The Author suggest that studying Venus is a worthy pursuit depsite the dangers it presents. To be honest, going to Venus would be idiotic, find a suitable and survivable place for humans would make sense, and the author does state it.

I do believe we should go to other planets, I believe that God only made one life inhabitable place from the proof I've gathered, but I was a Evolutionist and Paleontologist at the age of 5. I believe we could one day inhabit planets like Earth and find suitable places, and I've always been astonished with space, because its amazing. Now I will tell why I believe the author is great at showing his/her perspective.

We shouldn't go on Venus, but in Paragraph 5, NASA came up with a possible solution. "Imagine a blimp-like vehicle hovering 30 or so miles above the roiling Venusian landscape. Just as our jet airplanes travel at a higher altitude to fly over many storms, a vehicle hovering over Venus would avoid the unfriendly ground conditions by staying up and out of their way. At thirty-plus miles above the surface, temperatures would still be toasty at around 170 degrees Fahrenheit, but the air pressure would be close to that of sea level on Earth. Solar power would be plentiful, and radiation would not exceed Earth levels. Not easy conditions, but survivable for humans."

The only problem to the previous solution is that the farther you go up the less insight you can get, In Paragraph 6, the author states "However, peering at Venus from a ship orbiting or hovering safely far above the planet can provide only limited insight on ground conditions because most forms of light cannot penetrate the dense atmosphere, rendering standard forms of photography and videography ineffective. More importantly, researches 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. Or maybe we should think of them as challenges,. Many researches are working on innovations that would allow our machines to last long enough to contribute meaningfully to our knowledge of Venus."

So yes, Nasa does have some flaws and some great ideas. But personally I believe that we should use a filtering system, so that the hot air inside is pushed outside with cold air refurbishing the insides of the rover. Some thick strengthy metal would be used against the walls of the rover, would make it heavier, but it would give us more time, the Cameras would need to be covered with some thick heat resistant glass. And the insides would be lined with heat resistant metal and wires. Find a cool place on the planet with out sattelites to minimize heat and give us more time or for example instead of 170 degrees it will only be 150 degrees, which is still bad but it would be alot less stressful.

Us, as a people will always strive for new and interesting wonders, and it is the great minds of our societies that lead us one step further into the future. If a great danger faces us, it is those people we look to for answers for our many questions.

The author states "Despite the risks, or maybe we should think of them as Challenges." Challenges lead to creativity, and with creativity, our world is improved in more ways then one. Thus, we must push on to new lengths and stretch our understanding and see with unclouded eyes.