Re: Guth Venus / Brad Guth and the geothermal planet (5 Gold Star Rating *****)

Brad Guth

unread,

Jul 10, 2011, 3:18:31 PM7/10/11

to

For those few Usenet/newsgroup readers that still think they have an
open mindset that isn’t configured to self-destruct or implode upon
hearing, reading or observing a revised interpretation about the
planet Venus, I might actually have that different interpretation to
offer, as well as a few terrific ideas and notions that could prove
rather interesting. However, if you are a certain kind of faith-based
and kinda social/political closed mindset in your set ways sticking
with our mainstream status-quo of revising nothing, like 99.9% of
Americans having survived their K12 and higher education years, then
you may not have to bother yourself with any of this, because I’m only
going to keep pissing you off.

Not that I can agree with every new or old interpretation by others,
such these results from Venus Express are still developing and will
hopefully get further revised as time and resources make our
understanding better, with fewer preconceptions keeping us from
realizing the greater potential that such a nearby planet like Venus
has to offer.
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/object/index.cfm?fobjectid=39432

Just because our government agencies and their mainstream media that
has to publish whatever is handed to them as is (or else), as well as
having to stick with whatever’s contained within those K12 textbooks
telling us that this extremely nearby planet Venus is simply too hot
for any kind of conventional Goldilocks life as we know it to survive,
at least presumably in the nude upon its hellish surface isn’t an
option, doesn’t mean that imported and/or custom engineered life
couldn’t technically manage, not to mention whatever the laws of
physics and applied technology could make Venus perfectly doable even
for the frail DNA/RNA and inferior physiology of us humans.

Gee whiz, why am I not the least bit surprised, that supposed wizards
of such all-knowing expertise like our peers and whatever authority
above them still can’t even manage to muster up any similar examples
of extremely rugged terrain on Earth that looks remotely as though it
were artificially created or even modified to suit, that is if you
know what I mean (which obviously most of you don’t). According to
our mainstream peers and perhaps even yourself plus many others of
your silly obfuscation and FUD-master worthy kind, there’s supposedly
only inert hot rock on Venus that’s entirely heated by a solar
greenhouse situation because, supposedly Venus is exactly the same age
and basic composition as Earth. However, it just so happens in this
instance to look as though Venus has at least one fairly complex
tarmac/airport situated rather boldly within a very mountainous
terrain, along with having that nifty nearby bridge and a community of
multiple high-rise geometries (large geometric structures), as well as
any number of nearby complex natural formations and seemingly active
dynamics taking place (at least within reservoirs plus the “fluid
arch”), that when taken as a group just so happens to be oddly
arranged as though offering a perfectly rational community like
infrastructure of viable logistics that even 5th graders could
recognize.

As far as having renewable energy goes, it seems the planet Venus has
us beat by a good thousand to one, and with such local renewable
energy abundance (much of it via direct geothermal, volcanic plus
atmospheric dynamic pressure and thermal differentials) plus there’s
no apparent shortages of raw elements (including H2, H2O and O2) is
where anyone half as smart as a 5th grader could manage to survive,
with loads of energy and local resources to spare. This is not to say
that any sort of naked and dumbfounded Goldilocks is ever going to be
a happy Venus camper, or that loads of pizza and ice cold beer
wouldn’t have to be imported from Earth. Also try keeping in mind
those terrific robust cloud layers are not made of crystal dry sulfur
dust (even ESA has had to revise their assessment to allowing 14
teratonnes as water, and my swag interpretation still has it pegged at
500+ teratonnes or roughly 0.1% of that terrific atmospheric mass).
Our extremely thin and low density atmosphere holds at least 50e12
tonnes of H2O (possibly with GW and AGW has that H2O saturated up to
100e12 tonnes).

Here's that same old original cloudless GIF composite radar obtained
image file (as raw and not having been enlargement processed) that our
mainstream status-quo has been so deathly afraid others might actually
look at:
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
Without even downloading the GIF monochrome image, you can still
screen zoom-in on the small area in question (less than 10% of the
composite FOV), so as to keeping the raw 1:1 pixel format and its
rather limited resolution of 225 meters/pixel, and thereby have
yourself a perfectly good look-see at interpreting whatever that sort
of 225 meter per pixel resolution has to offer.

Here’s one of my basic 10:1 resampled enlargements of the very same
area that I’ve pointed out to NASA and others of their Magellan team
for more than the past decade, that’s still a generic composite
derivative like their original because it’s entirely a product of the
original (nothing personal added or subtracted):
http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddsdxhv_0hrm5bdfj
If you’d care to focus on anything specific, please go right ahead
and do so, because I’m not certain that my interpretation of what the
image depicts is offering the best or only option.

First of all, I kind of doubt the surface is significantly cooler than
reported, however the most recent ESA data via their Venus EXPRESS
mission has been reveling considerable atmospheric thermal
differentials that haven't been reported and/or published by others as
having previously had essentially the same or better science data to
go by. Those polar surface temperatures could be considerably cooler
due to them strong atmospheric vortex considerations that's causing
such upper nighttime cryogenic atmosphere to draw substantial energy
away from the much hotter lower atmosphere and it’s geothermally
heated surface.

What we have here to look at and deductively interpret is simply a
fair number of unusually complex geometric patterns, of somewhat
unusually unified or associated pixels that don't seem to be of
entirely random geology happenstance. However, there are a number of
quite large and unusual items that should be considered as natural,
such as the "fluid arch" and perhaps even that extremely large clover
shaped reservoir could be considered as perfectly natural (even though
the geology of Earth offers us nothing remotely close to such size or
geometric unified complexity). However, that extensive and complex
tarmac/airstrip as offering such an unusually flat item situated
within that mountainous terrain simply isn't as likely to be formed by
natural geology we know of, nor is that highly unusual bridge item and
those multiple other large scale items of a nearby community of
geometric shapes and a their rational community like setting, of what
seems rather artificially structural and rational infrastructure
worthy is what should be closely reviewed by others to see if any or
all of those could have been formed by natural processes.

You folks must have at least as good if not a whole lot better image
processing expertise for this resampling/enlargement capability, so
please do share that better result with us, so that at least we can be
on the same page and not looking at entirely different areas. If you
need some assistance or advisements with selecting and/or utilizing a
photo enlarging process, I’ll gladly donate my time and resources free
of charge

If you should interpret this image as only containing perfectly
natural formations of greenhouse hot rock and depicting logical
patterns of erosion, then you must also have a number of reference
example images obtained of terrestrial geology recorded by similar
radar imaging resolution, by which that interpretation of seeing only
inert hot rock and natural erosion is based upon, and naturally we’d
like to have a look-see at whatever is within your observationology
frame of reference that gives you the necessary expertise, because you
can’t just be making stuff like that up in order to suit a given
opinion or policy.

If need be, ask others (5th graders if necessary) to see whatever they
can interpret.

