Venus for dummies (1.0) / Brad Guth (GuthVenus)

[Brad Guth]

Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?

It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
hot and seriously pressurized.

Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
rock seem about right.

The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
what gives with that?

As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
wee bit unnatural or unexpected?

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus

“GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in

> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

Not that I am the one and only independent source of research that has
been ongoing and sharing of as much about this extremely nearby planet
as possible, as there have been others within JPL/NASA as having
expressed a keen interest in this extremely nearby planet. Problem
is, these others probably can't say or suggest anything because of
what GuthVenus represents.

If you happen to have photographic enlargement expertise in the art
and science of deductive interpreting as to what a hot and nasty
surface like Venus has to offer, would be appreciated and given full
credit.

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 4, 7:34 am, Fred J. McCall <fjmcc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Not that I am the one and only independent source of research ...
>
> In fact, not that you are one at all, being ratshit crazy and an
> ignorant dolt into the bargain...
>
> --
> "Ordinarily he is insane. But he has lucid moments when he is
>  only stupid."
>                             -- Heinrich Heine

I'm only replying to this because it makes for a record of your topic/
author stalking that doesn't automatically go away in 6 days.

"The author of this message requested that it not be archived. This
message will be removed from Groups in 6 days (Jan 11, 7:34 am)"

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 4, 10:15 am, Dean <damark...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I've noticed that lately, your only replies have been from yourself.

Then perhaps something is terribly wrong with your search engine.
Start using or go back to using the original Google Groups html
version of Usenet/newsgroups.

Do you currently have everything honestly independent as filtered out?

[Brad Guth]

The Venus Airship

Local space travels and exploitation of an extremely nearby hot and
nasty planet like Venus is likely forever going to remain testy even
though it’s ever so gradually cooling off, though perhaps for some it
is not quite as bad off as accomplishing the exploitation of our naked
moon.

On the surface, one m3 of that hot, compressed and otherwise heavy
atmosphere is worth something like a specific gravity offset worth 65
kg (give or take a kg). Actually, a tonne worth of an Earthly alloy
or any solid substance would only weigh 905 kg in terms of Venus mass,
and quite unlike Wayne Throop as well as most others here in Usenet/
newsgroups forever stuck in their failsafe mainstream naysay mode,
I’ll gladly take and run with that nearly 10% advantage of less
gravity, especially when there’s so many other complex issues to
contend with. Such as a composite rigid airship constructed out of
these mostly composite panels of a thin metal alloy sheathed and
otherwise of fused or bonded milliballoons within, as their
uncompressible structural rated insulation that’s displacing 65 kg/m3,
would mean that a 100 kg outer shell panel of this composite rigid
airship would only apply 35 kg per m3 or per 4 m2 if this outer shell/
hull of interlocking panels creating this airship were only 250 mm
thick. Of purely insulation fluff utilized as a void filler for
nonstructural thermal insulation that’s made of milliballoons filled
with hydrogen, could easily achieve R-1024/m or .0009765 w/m2/k, and
of its composite density could easily be less than 64 kg/m3. In other
words, even using terrific volumes of this fluff is not going to
contribute any large amount of constructed mass, nor is this minimal
thermal coefficient going to ever require any great deal of heat
exchanging in order to maintain a very cool airship cabin interior.

Ceramic foams are relatively common place, offering their extremely
light volumetrics and their terrific geometric compression toughness
(for instance the space shuttles were each covered with ceramic tiles
that easily insulated their frail aluminum shell against the nearly
2000 K reentry heat, as similar to what hollow basalt spheres that can
also withstand such heat and remain as terrific compression tough even
if their interior void was evacuated to .01 atmosphere. On Venus
these basalt or even carbonado spheres could be initially made to
contain one full atmosphere worth of hydrogen, even though a soft
vacuum of .1 H2 atmosphere really shouldn’t be all that tough to
create and mass produce.

Try to remember that Venus has no apparent shortages of hydrogen nor
that of renewable energy to burn (so to speak), in that processing
almost anything (including ceramics, carbonado and tough metals like
titanium and thorium) should really not be any problem, and consider
that every 19 months it conveniently gets to within 100 LD of us (in
other words, the only thing out there that’s any closer to us and
worth exploiting, is our moon).

