Many authors write about how we should do certain things even if they don't apppeal to us or seem possible. Authors are supposed to support their claims. The author supports the idea that studying Venus is a worthy puruit despite the dangers well.

First, the author talks about Venus is almost like Earth's twin. In paragraph 2, he states how Venus is similar to Earth in many ways. One way is how they have similar sizes and desities. He also says Venus is sometimes the closest planet to Earth.

Second, the author states the challenges and solutions to them. In paragraph 3, he states that, "On the planet's surface, temperatures average over 900 degrees Fahrenheit..." His solution is to fly above the surface where its still pretty hot, but nothing compared to the surface. He also states how the atmospheric pressure is 90 times greater than Earth's. His solution for that is also flying above it because high enough would be similar to Earths

Third, the author talks about how NASA is working on ways to vist Venus. In paragraph 7, the author states that NASA is testing things in atmospheres similar to Venus's. So far, they've stayed in a few weeks before being destroyed. He talks about how mechanical computers could survive it. Modern computers are destroyed easily with the extreme conditions of Venus, but mechanical ones that use cogs wouldn't be destroyed as easily.

The author has valid claims and supports them well. It's important that authors support their claims. Authors write about many different topics all the time.