Throughout the article "The Challenge of Exploring Venus,"

the author suggests that studying Venus would be valuable despite the many dangers it holds. A major portion of the article gives insight onto why studying Venus can, and is, dangerous.

Information about how studying Venus can be very valuable is rarely provided.

The author does not adequately support their idea that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit despite the dangers.

Though the author of the article belives that studying Venus would be advantageous, the evidence provided is not strong.

In paragraph 4, the author writes that Venus is the "most Earth-like planet in our solar system" and "could have supported various forms of life."

The author does provide much context into these claims and only describes geographical features.

The author then does not mention this idea until paragraph 8.

They conclude the article with very similar statements as mentioned before.

The article does not contain information on why studying Venus would be valuable, but more so on why it is dangerous.

Most of the article describes and tells about the many dangers of studying Venus.

This directly contradicts the author's viewpoint.

In paragraph 2, the author provides evidence against their idea.

The text states, "Each previous mission was unmaned, and for good reason, since no spacecraft survived the landing for more than a few hours,"

and "Numerous factors contibute to Venus's reputation."

When first reading the article, the text immediately leads the reader to believe that Venus is extremely dangerous.

The author includes many other shocking facts including, but not limited to, "97 percent carbon dioxide blankets Venus... temperatures average over 800 degrees Fahrenheit.. atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than what we experience on our own planet."

Reasons such as these lead readers to form a negative opinion about the explorations of Venus.

Though the author does bring up different solutions to make a trip to Venus more safe, they also bring up why the solutions would not work.

For example, one solution includes floating 30 miles abouve the atmosphere.

However after describing this system, the next paragraph provides reasons why this would not work well.

As stated in paragraph 6, "...researchers cannot take samples of rock, gas, or anything else, from a distance.

Therefore, scientists seeking to conduct a thorough mission to understand Venus would need to get up close and personal despite the risks."

The author also notes that photography and videography would be ineffective.

Paragraph 7 also explains that modern computer can not work near Venus's surface as the high temperatures melt most of the metals.

Though the ideas that the author brings up are valid, they are discredited, weakening the points.

In conclusion, the author does not properly support their claims that studying Venus can be valuable despite the dangers.

The article consists mainly of reasons why studying Venus can be very dangerous rather than why it is advantageous.

The article provides evidence agains the author's viewpoint and show that studying Venus is too dangerous and that the risks do not outweigh the outcome.