therefore, if NASA concluded that this "face," was the creation of an ancient alien civilization, they would have no reason to put their finding out there into the public, without stating what they believed it truly is.

Another piece of evidence for the "face" just being a naturally formed feature, such as a butte or a mesa, is probably the most obvious fact. If NASA didn't want people to know about it, they would not have had it published for the general public's viewing. If NASA didn't want people to know that they had found evidence of an alien civilization, would they publish it and try to get people to believe that it was a natural formation? Of course not! It would have been a lot simpler to withhold the image and keep it secret rather than publish it. People make mistakes, but such a large government company such as NASA would have thought a little bit more before they published a picture they didn't want out there.

Finally, the last piece of evidence is another obvious one. Back in the 1970's, we did not have the sort of technology we have nowadays. The cameras were not as sharp and nowhere near the amount of pixels today's photography equipment has. The "face" was photographed twice more after the original image surfaced in 1976. The first picture was very blurry and was the main reason that people belived it was that of an alien civilization. In the original photograph, each pixel spanned about 43 meters, versus 2001's 1.56 meters. The second picture taken was a lot less blurry, and was taken in 1998. It showed a lot more and a allowed for almost no question that it wasn't what NASA said it was. People were not convinced, due to the fact that it was taken during a cloudy season on Mars, and was said to have obscured markings that might have led to it being identified as alien. The last picture was taken in 2001. There is no question with this picture. It clearly shows a natural landform with no strange markings and/or features.

The face on mars is not the result of extra terrestrial life, but more of the result of hundreds of years of weathering and shaping. After years of doubt, it is quite obvious that Mars' "face" is simply a natural formation. It is time for conspiracy theorists to put to rest their old, worn out ideas in favor of noble pursuits that can be backed up by solid evidence and scientific fact. It turns out, Mars's "face," is nothing more than it's butte.

Score: 6