Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
The author does not do the best job of explaining why it is a good idea to explore Venus. This is due to the fact that he has more reasons of why scientists shouldn't go to Venus, instead of reasons they should go to Venus.The author has multiple paragraphs that could be considered rebuttals, but only a few that support his argument.

There are eight paragraphs total in the article. Six of them talk about why one might say no to the idea.The authour also gives really scary examples such as "These conditions are for more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an enviroment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquify man metals." The author also states, "Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere." If you are trying to get people to agree with you, it would be a better idea to not frighten them.

If Venus has that high of a atmospheric pressure, how would a scientist study venus? The author says the atmospheric pressure can crush submarines, but he never says how one can study the planet if nobody can even get on it. The author needs to put himself in the readers shoes more often, and answer questions an inexperianced person may have. He can not assume people know if there is technology capable of sending people to unreachable destinations. Many people in the world do not know if there is technology of this capability.

Score: 3