Have you ever wondered what it would be like to explore a planet while fighting through the dangers the planet brings? What about a planet that at ground level, has far more extreme conditions than humans can handle? This is what exploring our planetary neighbor Venus would be like. Even though the author claims it would be worthy to make the dangerous trip to Venus, he does a poor job of supporting his claim.

The author uses a credible source, NASA, but the author fails to back up why the pursuit is worthy. The information from NASA talks about possible solutions to the harsh conditions of Venus, but not about why the trip should be made, despite all the harsh factors. The text states, "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 hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape." The author has valid reasoning for solutions, but this information does not mention why it would benefit us to risk lives just to make the adventure.

The author also includes an abundance of information about how dangerous and risky Venus is, and yes it is important to know these facts, but in the beginning of the article, the author seems to scare the audience into not traveling to Venus. Paragraph 3 states, "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. These conditions are far more extreme than anything humans encounter on Earth; such an environment would crush even a submarine accustomed to diving to the deepest parts of our oceans and would liquify many metals." The author goes into detail about just how deadly Venus would be to humans, instead, if he was trying to prove that it is a worthy point, the author should've been lighter about these facts and not gone into such scary, vivid detail; the author also could've added a counterargument in this paragraph instead of waiting until later in the essay to start showing what he was actually trying to prove.

The author could've included more evidence to support his view, but he did provide one piece of sufficient evidence. Paragraph 4 reads, "Long ago, Venus was probably covered largely with oceans and could have supported various forms of life, just like Earth." This piece shows that some scientists want to explore Venus for its ancient possible ability to explore life, but the author needed to support his claim with other information, other than strictly in this paragraph.

Ultimately, the author did have evidence in his article, but there needed to be more in order to make his claim well-supported and also more credible. Exploring Venus may be a good idea, but the author's claim wasn't clear enough throughout the essay to be able understand his point. The only time the author's claim was clear was in the conclusion when he stated reasons why Venus should be explored. All in all, the author did a poor job of supporting his idea of the worthiness of traveling to Venus, despite all the dangers it brings with it.