Otherwise, go to BradGuth.blogspot and my Google document pages:
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet?hl=en
http://bradguth.blogspot.com/

http://www.wanttoknow.info/
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

On Jun 12, 7:39 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> '''Guth Venus''' is a very small portion or selected tiny area of
> planet Venus that is actually quite similar to Earth in more ways than
> most of us would care to think about. It’s size, gravity, mountainous
> and canyon terrain and especially of its protective atmosphere are
> each necessary if any sufficiently advanced life is going exist or
> even temporarily coexist. However, on the surface (literally) it's
> not exactly naked human friendly or what you'd typically interpret as
> Goldilocks approved, even though it certainly has terrific diversity
> in geology and loads of dynamic energy and resource potential along
> with a full range of elements that cover most every imaginable kind,
> and invaluable to most anyone as long as the laws of physics and best
> available science can be utilized.
>
> Because we all have to interpret whatever we see and measure, some of
> what this article is about has to do with the science of
> observationology(deductive interpretations of remote obtained images),
> along with my personal research and subjective notions that you can
> evaluate on your own or at least for the moment take my version as
> being sufficiently correct as to what the planet Venus has to offer an
> intelligent species, such as us humans. I am also perfectly
> verifiable about all of this because I really exist as who I really
> am, and I can be contacted in various ways in order to question or
> inform on most any related topic. I'm also not trying to take credit
> away from others, whereas instead I'm fully encouraging others to
> contribute their own observationology expertise plus whatever physics
> and science expertise they have, because at least subjectively almost
> anything about the planet Venus seems doable..
>
> Here's an original cloudless GIF composite radar obtained image file
> (as a raw unmodified image that's not having been enlargement or
> otherwise processed):
> Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1
> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
> and the high resolution GIF version incorporates 36 looks/scans per
> pixel
> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
> Within this composite image obtained by our NASA-Magellan mission are
> some extremely good geology and otherwise oddly or highly unusual
> configured shapes of low-resolution pixel patterns that haven't been
> explained as entirely natural, much less confirmed as being artificial
> or intelligent created. However, with some open minded degree of
> looking over this entire image and then comparing those natural
> geology features with everything depicted, as well as comparing to the
> similar geology and our intelligent infrastructure of Earth, it's kind
> of hard to ignore some of those complex patterns on Venus that are
> truly quite unusual in a community rational kind of infrastructure
> way. At least it’s by far the most interesting configuration of hot
> rocks on any planet or moon we’ve managed to image so far.
>
> It really doesn’t take much open minded interpretation to see these
> significant geometric patterns that would be really hard for natural
> geology and erosion to accomplish, at least not without some
> intelligent intervention. So far others and myself haven’t identified
> any other similar patterns of such large infrastructure scale on Earth
> unless actual artificial structures within a community of rational
> infrastructure were part of the image.
>
> In order to fully appreciate this complex and hot as hell terrain plus
> whatever else can be interpreted, will require some limited image
> zooming or resampled enlargement process so as to assist the untrained
> eye in this subjective observationology science, which doesn't mean
> you have to agree with anything that I've interpreted or having
> suggested as being worthy of some level of intelligent infrastructure,
> because this could be all perfectly natural though if only existing on
> Venus because, at least thus far I’ve not found natural formations
> that come even remotely close in scale as to looking so intelligently
> functional and community rational at the same time, so I'm not going
> to forcibly speculate on your behalf other than to share whatever I've
> interpreted, and to at least some extent having backed up with physics
> and the best available science of others.
>
> Even though I'm not always the most qualified, and if other can’t
> contribute their supposed expertise, in which case I'll try to explain
> everything the best I can. However, from this point on you'll need to
> hold on for dear life because, I'm going to try selling this
> interpretation of "Guth Venus" as the best ever discovery since sliced
> bread. Feel free to point out where the geology of Earth or whatever
> other planet or moon offers similar or better examples of artificial
> geometric shapes in a rational community like setting that are
> actually of natural geology and erosion, because so far I got nothing.
>
> By using that introduction catch phrase of "life-friendly" is not to
> be taken lightly or in gist as representing some kind of perverted
> joke or pun, because the planet Venus is obviously and quite seriously
> an extremely hot surface environment beyond any terrestrial pressure-
> cooker, other than inside a nuclear reactor pressure vessel which
> clearly isn't humanly survivable. However, with physics and
> technology applied it's not quite as insurmountable as some might
> think, and try to remember that there's always a cool sanctuary above
> those cryogenic nighttime clouds in case our rigid composite airship
> starts to melt. Thereby I'm thinking our Venus is certainly not off-
> limits as to any space traveling expertise, or that of exceeding that
> level of technology for safely accommodating our frail human
> physiology, so we're not speaking of such a nasty planet hosting
> uncivilized or uneducated heathens that probably couldn't have
> independently evolved there to begin with.
>
> If you can better deductively interpret this image of “Guth Venus”,
> have at it, as I’m certain I’ve gotten a number of items incorrectly
> identified or having missed some that your observationology as having
> better interpreted for whatever natural or artificial nature they
> represent.
>
> My derivative image of “Guth Venus” is simply a cropped out portion
> from the 225 meter/pixel GIF original composite, of less than 10%
> extracted that’s merely 10X resampled with use of basic image filters
> plus a little extra contrast, but other than that nothing of any
> specific pixel(s) has been contributed or hidden, thereby needless to
> say that nothing has been intentionally added, subtracted or otherwise
> distorted.
>
> Here’s one of my 10:1 enlargements of the same area that I’ve pointed
> out for the past decade:
> http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddsdxhv_0hrm5bdfj
>
> On May 22, 10:25 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > This tired old topic about “Guth Venus” is getting ready for another
> > redo or do-over from scratch.
>
> > First of all, it seems perfectly clear enough that there has been some
> > kind of intelligent other life existing/coexisting on Venus. At least
> > Venus has been technically doable, and there’s all the natural
> > resource of unlimited local energy and minerals you could possibly ask
> > for. At least for those capable of interplanetary travels, the
> > complex environment of Venus is not the least bit insurmountable.
>
> > Secondly, the average sooty coal like and otherwise crystal dry kind
> > of dusty carbon or carbonado accumulations of complex local minerals
> > and cosmic deposits upon our physically dark basalt Selene/moon should
> > have become worth all the tea in China, so to speak. The relatively
> > low or inverted density interior of our moon and especially of it’s
> > relatively wet crust that’s supposed hosting 260 ppm of water plus
> > crater hidden ice and otherwise accommodating the naked surface
> > abundance and thereby easily accessible raw element of He3, should
