Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
The so-called "Face on Mars" is not what its famous title implies. If it's name was to be re-done to be politically correct, it would be renamed "The Mesa on Mars." The landform would be renamed that because it is a mesa, if there was life on Mars we'd know, and because the only reason we ever called it a face was because of poor camera quality in 1976.

In many Western countries, there are landforms called Mesas. They're quite amazing, and a few probably do look like faces up in space. But do people believe that aliens created them? Why, no! Mars is alike to Earth in ways, so it makes sense for it to have some of the same landforms that we do.

If there even was alien life on Mars, the public would know about it. Just like they found out about the "the Face on Mars". It would get NASA publicity and money, so they'd tell the world about their findings. So if the face really was created by aliens, NASA would tell us. But they know its not, so they won't tell us otherwise.

At first in 1976, the mesa did look like a face. Most of that is due to the shadows that were cast at the time and the quality of the camera. It wasn't the best. But, cameras kept evolving and NASA eventually went back in for better pictures. Once they did, though, it did not resemble a face as much.

In conclusion, "the Face on Mars" is actually a mesa. Science and good camera quality has proved it. And if that's not convincing enough, it is a mesa just like we have in the U.S.,

NASA would be the first to let anyone know if there was life on Mars, and because it only ever looked like a face due to bad camera quality. Now, there is not as much mystery to "the Face on Mars", and it may not be as much as an adventure, but NASA

can add it into the books of what we have learned about our universe.

Score: 3