However, it seems Wayne Throop’s lack of hand-waving plus his purely
negative and/or naysay closed mindset about absolutely anything that
wasn’t of his idea to begin with, is noted as would be expected of
most others of his kind. Perhaps the very next time there is
something of any great importance and value to humanity that we don’t
need to accomplish, we’ll certainly have to put Wayne right at the
very top of the short list of being our chief naysay in charge.

[Brad Guth]

The Guth-Venus Airship:
An airship offering its internal gas displacement volume of 1e6 m3
(roughly 5 times that volume of the Hindenburg LZ 129) which also had
118 tonnes worth of its own inert mass to deal with, could lift at
maximum 65e6 kg minus the inert mass of the composite rigid airship
itself. If this floating craft were given half or 32.5e6 kg(32,500
tonnes) as the all-inclusive inert dry or empty mass of this airship,
leaves us with a live payload (including provisions of food, water,
other supplies and fuel) worth 32,500 tonnes. However, if the
Hindenburg was an inert mass of 118 tonnes, it seems highly unlikely
that our much larger and more complex Venus rated airship is ever
going to exceed a hundred times that amount, or 11,800 Earth tonnes,
which makes it worth only 10,679 tonnes as having been constructed and
parked on Venus. Thus 65,000 tonnes minus 10,679 tonnes equates to a
potential live working payload worth 54,321 tonnes of the all-
inclusive added payload mass, and it’ll still float not to mention
whatever added lift obtained from the multiple(6) maneuvering
thrusters.

Airship lifting capability as created via displacement using Venus
hydrogen at 90.5% gravity is always going to remain a big variable,
because at the maximum surface pressure is where the mass per m3 at 96
bar compressed but otherwise heated to 735 K and, by using the H2 (J/
kg K) SGC of 4124 is what gets that Venus hot H2 density
substantially revised. In other words if Venus H2 were given 3.167 * .
905 = 2.866 kg/m3.
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/individual-universal-gas-constant-d_588.html
http://www.ajdesigner.com/idealgas/ideal_gas_law_density.php

A million cubic meters worth of H2 at 2.87 kg/m3 = 2,870 tonnes, or
roughly 4.4% of the estimated 65,000 tonnes worth of its zero
elevation inert mass plus its usable payload and variable ballast
which still has to be continually managed on the fly, as always
depending on the lifting gas temperature and its pressure, as well as
for adding or subtracting CO2 as a dynamic ballast compensation in
order to suit the lifting capacity on demand and continually managed
this on the fly in order to suit whatever change in altitudes and
temperature.

Obviously this one is going to be a highly complex and otherwise
represent an extreme engineering task for only the most expertise of
advanced airship and perhaps a little submarine applied technology,
and as such it is not going to be nearly as simple to pull off as the
Hindenburg. Accomplishing this craft while on Venus might also
suggest that it’s not a viable idea unless a preexisting facility or
one as having been constructed is accomplished first. What would a
properly motivated Venusian do?

Even a modern airship revised for Earth transoceanic transportation,
whereas a modern-day terrestrial constructed Hindenburg would likely
have a dry inert mass of 100 tonnes, transferring those 18 inert
tonnes back into usable live payload and the twice heavier helium gas
that’ll weigh 34 tonnes instead of the 17+ tonnes of hydrogen is
putting the working live payload of this new and improved “Hindenburg
2.0” as nearly right back where it started, except more fuel
efficient, a whole lot easier to maintain and operate plus a bit
faster and otherwise safer with a need of nearly half the crew and
thereby capable of hauling 30 additional passengers.

The silly notion that our planet is always going to be good to go as
is, regardless of its overpopulation and depleted resources, as such
seems perfectly fine and dandy to the oligarchs and their brown-nosed
minions. Of course, the usual systemic FUD kinds of non-thinkers like
our always naysay Wayne Throop would most likely have to keep
insisting that any such off-world airship technology application is
simply not worth the effort or the scientific achievement that would
only directly benefit us in multiple ways, and so why bother?