> > have by itself been more than worth the mostly robotic mining effort
> > of extracting for our terrestrial fusion energy needs.
>
> > The only nagging problem about accomplishing expeditions upon our
> > physically dark and nasty moon is that it seems that we still do not
> > have any viable fly-by-rocket landers (especially not one of the
> > Apollo era), or even sufficiently robust robotics suitable for
> > tunneling into the moon, much less sufficiently rad-hard human DNA.
> > (it seems all the smoke and mirrors of our mutually perpetrated cold-
> > war era really doesn’t count, because that moon surface should be just
> > as nasty if not potentially worse than any Van Allen belt of our
> > magnetosphere has to offer)
>
> > Of course, Venus should offer most of everything our Selene/moon plus
> > that of Earth has to offer, except that Venus does not require rad-
> > hard DNA or any fly-by-rocket methods of soft landings or efficiently
> > getting yourself about when using a buoyant composite rigid shuttle/
> > airship, and otherwise from within the thick clouds of Venus is what
> > always holds hundreds of teratonnes of good old water, though highly
> > acidic but otherwise easily extracted as pure h2o using fundamental
> > physics and the vast abundance of local energy in order to efficiently
> > extract as much h2o as you like.
>
> > Most of the valuable minerals and raw elements of Venus are those
> > having been and still being geothermally plus otherwise forced out of
> > its unusually toasty surface that’s radiating and/or geothermal
> > upwelling on average 20.5 w/m2, thereby having to mine deeply into its
> > relatively thin crust shouldn’t even be required, and as I’ve
> > stipulated so many times, that all of the mission and/or habitat
> > energy requirements for accomplishing and/or processing most anything
> > you can imagine is already there to utilize as is.
>
> > Venus is undoubtedly that of a humanly toasty surface or pressure
> > cooker environment that’s clearly not suited to any naked Goldilocks
> > (aka dumb blondes), but otherwise it’s more than technically
> > manageable, especially via good robotics and otherwise by way of using
> > the composite rigid airship method. Therefore, it’s kinda like most
> > all other off-world locations, whereas far below the standards of Eden
> > is why we can not plan on going there in the buff or as otherwise
> > dumbfounded and mainstream snookered fools. Oddly but not
> > surprisingly, the faith-based closed mindset wants absolutely nothing
> > to do with Venus or any other planet or moon that’s capable of hosting
> > complex life even via applied physics and technology, but that’s
> > entirely their highly biased problem, and not ours.
>
> > "Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1"
> > http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
> > http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
> > Thumbnail images, including mgn_c115s095_1.gif (225 m/pixel)
> > http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
>
> > Brad Guth / Blog and my Google document pages:
> > http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet?hl=en
> > http://bradguth.blogspot.com/
> > http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddsdxhv_0hrm5bdfj
>
> > On Mar 28, 9:10 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > With 99.9% of Usenet/newsgroup contributors as phony or bogus, don't
> > > expect to see any inside support or much less anything positive/
> > > constructive going on. Each and every topic posted by the few of us
> > > that are real and doing our best has to stand on its own, and
> > > continually defend itself against the mainstream status-quo gauntlet
> > > that wants nothing to ever change (at least not for the better).
>
> > > The ongoing consideration of this topic is that most Americans and
> > > obviously many others around the world simply can't afford the luxury
> > > of honestly thinking for themselves without breaking wind or otherwise
> > > coming unglued at the seams. They are also deathly afraid of their
> > > own shadows, and worse yet afraid of whatever their faith-based and/or
> > > political and peer authority might do if they don't fully accept and
> > > comply to their mainstream words as representing the one and only
> > > truths. Such as independent energy and technology wizards like our
> > > William Mook, possibly yourself, a little of myself and otherwise damn
> > > few others are clearly the exceptions, and the price we each get to
> > > pay is truly considerable. Mook’s environmentally clean and renewable
> > > “New World Oil” via his solar Mokenergy derived hydrogen at $100/
> > > tonne, and a few other valuable energy related products (including my
> > > initial billion tonnes/year of HTP) is all perfectly well and good if
> > > it ever happens, which of course those of our Big Energy mafia/cabal
> > > types currently in charge are not going to let happen, no matters what
> > > the consequences.
>
> > > When looking off-world for any kind of alternative Goldilocks suitable
> > > Eden/sanctuary, as well as for considering the mining and/or
> > > exploiting of its minerals and rare element riches or whatever other
> > > valuables worth the effort, it's imperative that local energy already
> > > exist and if at all possible be renewable. It's also imperative that
> > > this off-world location be relatively nearby (at least from time to
> > > time) and offering a protective atmosphere that also gives terrific
> > > buoyancy (even if it’s considered as too hot or too cold and toxic or
> > > acidic isn’t an insurmountable problem for other than naked Goldilocks
> > > that are too dumb to lace their own shoes), which thereby our next
> > > world or moon doesn't really have to comply to any naked dumbfounded
> > > Goldilocks standards because, we already have perfectly good
> > > technology in order to manage almost any toxic and/or thermal and
> > > pressure extremes that you can think of.
>
> > > Of course, if there's already clear signs of some off-world locations
> > > being utilized, such as the planet Venus hosting intelligent other
> > > life, makes this kind of remote exploration and that of our human off-
> > > world expansion into an entirely new kind of tactical ballgame. I
> > > realize that you and most others have systematically refused to even
> > > look objectively at whatever the planet Venus has to offer, much less
> > > having deductively pondered in order to constructively contribute as
> > > to interpreting whatever that area of "Guth Venus" is showing us.
> > > However, if you were really any good at supporting your typically
> > > mainstream approved naysay and denial interpretations that’ll insist
> > > Venus is a totally worthless planet that's supposedly unsurvivable by
> > > any kind of intelligent life, then you would have provided your better
> > > quality digital enlargements of that specific target area that I've
> > > pointed out for the past 11 years, thereby showing the rest of us by
> > > example and comparisons how those highly unusual pixel patterns are
> > > just common-place geology that so happens to interpret as looking
> > > exactly like the complex geometric and structural kinds of
> > > infrastructure that I've interpreted as being artificial (ETI)
> > > worthy. So, when if ever are the rest of all you folks and others of
> > > such supposed greater expertise in observationology and science, in
> > > that you must always know best about everything under the sun,
> > > actually going to accomplish this mainstream approved analogy?
>
> > > http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
> > > Guth Venus, at ten times resample/enlargement of the area in
> > > question:
> > > https://docs.google.com/File?id=ddsdxhv_4fdgd46df_b
>
> > > http://translate.google.com/#
> > > Brad Guth / Blog and my Google document pages:
> > > http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet?hl=en
> > > http://bradguth.blogspot.com/
> > > http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddsdxhv_0hrm5bdfj
>
> > > On Feb 13, 2:07 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > All planets within reason offer some level of complex life or weird
> > > > biodiversity which needn’t match anything we might consider as
