Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
Should one's taxes go towards funding useless and pointless projects? Most people agree that it is awful when their taxes go into unnecessary and meaningless projects. This is exactly what they are getting with the attempts at exploring Venus. The author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy persuit despite the dangers it presents; however, they do not adequately give reasons as to why the exporation of Venus is viable. The author fails to give reasoning as to how studying Venus benefits humanity, how research is progressing, or why Venus is a better choice than other planets.

The author of this article does not give adequate reasoning as to why studying this planet is prouctive for humanity. Throughout the article, the author claims that scientists want to study the planet because it is most like Earth density wise. While it is most like Earth's density, it is not like Earth in so many ways. Venus is a lot more dangerous and deadly when compared to Earth. It has thick, poisonus gas clouds. It also has a bailing surface. While in the past it was much like Earth, currently is is much different. The similarities between Venus and Earth are very few, and that makes Venus less desirable to study. The author also does not give examples of how examining the rocks, liquids, or metals could progress humanity.

The author does not contribute any major discoveries for the Venus projects. There are several examples in the article where the author states a new idea that scientists have for getting to Venus. However, most of these ideas are not solid enough. There has not been enough of a technological breakthrough for NASA to fund another trip to Venus. The text states, "...not a single spaceship has touched down on Venus in more than three decades." This reinstates the point that, while there have been ideas, none of them are solid enough for a trip to Venus. If no signifigant progress has been made in 3 decades, why should NASA continue to fund the project?

The article does not make a claim as to why Venus is a better choice than any other planet. In the second paragraph, the author states numorous challenges to exploring Venus, but he does not list the disadvantages to studying a planet like Mars. According to the article, both of the planets are fairly close to Earth. At some points, Mars is even closer than Venus. This would make it easier to travel to Mars. It also does not appear as if Mars has even close to the same difficulties that Venus has, making it a safer option. It would also mean that Mars has a higher chance at colonization.

While this article provides many examples on why we should study Venus despite it's challenges, it does not do so in an adequate way. There are many glaring problems and reasonings that are just not addressed in this article. The author does not back up why the planet is so important, it's worth to humanity, or the scientific breakthoughs that warrent the project continuing. Due to those reasons, the author does not thouroughly support their idea that Venus is worthy.

Score: 4