Perhaps in spite of Throop’s pretentious naysay expertise, just maybe
on this one we should bother, because the mainstream terrestrial
oligarchs in charge regardless of whomever we elect or appoint are
clearly not going to allow future competition to ever build against
any of their terrestrial hoarded and insider market speculated to
death resources, unless it’s entirely forced upon them. Plus
otherwise, we’ll need to exercise our rights in order to explore and
exploit new worlds and their moons, so that continued advancements in
science and technology continue to flow and move forward instead of
stagnate at costly inflation and wars due to the limited natural
resources at hand. Problem is, even William Mook was always adamantly
opposed to creating surpluses of anything, perhaps because that’s what
oligarchs have always managed to avoid creating a surplus of anything
and otherwise do their best in order to maximize return on
investment. Fot analogy, consider if any one oligarch were to
suddenly flood the global market with a new form of cheaper energy or
mass produce less spendy products via such cheaper energy and thereby
offered whatever surplus of resources, whereas most of the other
oligarchs of Earth could become badly screwed, and apparently we can’t
allow any of that to happen.

On the other hand, independent off-world exploitations can’t be
entirely stopped by other than wars and social/political dysfunctions,
that as we know their revenge karma can bring most anything to a
screeching halt.

Btw; be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement
software, using your independent expertise as to magnify the
mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon.

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in

question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

[HVAC]

On 1/8/2013 8:53 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
> The Guth-Venus Airship:


Can you imagine this idiot sitting around 'thinking' this shit up?








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

[Brad Guth]

>  http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/individual-universal-gas-constant-d...

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus

Just for the fun of it:
An airship of roughly 640 meters by 90 meters diameter is going to
represent an all-inclusive volume of roughly 2.7 million cubic meters,
whereas a million cubic meters of its internal volume needs to be
allocated as to accommodating the necessary volume of H2 lifting gas.

The outer shell area of roughly 1.4e5 m2, and if the all-inclusive
mass of its thick shell and its innards as extrapolated per outer
surface area, were allowed to reach 100 kg/m2, makes the outer shell
or rigid hull and the complex innards of this enormous craft worth
1.4e7 kg or 14,000 tonnes, which at first may seem a tad excessive
considering the total dry/inert mass of the Hindenburg hovering around
118 tonnes. However, given the 65 kg/m3 buoyancy and 90.5% less
gravity than Earth means that we should not have any insurmountable
problem with offsetting several thousand tonnes worth of reduced inert/
dry mass via its structural composite volumetric buoyancy or specific
gravity if you like, especially when the volume of its constructed
composite elements are being offset by their individual buoyancy or
lower specific gravity. Personally I’d tend to favor that our Venus
composite rigid airship simply could not easily exceed 75 kg/m2 of its
outer hull area, creating a dry/inert mass of 10,500 tonnes, although
its extensive outfitting of propulsion and complex systems along with
its well insulated cabin interior might conceivably contribute give or
take a few extra thousand tonnes.

In other words, the dry/inert all-inclusive mass of the Venus airship
could conceivably manage to become worth 120 times greater dry/inert
mass than the dry/inert mass of the Hindenburg, but that’s only if
each of these were situated as parked side by side here on Earth.
However, as per this enormous one being situated upon Venus is where
our composite rigid airship that also gets the structural volumetric
benefit of 64 kg/m3 applied in addition to utilizing the 9.5%
advantage worth of reduced gravity, of which the lesser gravity alone
brings our comparative inert mass ratio closer to 108.6:1, and the
volume of the structural composites with such low specific gravity
shouldn’t have any problems in further reducing this ratio to roughly
100:1.

To be fair, having such a truly large composite rigid airship offering
a usable interior volume of perhaps at least 1.6 million cubic meters
for accommodating its infrastructure and those well insulated cabin
areas plus all of its complex systems, is going to be offering a
downright impressive airship of a very spacious scientific and planet
exploitation worthy form of transportation, offering loads of spacious
cargo hauling capacity, especially if there were only a thousand
humans onboard.