> > > > Goldilocks worthy. However, with energy and applied technology should
> > > > make any number of extreme planets and moons viable for Goldilocks.
>
> > > > Even though the random happenstance of evolution all by itself kinda
> > > > sucks, not that evolution doesn’t happen or that intelligent design is
> > > > any more insurmountable or taboo than interstellar panspermia
> > > > (especially via icy proto-moon like our captured Selene). Random
> > > > happenstance evolution is at best unlikely to survive in most stellar
> > > > locations (even here on Earth), and at best it needs a great deal of
> > > > luck and uninterrupted time. At least so far, random happenstance via
> > > > artificial means hasn’t been shown to create life from scratch, much
> > > > less as we know it, whereas instead intelligent engineering or the
> > > > genetic redesign of life as we know it has been proven to accomplish
> > > > what nature could not, and if we can do it then others can, either by
> > > > mistake or intentionally.
>
> > > > Within our galaxy could be a considerable number of older solar
> > > > systems, perhaps 2/3 being older and 1/3 younger than our solar system
> > > > really isn’t asking too much. To think, if we hadn’t wasted the past
> > > > century at bogus and contrived wars, and otherwise at ethnic and faith-
> > > > based casting, we’d be among some of the nearby stars by now (at least
> > > > our probes could be there). With on-location energy and applied
> > > > technology, there could be as many life capable planets and moons as
> > > > there are stars for those of us with sufficient intelligence having
> > > > mastered interstellar capability. As for the always naked and
> > > > dumbfounded Goldilocks is not so lucky, whereas at most 0.0001% of all
> > > > those many exoplanets and their moons are directly suitable as is,
> > > > though fortunately for us in need of a replacement Goldilocks
> > > > certified Eden, there’s still a great many (perhaps 500e3) viable
> > > > exoplanets to pick from, and of those nearby (say within 100 ly) could
> > > > be as many as 5 Eden worthy planets or large enough moons equally
> > > > viable (Pandora probably isn’t one of them).
>
> > > > On Earth there were many complex life cycles and thereby evolution do-
> > > > overs, whereas most of the early variations simply didn’t survive the
> > > > test of time, and the few which survived nowadays are clearly at risk
> > > > of extinction because of what we’ve done to their original habitat
> > > > that had pretty much everything going for itself. Ants and microbials
> > > > are not exactly giving up without a fight, so perhaps it’s us humans
> > > > that need to vacate the premises before we get eaten alive or
> > > > otherwise starve ourselves to death.
>
> > > > The Ed Conrad “man of coal” is firmly dated at 305 million years (+/-
> > > > 7 million).
> > > > http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-539313
> > > > http://groups.google.com/group/sci.astro/browse_frm/thread/0d31578e50...
>
> > > > Obviously that early species of something humanoid didn’t manage to
> > > > survive through all those ice ages and then each of those eras of
> > > > extreme thaw with subsequent flooding, as well as asteroid impact
> > > > trauma that also terminated most life and having modified terrestrial
> > > > biodiversity multiple times before modern humanity ever emerged from
> > > > the last ice age this planet w/moon and a seasonal tilt is ever going
> > > > to see, as supposedly the only intelligent species that has in some
> > > > ways done more global diversity harm than good.
>
> > > > For all we know, those on Venus are not even from there own local
> > > > evolution, but implants or donations from older worlds that probably
> > > > need whatever elements the seemingly newish planet has to offer. I’m
> > > > thinking this interpretation could put a whole new spin on hell, as a
> > > > for-profit kind of hell, and perhaps by the time we get there it’ll
> > > > either be slim pickings or off-limits unless we’re invited, but on
> > > > Earth that really never stopped us before.
>
> > > >http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
> > > > A ten times resample/enlargement of the area in question:
> > > > https://docs.google.com/File?id=ddsdxhv_4fdgd46df_b
>
> > > > http://translate.google.com/#
> > > > Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
>
> > > > On Dec 20 2010, 12:36 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > There's actually many technical and valid logistics advantages to
> > > > > exploring and working the extremely nearby planet Venus, as well as
> > > > > for extracting whatever valuable elements on behalf of the greater
> > > > > benefit and good that it represents to the survival and future
> > > > > expansion of our human species, as well as to supplement the necessary
> > > > > salvation of our global warming environment that so many have
> > > > > systematically trashed and remain in naysay denial about. At least
> > > > > that's been my interpretation and shared thoughts as of more than a
> > > > > decade ago when I'd informed our NASA and others as to what I had
> > > > > deductively interpreted from those super-terrific SAR obtained images
> > > > > that most folks refuse to even look at.
>
> > > > > The original GIF image file (as raw, not enlargement processed):
> > > > > http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
> > > > > The fact that something sufficiently intelligent has already been
> > > > > there and may still be operating or mining for whatever it's worth, is
> > > > > just icing on the cake (so to speak). This form of Venusian
> > > > > intelligence may not even be ETs, nor as technologically advanced as
> > > > > us, although it should be hard for actual ETs with space travel
> > > > > capability to pass up such a nifty mineral and rare element treasure-
> > > > > trove worthy planet that also has more than its fair share of
> > > > > renewable energy plus most of everything they’d need.
>
> > > > > The fact that the surface environment has been mostly geothermally
> > > > > heated, its robust, very acidic and kinda steamy protective atmosphere
> > > > > continually replenished from active geothermal vents and a
> > > > > considerable number of volcanic sources, plus there’s always some
> > > > > greenhouse heating as having added to this thermal trauma, is simply
> > > > > not technically insurmountable for those of us with a 5th grade or
> > > > > better education.
>
> > > > > To further elaborate; if we can’t manage to technically deal with
> > > > > surviving on or within our moon, Mars or the likes of whatever a
> > > > > viable nearby planet like Venus has to offer, as such pretty much
> > > > > eliminates 99.9% of whatever else is out there, including other moons,
> > > > > Ceres, exoplanets and whatever their terrific moons might have to
> > > > > offer. Finding another naked Goldilocks approved planet that’s
> > > > > sufficiently wet and tropically Eden/Earth like is going to represent
> > > > > a tough call, especially if it also needs to be favorably plant and
> > > > > animal populated but otherwise uninhabited by any kind of humanoids,
> > > > > aggressive meat eating critters or invasive species that would just as
> > > > > soon invade our private parts and kill us from the inside out, as
> > > > > pretty much next to impossible if we can’t manage to technically adapt
> > > > > ourselves to the likes of Venus by simply utilizing the best available
> > > > > technology to our advantage.
>
> > > > > The positives (including its toasty environment because that planet
> > > > > isn’t very old) simply far exceed the negatives as far as the planet
> > > > > Venus is concerned, and we may not even be the first intelligent
> > > > > species to utilize that planet, so that’s another good reason why we
> > > > > should go and stay for as long and as much as our technology and
> > > > > expertise of adapting will permit, unless those Venusians manage to
> > > > > beat the crap out of us first.
>
> > > > > Brad Guth / Blog and my Google document pages:
> > > > > http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet?hl=en
> > > > > http://bradguth.blogspot.com/
> > > > > http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddsdxhv_0hrm5bdfj

