Rate the following essay on its writing, argument, and language skills:
Is the "Face on Mars" really a natural landform? Seeing from pictures and other kinds of photographic things can you really tell? There may be alien markings or there may not be any markings.

I say that the "Face on Mars" is in fact, a natural landform. There is no alien markings to be seen from a picture. For example, ""As a rule of thumb you can discern things in a digital image 3 times bigger than the pixel size," he added. "So, if there were objects in the picture like airplanes on the groud or Egyptian-style pryamids or even small shacks, you could see what they were!"

So, if there were alien markings on this natural landform you would be able to see them. This was stated by Jim Garvin who is a chief scientist for NASA's Mars Exploration Program. The picture uses the camera's absolute maximum resolution.

Many people said from the photo took in 1998, "Perhaps, said skeptics, alien markings were hidden by haze." The photo in 1998 was taken on a cloudy winter day on Mars and caused a haze to appear over the camera. By going in 2001 on a nice sunny day on Mars, the picture was clear and easy to see. You can tell in the picture that there is no alien markings of any kind. The picture was took with great resolution and couldn't be better.

In conclusion, there could be a possibility of aliens making this natural landform but, it could also just be a natural landform. It should not be famous for a conspiracy theory that it was made by aliens, simply of its shape. This landmark, looking like a human face, is just a natural landform.

Score: 3