In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" the author suggests that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers. The author provided reasons on why exploring Venus is so important.

The author beleives that Venus should be explored because it is "Often referred to as Earth's "twin," Venus is the closest planet to Earth in terms of size, and occasionally the closest in distance too". (Paragraph 2). Another reason why the author believes that Venus should be explored is because "It may have been the most Earth-like planet in our solar system."( Paragraph 4). These two reasons explain why it can be beneficial to explore Venus. To prove that Venus was and is so similar to Earth the author provided details such as, "Venus was probably covered with oceans and could have supported various forms of life," and "The planet has a surface of rocky sediment and includes familiar features such as valleys, mountains, and craters." (Paragraph 4). Providing these details helped support the idea that Venus is so similar to Earth. Proving that Venus is so similar to Earth can show people that it might be worthy to explore it. The author also talked about ways that could possibly make exploring Venus safer. In paragraph 5 the author says, "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus would allow scientists to float above the fray" giving this information can show that there are safe options that are in the works for exploring Venus.

The author's use of supporting details was well used in supporting his idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit. The author also stated possible disadvantages and dangers that could happen which helped improve his claim. If the author only used the positive affects and left the dangers out I think it would have hurt his article. Overall, I think this article was written well with plenty of supporting details.