HVAC

unread,

Jul 10, 2011, 3:53:52 PM7/10/11

to

On 7/10/2011 3:18 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
> For those few Usenet/newsgroup readers that still think they have an
> open mindset that isn’t configured to self-destruct or implode upon
> hearing, reading or observing a revised interpretation about the
> planet Venus, I might actually have that different interpretation to
> offer, as well as a few terrific ideas and notions that could prove
> rather interesting.

LOL! If you DO say so yourself!

> However, if you are a certain kind of faith-based
> and kinda social/political closed mindset in your set ways sticking
> with our mainstream status-quo of revising nothing,

In other words, if you disagree with Guth.....

> like 99.9% of
> Americans having survived their K12 and higher education years, then
> you may not have to bother yourself with any of this, because I’m only
> going to keep pissing you off.

No Brad...PLEASE keep going! You and a few others are the
reason I come here.... YOU provide the entertainment, *I*
do the laughing. Get it?

<<<Snip remainder of Guth's rant for sanity purposes>>>

--
"OK you cunts, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo

William Mook

unread,

Jul 11, 2011, 5:04:51 AM7/11/11

to

HVAC is whistling to himself as he crosses the graveyard in a vain
effort to cheer himself up.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pJgmxOdeoJ4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRrxhM9Tlms

BDK

unread,

Jul 11, 2011, 9:07:33 AM7/11/11

to

In article <dd30a21a-7af1-42c5-88bb-3aa77c78ec53
@u6g2000prc.googlegroups.com>, mokme...@gmail.com says...

No, he and a lot of other people are laughing at posts like yours.

--
BDK- Top of the government shill heap for over 10 years running!

Brad Guth

unread,

Jul 11, 2011, 10:22:05 AM7/11/11

to

For those few independent and investigative Usenet/newsgroup readers
that still think they have an open mindset that isn’t preconfigured to

self-destruct or implode upon hearing, reading or observing a revised
interpretation about the planet Venus, I might actually have that
different interpretation to offer, as well as a few terrific ideas and
notions that could prove rather interesting. However, if you are a
certain kind of faith-based and kinda social/political closed mindset
in your set ways sticking with our mainstream status-quo of revising

nothing and of allowing nothing new in to challenge your mindset, like

99.9% of Americans having survived their K12 and higher education

years that seem to stick to their guns and preconceptions no matters
what, then you may not have to bother yourself with any of this,

derivative like their original, because it’s entirely a product of the
original SAR obtained pixel data (nothing personal added or

subtracted):
http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddsdxhv_0hrm5bdfj
If you’d care to focus on anything specific, please go right ahead

and do so, because I’m not certain that my investigative and deductive

interpretation of what the image depicts is offering the best or only
option.

First of all, I kind of doubt the surface on average is significantly

cooler than reported, however the most recent ESA data via their Venus

EXPRESS mission has been reveling surface temperature variations plus

considerable atmospheric thermal differentials that haven't been

reported and/or sufficiently published by others as having previously

had essentially the same or better science data to go by. Those polar
surface temperatures could be considerably cooler due to them strong
atmospheric vortex considerations that's causing such upper nighttime
cryogenic atmosphere to draw substantial energy away from the much

hotter and sultry or steamy lower atmosphere and that of its
geothermally heated surface.

What we have here to look at and deductively interpret is simply a

fair number of rather unusually complex geometric patterns, of
somewhat unusually unified or associated pixels forming patterns that

don't seem to be of entirely random geology happenstance. However,
there are a number of quite large and unusual items that should be
considered as natural, such as the "fluid arch" and perhaps even that
extremely large clover shaped reservoir could be considered as

something perfectly natural (even though the geology of Earth offers

us nothing remotely close to such size or geometric unified
complexity). However, that extensive and complex tarmac/airstrip as

offering such an unusually flat item as clearly a raised platform
that’s situated within a mountainous terrain simply isn't as likely to
be formed by way of any natural geology and erosion that we know of,

nor is that highly unusual bridge item and those multiple other large

scale items of multiple rectangular quarry sites plus having a nearby
community of geometric shapes in a rational community like setting, of

what seems rather artificially structural and rational infrastructure
worthy is what should be closely reviewed by others to see if any or

all of those could have possibly been formed by natural processes.

You folks must have at least as good if not a whole lot better image
processing expertise for this resampling/enlargement capability, so

please do share that better result with us, in that at least we can be

on the same page and not looking at entirely different areas. If you
need some assistance or advisements with selecting and/or utilizing a

photo enlarging process even though most photo resampling software is
self explanatorily, I’ll gladly donate my time and resources free of
charge

If you should interpret this image as only containing perfectly
natural formations of greenhouse hot rock and depicting logical
patterns of erosion, then you must also have a number of reference
example images obtained of terrestrial geology recorded by similar
radar imaging resolution, by which that interpretation of seeing only
inert hot rock and natural erosion is based upon, and naturally we’d
like to have a look-see at whatever is within your observationology
frame of reference that gives you the necessary expertise, because you
can’t just be making stuff like that up in order to suit a given
opinion or policy.

If need be, ask others (5th graders if necessary) to see whatever they

can interpret, because at least they’ll be willing to honestly share
whatever satellite or aerial observations of weird terrestrial and
other geology that supports their interpretation of whatever the
planet Venus has to offer, because you have to base such
interpretations on something other than media and textbook
infomercials plus having a naysay closed mindset. If you have some
other interpretation for those reservoirs that clearly contain
something fluid, and especially have any better idea as to that large
clover shaped reservoir, or explaining the nature of that “fluid arch”
would be terrific to hear about.

Brad Guth

unread,

Jul 11, 2011, 10:37:38 AM7/11/11

to

It seems our resident FUD-masters of the GOP/ZNR redneck kind are
having themselves another bad Usenet/newsgroup day of it. If they
could round us up and have our books and whatever we've published
burned along with having both of us tied to a stake in the center of
that fire, they would. These are the exact same folks that cheered as
our Commander in Chief ordered the systematic torturing of Muslims,
and for otherwise sustaining their bogus wars based upon false flags
and those nonexistent WMD (unless cheap oil and drugs were supposed to
count as WMD).

It seems having 16+ public funded agencies plus involving dozens of
rogue contracted operations supposedly in charge of protecting us
(apparently from ourselves more than from others) simply isn't good
enough.

http://groups.google.com/group/google-usenet/topics?hl=en
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet/topics?hl=en

Brad Guth

unread,

Jul 12, 2011, 7:55:50 AM7/12/11

to

Terraforming Venus - is it really necessary?
On Jul 1, 1:49 pm, "Uncle Sam" <uncle...@hatesspam.com> wrote:
: Would it be possible to construct buildings on or just below the
surface of
: Venus that are capable of withstanding the immense heat and
pressure?

- and -

Venus - rapid terraforming with utility fog?
On Jul 4, 10:14 am, "Richard Stephens" <rstephen...@gmail.com> wrote:
: Venus has an abundance of carbon, so why not use it to create a
thick
: layer of utility fog that would cover the planet. There should be
enough
: carbon for the blanket of foglets to be tens of miles thick.
: Benefits of utility fog:
: 1. The fog would have the ability to quickly cool off the planet,
acting as
: a giant radiator.
: 2. The fog could make up for the very slow day/night cycle by
simulating
: a "normal" 24 hour Earth cycle.
: 3. 100 miles of utility fog should support a population in the
hundreds of
: billions, if not trillions.
: 4. The whole process could be completed in a decade or less, not
the
: centuries that it's estimated terraforming would take.

- and -

On Jul 4, 3:14 pm, Pat Flannery <flan...@daktel.com> wrote:
: Now, if we can just make the nanobots for the utility fog, figure
out
: how they are to be powered, figure out how to get them to tolerate
the
: heat, pressure, and sulfuric acid at the beginning of the process,
and
: figure out how to get rid of trillions of them once the planet is
: terraformed.
: And there's another problem; studies of impact craters on the
surface
: of Venus show that all of them are fairly young in geologic terms,
: indicating the whole surface goes molten from time to time.
: A cool atmosphere isn't going to help if you are swimming around in
: red hot lava.

