In "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author explains that studying Venus is a worthy approach despite the dangers. The author impressively supports that the mission to Venus is worth it despite the dangers that might come with it. In the article he provides examples, uses a credible source, and also views the other side. By doing these things it made his point credible and also stronger to the reader.

In the article he provides the example of a floating car above venus to show that a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the conditions but it would provide little sight. He uses to example to illustrate what it would be like to avoid the conditionsby showing this is what the would have to do. He also provides examples to an alternative by saying that there could be electronics to avoid the risks. By providing both of these examples it gives the reader some relateable examples to get an insight into his point.

NASA is a world wide administration that has credibility over the course of its govern. By providing examples of what NASA is doing to show that it should be done, then if NASA is working on it then it makes his point credible. He quotes NASA'S approches on studying Venus so that it can avoid the risks to show that it is possible to explore Venus without the risks. A NASA solution would be that a person could float above the fray. They also have considered sending electronices so it is possible. He saying that it might be difficult but it is attainable. This supports the claim that he supports his claim impresively because he uses sources.

In most arguments the person views the other side so that they can provide an alternative to what they are saying. He uses cons such as no mission has had a man, 97% of carbon dioxide blankets Venus, the temperature is 90 times greater than Earth, and that it could crash a submarine. But then he says that Venus has benefits to that out way the dangers. The benfits include: it is the brightest point, it is close to Earth compared to other space travels, long ago it could support life, and it will expand the edges of imagination and innovation. He provides benefits to out weigh the cons of exploring Venus. He does a great job of explaining why exploring Venus has value and can provides insight to other counter arguments that might rise from others opionions. This is why he does an impressive job supporting his argument.

In conclusion, the author provided points in the argument to make the opinion more credible and also stronger to the reader. In the article the author provided examples, a wide known credible source, and viewed the other side. He impressively supported his opinon that the mission to Venus is a worthy persuit despite the dangers. Without his evidence to suppport his opinion the article would have not had such an impact on the reader. This is why he did an impressive job supporting his idea.