Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents, but the author does not supports this idea, and only gives a few reasons why it would be beneficial to study it. The author suggests that it is a worthy pursuit because it is the closest planet to Earth, in size and in distance, there might have been life on Venus previously, and humans should not be held back by the thought of danger, but the author does not show why each of these reasons make it worth to study Venus.

To start with, the author states that Venus is the closest planet to Earth in size and distance. This statement does not support the idea that studying Venus is worth going through all of the dangers. Yes, it may be the easiest planet to get to, but Venus is not an easy planet to land or conduct research on, especially with the "high pressure and heat" and also "additional impediments like erupting volcanoes, powerful earthquakes, and frequent lightning strikes" shown in the third paragraph.

Additionally, the author states that humans should study Venus because it "was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life," shown in the fourth paragraph. Although Venus has features similar to Earth's like "valleys, mountains, and craters," it does not mean that Venus supported life. Also, in the text, it says that Venus was "probably" covered in oceans, which shows that there is no proof that this statement is a fact. The author does say that it would be beneficial to study Venus for scientific reasons, but in the second paragraph, it shows the conditions on Venus are not sustainable considering "no spacecraft (has) survived the landing for more than a few hours."

Lastly, the author states that human's travels "should not be limited by dangers and doubts," in the eighth paragraph. By stating this, the author shows that he/she understands the conditions of Venus, but that does not mean humans should be held back. This statement, again, does not show why it is worth it to study Venus, just that humans should not be held back.

In conclusion, the author does not support his/her idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit. The author does give reasons why it would be beneficial to go to Venus and study it, but never shows why it is worth it. Yes, it would be helpful to know if Venus did support life at one point in time, but the author never showed if it would be worth all of the time and money. To wrap it all up, the author did not support his/her idea at all; that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers.

Score: 4