Rate the following argument fragment on its writing, argument, and language skills:
Evidence: Even though humans could possibly hover 30 miles above the ground level, the texts states that the vast distance would provide only "limited insight on ground conditions," and it would "[render] standard forms of photography and videography ineffective." Along with that, the author admits that "researchers would not be able to take samples...from a distance." The challenge that the study provides would simply not be worth the time, money, and risks. If man were to go to extreme lengths to reach within 30 miles of a planet and not be able to collect and evidence or data, it would not be a successful mission if the goal was to obtain new information about the planet.

Score: 2