The author states that Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it presents. How well does this author truly show this? He shows how we can see Venus from afar but we don't know what it is like close up, it's often reffered to as earth's twin which is very important, and we also need to get up close to Venus even if there is risks.

People from earth can see Venus just by looking up at the right place. The author states, "Venus, sometimes called the "Evening Star," is one of the brightest points of light in the night sky, making it simple for even an amateur stargazer to spot." So from afar we can see it as a big "light" in the sky, kind of like a star. But Venus is not a star it is a planet. What he means by this is that you can see how bright Venus is from afar but what you can't see what it is really like close up. But if we dont know what Venus is like close up then how do we know it is Earth's "twin"?

Venus is often referred to as Earth's "twin". According to the text "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", "Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of density and size, and occasionally the clostest distance too." The passage also states, "Venus may well once have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system. Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like earth." So if Venus is so much like earth then why can't we send a spacecraft to Venus now? Well we tried and it didnt workout. There was a spacecraft sent unmanned because the spacecraft could only survive the landing for three hours. Venus today still have some features that are close to ours on earth. Could this mean it could become safe sometime? Doubtful. According to the passage, "Venus is a planet that has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountians, and craters." So why do we need to get so up close to Venus even though it causes risks?

Wouldn't you like to know whats on Venus even if it could be dangerous? I beileve this is why the author suggest thst Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers it precents. You may wonder what thoes dangers are. According to the passage, "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon dioxide blankets venus. Even more challenging are the clouds of highly corrosive sulfuric acid in Venus's atmosphere. On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit, and the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." So why should we still go? NASA is finding a possible solution to the hostile conditions. According to the text "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray. Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hoveriing 30 or so miles above the rolling Venusian landscape. A vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground confitions by staying up and out of their way." It also states, "Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans." This means we would be able to see and get more information about Venus.

I conclude that because of all the new findings that this is why the author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit dispite the dangers. If Venus is like Earth does that mean that what happened to Venus might happen to us? This is why we need more information. The author shows us how we can see Venus from afar but we don't know what it is like close up, its often reffered to as earths twin which is very important, and we also need to get up close to Venus even if there is risks. These are very important to know when deciding weather it is a good idea to travel to Venus even with the dangers.