Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
The author does not support his idea well that studiying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. The author talks about people being facinated with Venus, that Venus is the closest planet to Earth in proximity and features, and that it would be cool if humans were able to explore Venus. What he does not talk about well is the why. Why Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers.

Here is a part of the artical where the author talks about why it would be cool to study Venus. "Astronomers are fascinated by Venus because it may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system,"(paragraph 4). The author mentions humans being facinated with Venus and how the planet was once Earth-like. This information does help us see how it would be cool to visit Venus and it tells us some information about Venus. On the other hand the author doesn't give a solid reason for why studying Venus is worth it and despite the risks. "Striving to meet the challenge presented by Venus has value, not only because of the insight to be gained on the planet itself, but also because human curiosity will likely lead us into many equally intimidating endeavors,"(paragraph 8). The author does not tell us what the insight is that will be gained from exploring the planet. Also what does human curiosity leading us into other endeavors have to do with how studying Venus is a worthy pursuit. Their reason and support for studying Venus is weak. The author trys to use their own opinion to convince the readers that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit. The author aslo doesn't give a sound explanation as to how the danger of heat can be overcome for enabling the trip to be successful. "Some simplified eclectronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions,"(paragraph 7). The author explains that there is a material that can survive on Venus for a little while. A problem to this could be that the metal might actually not work on Venus because since no one has ever been ther how would they know exactly what it is going to be like. That is why they are going there in the first place to explore Venus. They could have totally messed up on the calculations of surviving on the planet and it might be a failure. The pros of this mission are far less important than the cons to this mission. If they succed then they can say they know what on Venus and can gain some information. If they fail then people can die, a load of money is gone because of the time, energy, and resorces put into the exploration are gone.

The author does not support his idea well that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. They only give a few reasons why the trip would be worthy. They use their own opinions as facts trying to pursuade the readers to agree with their ideas. They also don't fully explain how they can by pass the dangers involved with this exploration study on Venus. Since the author has used their opinion as facts and cannot explain without a doubt that this pursuit can be successful despite the dangers I have to say that they did not do well at supporting their idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents.

Score: 5