Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", the author has a vague claim for supporting the idea of exploring Venus. In the passage, the author explains how many dangers there are to exploring the planet, the unbearable temperatures, the lightning and volcanoes, the thick atmosphere that blocks Venus' surface. In all of these dangers, the author believes that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit, but does not use enough support for this idea.

In the text, the author is explaining all of the dangers in exploring Venus. In paragraph 3, "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of high corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmorphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees." The author continues to list these dangers. He barely has support that shows his idea of exploring Venus. For example, the author states in paragraph 5, "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray." Then the author explains in the same paragraph, "At thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth." The author states an idea that supports the claim that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers, but then uses a contradictory statement proving otherwise.

In the text, the author says that each mission has been unmanned. They have instead used spacecrafts to explore the planet. In paragraph 7, the author uses a detail about NASA to help support exploration on the planet. "NASA is working on other approaches to studying Venus. For example, some simplified electronics made of silicon carbide have been tested in a chamber simulating the chaos of Venus's surface and have lasted for three weeks in such conditions. Another project is looking back to an old technology called mechanical computers." The author's supporting claim does not have a contradictory statement, instead, he finally uses it to help support his claim. "By comparison, systems that use mechanical parts can be made more resistant to pressure, heat, and other forces." The author uses the statement to help prove his claim.

Overall, in this passage, the author does poorly in supporting the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. The author uses some sort of supporting statement, but then uses a contradictory statement which makes any reader reconsider the point the author was trying to convey. The article is weak in the sense that there is a constant reprimanding part to each weak supporting claim. The author did have at least one supporting paragraph in this article that helped with the idea of exploration on Venus. However, throughout all of this, the author had poor evidence to provide for his claim to convince the reader that exploration is a good idea despite all of the potential dangers enlisted in the passage.

Score: 3