Of course those large and spacious interior cabins and work areas that
are well insulated from the external heat and sealing out all of that
higher density of acidic atmosphere of mostly CO2, as instead having
its cabin atmosphere displaced by a little O2 and otherwise mostly He,
as such is also going to be providing some considerable buoyancy, as
to more than offsetting whatever the all-inclusive interior live mass
represents. In other words, accommodating a thousand humans plus a
great deal of extra payloads along with constant ballast and lifting
gas volume management that needs to be taken into account, especially
as the various cruising altitudes are taken into account.

No doubt this proposed Venus airship as I’ve suggested is just a rough
preliminary representation of whatever should become the actual thing,
so don’t be all that concerned or get yourself uppity if these numbers
are adjusted as we go along. Obviously smaller airships would come
first, including those of purely telerobotic controlled versions that
could get really small, acting as scout drones capable of going into
caves or remaining as easily hidden behind those large surface hot
rocks in order to spy on whoever or whatever else is already there.

The only significant drawback to this spacious airship interior
offering at least 1.5e6 m3 in usable free area may be the issue of
everyone always speaking like Melvin and the Chipmunks. At first this
could rather entertaining, but shortly thereafter it would not be all
that noticeable nor distracting. However, at the much greater
atmospheric pressure that’ll take some getting used to, may actually
minimize the Melvin Chipmunk voice issue, as well as for altitude
changes would still need to be accomplished very gradually. Of course
there could be hyperbolic sleeping chambers for those in need of
additional physiological and atmospheric adjustment time.

Sorry about all those silly numbers that I tend to over utilize in
order to help others visualize this truly enormous composite rigid
airship. Of course the traditional naysayers and their fellow FUD-
masters or those of Usenet/newsgroups that never pay any attention
anyway, because they’re only here to topic/author stalk and to
discredit anyone having an original idea or that of any interpretation
of science and physics that isn’t entirely mainstream status-quo, and
thereby fully accredited to others to begin with. It seems that FUDs
and their fellow army of brown-nosed naysayers are simply incapable of
having an original thought or interpretation that isn’t mainstream
status-quo parrot certified to begin with.

[alie...@gmail.com]

On Jan 8, 6:00 pm, HVAC <h...@physicist.net> wrote:
> On 1/8/2013 8:53 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
> > The Guth-Venus Airship:
>
> Can you imagine this idiot sitting around 'thinking' this shit up?

Unless he did so before 1965, he didn't. He stole it from ("hard")
sci fi author Larry Niven's short story _Becalmed in Hell_. Good
story.


Mark L. Fergerson

[HVAC]

Niven is a great author. However, I am surprised that he named it a
'Goth-Venus' airship.

[Brad Guth]

A Venus airship isn't rocket science, because it's much more complex.

[Brad Guth]

The Venus Airship

Local space travels and exploitation of an extremely nearby hot and
nasty planet like Venus is likely forever going to remain testy even

though it has been gradually cooling off, though perhaps for some it

is not quite as bad off as accomplishing the exploitation of our naked
moon.

On the surface, one m3 of that hot, compressed and otherwise heavy

atmosphere is worth something like a specific gravity offset of 65 kg

(give or take a kg). Actually, a tonne worth of an Earthly alloy or

any solid geometric substance would only weigh 905 kg in terms of
Venus mass (in addition to -65 kg/m3), and quite unlike Wayne Throop
as well as most others here in Usenet/newsgroups forever stuck in

their failsafe mainstream naysay mode, I’ll gladly take and run with
that nearly 10% advantage of less gravity, especially when there’s so
many other complex issues to contend with. Such as a composite rigid
airship constructed out of these mostly composite panels of a thin

metal alloy sheathed forms and otherwise filled with a mix of fused or
bonded milliballoons, of perhaps not larger than 12.7 mm diameter or 1
cm3 hollow spheres and of others not smaller than .1 cm3, as their

uncompressible structural rated insulation that’s displacing 65 kg/m3,
would mean that a 100 kg outer shell panel of this composite rigid
airship would only apply 35 kg per m3 or per 4 m2 if this outer shell/

hull of geometric interlocking panels creating this airship were only

250 mm thick.