That’s exactly correct, whereas the geothermal upwelling of 20.5 w/m2
is going to remain extremely problematic, not that solar influx isn’t
making it kind of worse. William Mook can create and deploy trillions
upon trillions of those highly reflective nanobots that could manage
to keep themselves only on the sunward side, acting as a highly
reflective fog above those already reflective clouds.

Actually even somewhat better, is using hydrogen filled robotic
airships that are each offering 1e6 m2, as a relatively flat disk
shape of 1.13 km diameter and always laying horizontally flat with
their highly reflective gold mylar facing sunward, could prove quite
nifty for a multitude of terrific reasons other than contributing
shade and improving the average albedo. If these highly reflective
airships averaged 100 meters thick, we’re talking about a 1e8 m3
airship, that within 1% of its volume could house at least a community
of a hundred humans, along with some pets, livestock and just about
anything else you’d care to pack along. In order to accomplish any
significant shading, there’s have to be at last a million of these
saucer shaped airships, so that accommodating 100 million of us
without ever setting one hot foot onto that geothermally heated
surface seems like kind of a good idea.

Perhaps Monsanto or even Nalco that makes Corexit and other highly
toxic substances for hydrocarbon butt covering, can devise a molecular
modifier for CO2 and S8 that'll reflect at something near 90% by day,
and automatically convert to a fully transparent cryogenic layer by
night, then somehow revert back to reflecting by day. On the other
hand, our extremely nearby and mostly geothermally heated Venus is at
least technically doable for us as is.

Terraforming by artificial means is probably not going to be necessary
unless you have been planning on going there in the nude. I’d have to
say that it’s quite technically possible to survive as is, and no
doubt the extremely nearby planet Venus is therefore perfectly doable
for most intelligent humans other than naked and typically dumbfounded
Goldilocks types that can’t seem to think outside their cozy
mainstream status-quo box, such as our resident GOP/ZNR rednecks and
their fellow FUD-masters that couldn’t manage to survive even if we
turned parts of Venus into another Eden for hosting fast-food vendors
and the next Winter Olympics (naturally indoors). This is not to say
each and every volcano and/or terrific geothermal vent is going to be
safe to visit, because that would be silly. However, some geothermal
vents are likely spewing hot and dense mineral brines instead of
vapors, or even spewing hydrocarbons that at 92+ bar could seem as
though acting kind of hydrodynamic to those SAR imaging methods..

The local pressure and/or rather substantial atmospheric density and
90% gravity is really not a problem for accommodating our genetics or
physiology as long as everything gets fully equalized over a
reasonably safe period of time, and you manage to keep yourself within
+/- .2 bar/hr(+/- 3 psi/hr) should remain as equalized without
complications, and otherwise that is also a rather nifty environment
unless you don't happen to like having 10% less gravity, terrific 65
kg/m3 buoyancy and otherwise extremely good protection from cosmic,
solar and local radiation, as well as always being nicely protected
from meteors and even from encountering small asteroids should not be
a problem because, most of those simply can’t get through the dense
atmospheric soup.

Breathing an artificial mix of 99% H2 and 1 % O2 should easily extend
that range of atmospheric pressure change per hour to an acceptable
+/- 2 Bar (+/- 29 psi)/hr, although a km elevation change in that
lower atmosphere is worth 4.1 bar(roughly 60 psi), so it might not be
advisable to exceed any change in elevation greater than 17 meters/
minute unless some additional pressure equalization techniques are
utilized. There’s certainly never going to be any shortage of
hydrogen, and even O2 can’t honestly be in short supply as long as you
basically know what you are doing. Without nitrogen and otherwise
kinda dehydrated, your body as breathing feed 99% H2 and 1% O2 is also
going to weigh yet another 5~10% less, so you’re not going to float
away but, you’d certainly notice the difference right off the bat.

Heat management: R-1024/meter of thermal insulation is also not a
technical nor logistical problem (especially when the application
environment is relatively dry and CO2 inert), as easily created from
local basalt that’s effectively processed from all of the locally
renewable energy that's damn near unlimited for creating basalt
milliballoons (filled or displaced with hydrogen would simulate a
super-atom shell or electron cloud that wouldn’t compress, offering a
microballoon product density of roughly 104 kg/m3 or as an assembled
structural element of as little as 64 kg/m3 once the local buoyancy
and gravity are accounted for) and of course we’d have those terrific
fibers, although we could always use Silica Aerogel of only 2 kg/m3,
means that enclosed Silica Aerogel (such as within the structural
shell of a composite rigid airship or within geometric building blocks
that contain those basalt milli and micro-spheres) could easily allow
its volume to become worth -63 kg buoyant unless that Silica Aerogel
compresses and/or equalizes to a slightly greater than atmospheric
density, of which enclosed and displaced with hydrogen should easily
prevent.
http://www.aerogel.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerogel
Utilized as part of the structural composite: “It has remarkable
thermal insulative properties, having an extremely low thermal
conductivity: from 0.03 W/m·K[9] down to 0.004 W/m·K,[6] which
correspond to R-values of 14 to 105 for 3.5 inch thickness. For
comparison, typical wall insulation is 13 for 3.5 inch thickness. Its
melting point is 1,473 K (1,200 °C or 2,192 °F).”

The distinct advantage to utilizing uncrushable microspheres or
millispheres is that their volumetric density doesn’t change, and the
static loading and/or its surface loading capability is truly
impressive. This gets even better when the surrounding fill or matrix
of whatever binder offers a similar tough ability. Even fluffy or
highly porous ceramics are not going to be terribly dense.

Basalt as easily refined and made into fused glass microspheres or
even using larger millispheres as having a volumetric true sphere
displacement mass of 104 kg/m3, with a crush rating in excess of 9.5e3
bar (138e3 psi), and each hollow sphere offering its 85.7% cavity
volume for enclosing H2 at less than 0.1 bar (whereas the H2 sure as
hell isn’t going to leak out, nor is any CO2 ever going to leak in).
In other words, basalt glass hollow spheres put into a composite
structural geometric element application (displacing 65% by volume)
are going to halfway float within that atmospheric soup of 65 kg/m3
buoyancy, because that atmospheric density and the local 90.5% gravity
is only making it so much better. Perhaps using a silica gel
displacement (35% by volume) as the microballoon geometric fill matrix/
binder could also be applied.
http://composites.poly.edu/Publications/Gupta-Tensile%20syntactic%20foam.pdf

http://solutions.3m.com/wps/portal/3M/en_US/Energy-Advanced/Materials/Products/Prod_Catalog-SMD/?PC_7_RJH9U5230GE3E02LECFTDQ4G06_nid=CR1NGJJX5QbeWHB23F5LMRgl
http://www.esa.int/gsp/completed/030910ESTEC16292.pdf

Clearly high temperature capable materials offering exceptional
insulation and otherwise for creating a robust structural composite
that’s impervious to most anything the Venus environment has to offer,
as well as having various electro-mechanical equipment that’ll survive
811 K is simply not technically an insurmountable problem. Whereas
going to Venus in the nude as a dumbfounded Goldilocks should remain
as highly problematic.

