'Space. The final frontier.' This is a very commonly used phrase that is the helm for space exploration. Since the beginning of time, humans have looked up to the sky and wondered what might be in that vast place above their heads. The problem is, there is simply no technology advanced enough for scientists to explore all that lies around them. In the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", the author definitely states the challenges of exploring the planet, but does not effectively support their claim that it is worth the risk.

The author presents the challenge of Venus's inhospitable environment in relation to the Earth by simply laying down the facts, without defending their side. In paragraph two of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus", the text states, "Each previous mission [to Venus] was unmanned...since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours." The author gives an explanation to the quick deaths of these spacecrafts as well, clearly outlining how hostile the environment is. "A thick atmosphere of almost 97 percent carbon blankets Venus...the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet." The author goes on to list more negative attributes, such as the temperature, which averages "over 800 degrees Fahrenheit...the hottest surface temperature of any planet in our solar system." It seems, so far, that the risks definitely outweigh the rewards. The author then describes technology that would help scientists explore Venus, but it is clear that this tech has not yet been developed.

The author mentions "NASA's possible solution to the hostile conditions on the surface of Venus" which is that "scientists [would] float above the fray." The problem with this statement is that the technology has obviously not been tested yet, and very likely not even developed. The author's use of an uncertain word, "possible", connotes uncertainty and doubt that this idea will even work. The author of "The Challenge of Exploring Venus" then proceeds to counter their own argument in the next paragraph: "However, peering at Venus from a ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the planet can only provide limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere". In addition to listing yet another drawback of the environment, the author blatantly states that the previously mentioned idea would not work for proper exploration of Venus. The author is simply relying on the reader's emotions and assumed interest in space to agree with the author, rather than presenting facts to back up their argument.

"The Challenge of Exploring Venus" does give a couple good reasons for exploring Venus: initially, the fact that it was once the most Earthlike planet. "Today, Venus still has some features that are analogous to those on Earth." The author then goes on to describe these features: valleys, mountains and craters. Another reason is given: "Venus can sometimes be our nearest option for a planetary visit, a crucial consideration...the value of returning to Venus seems indisputable, but what are the options for making such a mission both safe and scientifically productive?" It is assumed that the author ends this sound claim with a statement to pique interest, but it does just the opposite. The use of an interrogative relays to the reader that even the author, who is arguing for space exploration, is uncertain how these explorations will be accomplished; this effectively discredits the validity of their statement. The author relies too much on objectiveness to get their point across, and that is how they fail: to propose a strong argument, one must back up their claims with facts to persuade readers, not simply state facts in relation to the negatives of a situation without refuting them.

In conclusion, the author presents a weak argument that is backed up by unfinished projects and an assumed advocacy for space exploration. Rather than give the cold, hard facts of opposition and counter them with more facts that support their argument, the author gives no definitive research on how scientists will go about exploring Venus. The author simply states ideas, accepting them as sound solutions to any problem that space may throw at them. The vast unknown is not something to toy lightly with, lives and multitudes of financing are in the balance. There is no room for possible ideas, one must know with proof that these inklings of imagination will be sustainable when put to the test. Space may be the final frontier, but this argument persuades readers to believe that time is yet to come.