Of purely insulation fluff utilized as a void filler for nonstructural

thermal insulation that’s made of milliballoons (no larger than 12.7
mm diameter) filled with hydrogen, could easily achieve R-1024/m or .
0009765 w/m2/k, and of its composite density per any given volume

most others of his mainstream kind. Perhaps the very next time there

is something of any great importance and value to humanity that we
don’t need to accomplish, we’ll certainly have to put Wayne right at

the very top of the short list of being our chief naysayer in charge.

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in

> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

[Brad Guth]

The Guth-Venus Airship:
An airship offering its internal gas displacement volume of 1e6 m3
(roughly 5 times that volume of the Hindenburg LZ 129) which also had
118 tonnes worth of its own inert mass to deal with, could lift at
maximum 65e6 kg minus the inert mass of the composite rigid airship
itself. If this floating craft were given half or 32.5e6 kg(32,500
tonnes) as the all-inclusive inert dry or empty mass of this airship,
leaves us with a live payload (including provisions of food, water,
other supplies and fuel) worth 32,500 tonnes. However, if the
Hindenburg was an inert mass of 118 tonnes, it seems highly unlikely
that our much larger and more complex Venus rated airship is ever
going to exceed a hundred times that amount, or 11,800 Earth tonnes,
which makes it worth only 10,679 tonnes as having been constructed and
parked on Venus. Thus 65,000 tonnes minus 10,679 tonnes equates to a
potential live working payload worth 54,321 tonnes of the all-
inclusive added payload mass, and it’ll still float not to mention
whatever added lift obtained from the multiple(6) maneuvering
thrusters.

Airship lifting capability as created via atmospheric displacement

using Venus hydrogen at 90.5% gravity is always going to remain a big
variable, because at the maximum surface pressure is where the mass
per m3 at 96 bar compressed but otherwise heated to 735 K and, by

using the H2 (J/kg K) SGC of 4124 is what gets that Venus hot H2

density substantially revised. In other words if Venus H2 were given

3.167 * .905 = 2.866 kg/m3.
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/individual-universal-gas-constant-d_588.html

http://www.ajdesigner.com/idealgas/ideal_gas_law_density.php

A million cubic meters worth of H2 at 2.87 kg/m3 = 2,870 tonnes, or
roughly 4.4% of the estimated 65,000 tonnes worth of its zero

elevation inert mass plus its maximum usable payload and the variable
of control ballast which still has to be continually managed on the
fly, as always depending upon the lifting gas temperature and its
pressure, as well as for adding or subtracting CO2 as the dynamic

ballast compensation in order to suit the lifting capacity on demand

and continually managing this on the fly in order to suit whatever

change in altitudes and temperature.

Obviously this one is going to be a highly complex and otherwise
represent an extreme engineering task for only the most expertise of
advanced airship and perhaps a little submarine applied technology,
and as such it is not going to be nearly as simple to pull off as the
Hindenburg. Accomplishing this craft while on Venus might also
suggest that it’s not a viable idea unless a preexisting facility or
one as having been constructed is accomplished first. What would a
properly motivated Venusian do?

Even a modern airship revised for Earth transoceanic transportation,
whereas a modern-day terrestrial constructed Hindenburg would likely

have a dry inert mass of 100 tonnes, thereby transferring those 18
inert tonnes back into usable live payload and accommodating the twice

heavier helium gas that’ll weigh 34 tonnes instead of the 17+ tonnes
of hydrogen is putting the working live payload of this new and
improved “Hindenburg 2.0” as nearly right back where it started,
except more fuel efficient, a whole lot easier to maintain and operate
plus a bit faster and otherwise safer with a need of nearly half the
crew and thereby capable of hauling 30 additional passengers.