Otherwise that terrific atmosphere itself is an ideal freon, so to
speak, because a little compressed CO2 on Venus goes into its
supercritical liquid phase rather easily, and from that you can air
condition yourself all the way down to becoming dry ice (-78 C, 195
K), if you like. Add a little helium and you can go for running a
super collider. So, I really don’t see what the big insurmountable
deal is about the ambient surface temperatures, other than you
wouldn’t want to set yourself over a geothermal vent (of which there
are thousands) or try to trek directly over any given volcanic hot
spot of recent magma.

Here's that same old original cloudless GIF composite radar obtained
image file (as raw and not having been enlargement processed) that our
mainstream status-quo has been so deathly afraid others might actually
look at:
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
Without even downloading the GIF monochrome image, you can still
screen zoom-in on the small area in question (less than 10% of the
composite FOV), so as to keeping the raw 1:1 pixel format and its
rather limited resolution of 225 meters/pixel, and thereby have
yourself a perfectly good look-see at interpreting whatever that sort
of 225 meter per pixel resolution has to offer.

Here’s one of my basic 10:1 resampled enlargements of the very same
area that I’ve pointed out to NASA and others of their Magellan team
for more than the past decade, that’s still a generic composite

derivative like their original:
http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddsdxhv_0hrm5bdfj
If you’d care to focus on anything specific, please do so, because
I’m not certain that my interpretation of what the image depicts is

offering the best or only option.

First of all, I kind of doubt the surface is significantly cooler than

reported, however the most recent ESA data via their Venus EXPRESS

mission has been reveling considerable atmospheric thermal
differentials that haven't been reported and/or published by others as

having previously had essentially the same or better science data to
go by. Those polar surface temperatures could be considerably cooler
due to them strong atmospheric vortex considerations that's causing

such upper nighttime cryogenic atmosphere to draw energy from the much
hotter lower atmosphere and it’s geothermally heated surface.

What we have here to look at and deductively interpret is simply a

fair number of unusually complex geometric patterns, of somewhat
unusually unified or associated pixels that don't seem to be of

entirely random geology happenstance. However, there are a number of
quite large and unusual items that should be considered as natural,
such as the "fluid arch" and perhaps even that extremely large clover

shaped reservoir could be considered as perfectly natural (even though

the geology of Earth offers us nothing remotely close to such size or
geometric unified complexity). However, that extensive and complex

tarmac/airstrip as offering such an unusually flat item situated
within that mountainous terrain simply isn't as likely to be formed by
natural geology we know of, nor is that highly unusual bridge item and
those multiple other large scale items of a nearby community of
geometric shapes and a their rational community like setting, of what

seems rather artificially structural and rational infrastructure
worthy is what should be closely reviewed by others to see if any or

all of those could have been formed by natural processes.

Of course there will always be those in perpetual denial, as well as
obfuscating their FUD-master butts off in order to disqualify my
discovery and any associated topics, but then you’re not required to
read any of those disparaging replies unless you want a good laugh, or
a good cry because of how your government and its faith-based support
has systematically failed you on so many levels.

http://groups.google.com/group/google-usenet/topics?hl=en
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet/topics?hl=en

http://www.wanttoknow.info/
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

Brad Guth

unread,

Jul 12, 2011, 9:07:47 AM7/12/11

to

There’s obviously a reason (actually many reasons) why our NASA,
DARPA, NGIA/NIMA plus any number of interrelated and/or special-
interest agencies and insider groups, as well as those outside as
having been contracted services such as our JPL, that as a whole are
so compartmentalized that they are kind of in a dysfunctional mess
that can’t afford to budge an inch on this discovery of intelligent
other life existing/coexisting on the nearby planet Venus.

However, just because yourself and other pretend-Atheists as Semitic
acting FUD-masters happen think all research that's other than NASA,
DARPA and/or Jewish/Qinetiq approved by way of their having
accommodated such mainstream interpretations as only via their inner
most circle of public funded associates and friends, is somehow
entirely bogus and/or continually lying to us by methods of
obfuscation (excluding and/or banishing whatever facts don’t happen to
agree with their status-quo), really isn't a sufficient cause or
justification for you to think in exactly the same closed mindset way.

In spite of what most of us have been informed by our peers, there's
sufficient independent and/or alternative research, as deductive
interpreted science that has identified the global energy imbalance of
Venus, of the global geothermal outflux or upwelling of core heat from
within Venus that's in excess of 20 w/m2, so don't keep blaming myself
for having noticed those kinds of research data. If you still have a
problem of perpetual distrust based upon whatever ethnicity and social/
political or some faith-based bias, take it up with them and not with
others trying to honestly connect a few public and private funded
dots.

The average Venus surface as a whole body only gets to absorb 132 w/m2
from the sun that's providing up to 2650 w/m2 at those highly
reflective cloud tops. In other words, by day the surface receives
roughly 10% or 264 w/m2 (that's actually reasonably well illuminated
in spite of those 25 km thick and robust acidic clouds plus a few km
of other haze/fog layers above and below), which averages out to 132 w/
m2 on a global day/night basis. Others having interpreted the best
available science have the combined solar secondary/recoil energy from
that toasty surface plus its geothermal outflux pegged at 153 w/m2,
leaving us with a 21 w/m2 thermal discrepancy or imbalance. In other
words, Venus has not been thermal holding itself steady or much less
getting any hotter, and obviously all of its substantial atmosphere
(including them wet acidic clouds that offer hundreds of teratonnes
worth of h2o) is entirely derived and sustained from within itself.
In other words, those are not crystal dry clouds of sulfuric dust.

Here's that same old original cloudless GIF composite radar obtained
image file (as raw and not having been enlargement processed) that our

mainstream status-quo has been so deathly afraid others might look

at:
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
Without even downloading the GIF monochrome image, you can still
screen zoom-in on the small area in question (less than 10% of the
composite FOV), so as to keeping the raw 1:1 pixel format and its
rather limited resolution of 225 meters/pixel, and thereby have

yourself a good look-see at interpreting whatever that sort of 225

meter per pixel resolution has to offer.

Once again, here’s one of my 10:1 enlargements of the very same area

that I’ve pointed out to NASA and others of their Magellan team for
more than the past decade, that’s still a generic composite derivative

like their original:
http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddsdxhv_0hrm5bdfj
If you’d care to focus on anything specific, please do so, because I’m
not certain that my interpretation of the image is the best or only
option.

Brad Guth / Blog and my Google document pages:
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet?hl=en
http://bradguth.blogspot.com/

http://translate.google.com/#

Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

saul...@cox.net

unread,

Jul 12, 2011, 10:06:13 AM7/12/11

to

SPEAKING OF BEATING A DEAD FART!

PEEUUUUUUU!

Saul Levy

On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 04:55:50 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
<brad...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Terraforming Venus - is it really necessary

> Brad Guth, YES, I'M INSANE!
>

saul...@cox.net

unread,

Jul 12, 2011, 10:14:33 AM7/12/11

to

HOW MANY TIMES DO WE HAVE TO TELL YOU THAT YOUR IMAGES SHOW ABSOLUTELY
NOTHING, VILLAGE IDIOT GOOFYSHITHEAD?

