Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" tries to explain the several complications of sending a mission to Venus. They provide tons of factual evidence about the geography and climate of Venus. They give many good points, but ultimately fail at their task to convince readers that Venus exploration is worth it. Along with a failed point, this author tends to go off on side-tangents that have minimal importance to the story.

"The Challenge of Exploring Venus" is an article about the positives and negatives of trying to land a spacecraft on Venus. He has a decent build-up into his first point while giving more and more small facts about our second planet. Venus is likely the most similar planet to Earth, with its rocky surface, hills, and mountains, but it has much more limiting factors to deter us from traveling there. It has terrible weather in comparison to Earth, with acidic carbon dioxide filling 97% of the atmosphere and with heats of 800 degrees Fahrenheit. The authors gives plenty of information about this planet, most of it relevant to the topic at hand, and therefore succeeds in teaching you about Venus.

Even after succeeding in information given, the author fails to promote the idea that travel to Venus is worth all the cons. They write about NASA wanting to know as much as possible about one of our closest neighbors, but don't give enough reasons as to why it's worth it. With acidic atmospheres ripping through machinery, technologies don't stand a chance on the Venusian surface. With the science that we have, the most we can hope for is a jet-like expirience, flying several miles above surface so that the pressure doesn't crush us instantly. Venus is additionally prone to constant volcanoes, earthquakes, and storms deadly enough to take out machinery. Given all this information, it seems like the author is trying to deter us from missions to Venus instead of promoting it, as they planned.

The final point to take into consideration when reading this article is the authors' side-tangents. Multiple times, the author delves into a side-topic as opposed to continuing on with the topic of Venus exploration. They start off the article with two sentences that have no relation to the story, yet confuse readers. The sentences are about Venus' nickname, the "Evening Star", and how even though it is a planet, it is still called this. This is completely irrelevant to exploration, as everyone knows it is a planet, and the "Evening Star" name is never mentioned again. Later on in the passage, the author rambles on about World War II-age computers and how they functioned properly even before the digital age. Once more, this is slightly irrelevant and does not contribute to the story at all except to add another paragraph instead of focusing on the specifics of how NASA is using them to help with Venus.

Overall, this article about Venus is less than "stellar". The author attempts to prove why Venus missions are a neccesity, but doesn't quite get their point across. They provide great knowledge and information, despite being off-topic occasionally. This article is full of great facts, but the delivery is off and could have potentially been a better read if the author was on the other side of the argument, which has more proof to back it up. All in all, the author does not support their idea the best.

Score: 6