FUCK OFF!

Saul Levy

On Tue, 12 Jul 2011 06:07:47 -0700 (PDT), Brad Guth
<brad...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Here's that same old original cloudless GIF composite radar obtained
>image file (as raw and not having been enlargement processed) that our
>mainstream status-quo has been so deathly afraid others might look
>at:
> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
> Without even downloading the GIF monochrome image, you can still
>screen zoom-in on the small area in question (less than 10% of the
>composite FOV), so as to keeping the raw 1:1 pixel format and its
>rather limited resolution of 225 meters/pixel, and thereby have
>yourself a good look-see at interpreting whatever that sort of 225
>meter per pixel resolution has to offer.
>
>Once again, here’s one of my 10:1 enlargements of the very same area
>that I’ve pointed out to NASA and others of their Magellan team for
>more than the past decade, that’s still a generic composite derivative
>like their original:
> http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddsdxhv_0hrm5bdfj
>If you’d care to focus on anything specific, please do so, because I’m
>not certain that my interpretation of the image is the best or only
>option.

> Brad Guth, ANYONE DOUBT THAT I'M INSANE?
[REST OF GOOFYSHIT DELETED!]

Brad Guth

unread,

Jul 12, 2011, 11:42:10 AM7/12/11

to

On Jul 11, 2:04 am, William Mook <mokmedi...@gmail.com> wrote:

Now that you've mentioned the abundant and nearly renewable fusion
energy that has been intentionally withheld from us, is perhaps asking
a bit too much of them, to hold back or to lay off from all of their
tactical methods of public media damage-control. In other words,
you've let another one of their cats out of the bag.

It seems our resident FUD-masters of the GOP/ZNR redneck kind are

having themselves another bad Usenet/newsgroup day of topic/author
stalking and bashings. If they could manage to round the rest of us
up and have our books and whatever we've published as alternative
interpretations of the best available evidence and science burned

along with having both of us tied to a stake in the center of that

fire, they would. These are the exact same kind of folks that put
Christ on a stick and otherwise cheered as our previous Commander in

Chief ordered the systematic torturing of Muslims, and for otherwise

sustaining their bogus wars based upon loads of disinformation, false
flags and those nonexistent WMD (unless you consider their cheap oil
and organic drugs were supposed to count as WMD).

Apparently having 16+ public funded agencies plus involving dozens of

rogue contracted operations supposedly in charge of protecting us

(from ourselves more than from others) simply isn't good enough. Of
course having our traditional mainstream army of these devout brown-
nosed clowns and FUD-masters that only act/react exactly like Semites,
hasn’t exactly helped.

http://groups.google.com/group/google-usenet/topics?hl=en
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet/topics?hl=en

Brad Guth

unread,

Jul 13, 2011, 10:56:26 AM7/13/11

to

Here are some other topics related to the planet Venus that can’t seem
to fly, so to speak.

- and -

I believe that’s exactly correct, whereas the geothermal upwelling or
energy outflux of 20.5 w/m2 is going to remain extremely problematic,
not that a strong solar influx and those thick and dense acidic clouds
haven’t been making it kind of worse. Perhaps our William Mook can

create and deploy trillions upon trillions of those highly reflective
nanobots that could manage to keep themselves only on the sunward
side, acting as a highly reflective fog above those already reflective
clouds.

Actually, even somewhat better than any swarm or fog of reflective
nanobots, is using hydrogen filled robotic airships that are each
offering a reflective area of 1e6 m2, as a relatively flat disk shape

of 1.13 km diameter and always laying horizontally flat with their

highly reflective gold mylar facing sunward as they maintain cruising
at 75+ km, could prove quite nifty for a multitude of terrific reasons
other than contributing shade and improving the average albedo by
possibly one percent better. If these highly reflective airships

averaged 100 meters thick, we’re talking about a 1e8 m3 airship, that
within 1% of its volume could house at least a community of a hundred
humans, along with some pets, livestock and just about anything else
you’d care to pack along. In order to accomplish any significant

shading, there’d have to be at last a million of these saucer shaped

airships, so that accommodating 100 million of us without ever setting
one hot foot onto that geothermally heated surface seems like kind of
a good idea.

Perhaps otherwise Monsanto or even Nalco that makes Corexit and other

highly toxic substances for hydrocarbon butt covering, can devise a
molecular modifier for CO2 and S8 that'll reflect at something near
90% by day, and automatically convert to a fully transparent cryogenic
layer by night, then somehow revert back to reflecting by day. On the
other hand, our extremely nearby and mostly geothermally heated Venus

is at least technically doable for accommodating us as is, though just
not in the nude because it’s still downright hot and nasty unless
suitable habitats and methods of surface or airship transportation are
provided. Actually, composite rigid airships are perfectly doable.

Terraforming the entire planet by artificial means is probably not
going to be necessary unless you have been planning on going there in
the nude, because I’d have to say that it’s quite technically possible
to survive as is, and no doubt the extremely nearby planet Venus is
therefore perfectly suited for most intelligent humans other than

naked and typically dumbfounded Goldilocks types that can’t seem to
think outside their cozy mainstream status-quo box, such as our

resident GOP/ZNR rednecks and their fellow FUD-masters (mostly topic/
author stalking and posting in alt.astronomy) that couldn’t manage to

survive even if we turned parts of Venus into another Eden for hosting
fast-food vendors and the next Winter Olympics (naturally indoors).

This is not to say each and every active volcano and/or terrific

geothermal vent is going to be safe to visit, because that would be
silly. However, some geothermal vents are likely spewing hot and

dense mineral brines or caustic/acidic fluids instead of harmless
vapors, or even spewing hydrocarbons that given 92+ bar could seem as

though acting kind of hydrodynamic to those SAR imaging methods.

The local pressure and/or rather substantial atmospheric density at

90% gravity is really not a problem for accommodating our genetics or
physiology as long as everything gets fully equalized over a
reasonably safe period of time, and you manage to keep yourself within

+/- .2 bar/hr(+/- 3 psi/hr) should remain as sufficiently equalized
without complications, and otherwise it’s also a rather nifty

environment unless you don't happen to like having 10% less gravity,

the terrific 65 kg/m3 buoyancy and otherwise extremely good protection

from cosmic, solar and local radiation, as well as always being nicely

defended from meteors and even from encountering small asteroids
should not be a problem because, most of those items simply can’t get
all the way through the dense atmospheric soup.

Here's that same old original cloudless GIF composite radar obtained

image file (as raw and not having been enlargement processed) that our
mainstream status-quo has been so deathly afraid others might actually
look at:
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
Without even downloading the GIF monochrome image, you can still
screen zoom-in on the small area in question (less than 10% of the
composite FOV), so as to keeping the raw 1:1 pixel format and its
rather limited resolution of 225 meters/pixel, and thereby have
yourself a perfectly good look-see at interpreting whatever that sort
of 225 meter per pixel resolution has to offer.