The silly notion that our planet is always going to be good to go as

is, regardless of its overpopulation, pollution and depleted

resources, as such seems perfectly fine and dandy to the oligarchs and
their brown-nosed minions. Of course, the usual systemic FUD kinds of

non-thinkers like our most always naysay Wayne Throop would likely

have to keep insisting that any such off-world airship technology

application on behalf of exploiting Venus is simply not worth the
effort or the scientific achievement that would perhaps only directly
benefit us in multiple ways, and so why bother.

Perhaps in spite of Throop’s pretentious naysay expertise that’s
keeping oligarchs as happy campers, just maybe on behalf of this one

we should bother, because the mainstream terrestrial oligarchs in

charge regardless of whomever we elect or appoint are clearly not ever

going to allow future competition to ever build against any of their
terrestrial hoarded and insider market speculated to death resources,
unless it’s entirely forced upon them. Plus otherwise, we’ll need to
exercise our rights in order to explore and exploit new worlds and
their moons, so that continued advancements in science and technology
continue to flow and move forward instead of stagnate at costly
inflation and wars due to the limited natural resources at hand.
Problem is, even William Mook was always adamantly opposed to creating
surpluses of anything, perhaps because that’s what oligarchs have
always managed to avoid creating a surplus of anything and otherwise
do their best in order to maximize return on investment. Fot analogy,
consider if any one oligarch were to suddenly flood the global market
with a new form of cheaper energy or mass produce less spendy products
via such cheaper energy and thereby offered whatever surplus of
resources, whereas most of the other oligarchs of Earth could become
badly screwed, and apparently we can’t allow any of that to happen.

On the other hand, independent off-world exploitations can’t be

entirely stopped by other than proxy wars and social/political

dysfunctions, that as we know their revenge karma can bring most
anything to a screeching halt.

Btw; be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement
software, using your independent expertise as to magnify the
mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon.

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

[Brad Guth]

>  http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/individual-universal-gas-constant-d...

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus

Just for the added fun of it:
An airship as specified of roughly 640 meters by 90 meters diameter is
going to represent an all-inclusive volume geometric of roughly 2.75

million cubic meters, whereas a million cubic meters of its internal

volume is specifically allocated as to accommodating the necessary

areas plus all of its complex systems in addition to accommodating its
million m3 of lifting gas, is going to be offering a downright

impressive airship of a very spacious scientific and planet
exploitation worthy form of transportation, offering loads of spacious
cargo hauling capacity, especially if there were only a thousand
humans onboard.

Of course those large and spacious interior cabins and work areas that

are extremely well insulated from the external heat and sealing out
all of that higher density of acidic atmosphere comprised of mostly

CO2, as instead having its cabin atmosphere displaced by a little O2
and otherwise mostly He, as such is also going to be providing some
considerable buoyancy, as to more than offsetting whatever the all-
inclusive interior live mass represents. In other words,
accommodating a thousand humans plus a great deal of extra payloads
along with constant ballast and lifting gas volume management that
needs to be taken into account, especially as the various cruising
altitudes are taken into account.

No doubt this proposed Venus airship as I’ve suggested is just a rough
preliminary representation of whatever should become the actual thing,
so don’t be all that concerned or get yourself uppity if these numbers

are adjusted as we go along. Obviously smaller exploration airships
as scout probes would come first, including those of purely

telerobotic controlled versions that could get really small, acting as

our scout drones capable of going into caves or remaining as easily
hidden behind those large surface features of mostly hot rocks, in

order to spy on whoever or whatever else is already there.

The only significant drawback to this spacious airship interior

offering at least 1.5e6 m3 in usable free/open area may be the issue

of everyone always speaking like Melvin and the Chipmunks. At first
this could rather entertaining, but shortly thereafter it would not be
all that noticeable nor distracting. However, at the much greater
atmospheric pressure that’ll take some getting used to, may actually
minimize the Melvin Chipmunk voice issue, as well as for altitude
changes would still need to be accomplished very gradually. Of course
there could be hyperbolic sleeping chambers for those in need of
additional physiological and atmospheric adjustment time.

Sorry about all those silly numbers that I tend to over-utilize in

order to help others visualize this truly enormous composite rigid
airship. Of course the traditional naysayers and their fellow FUD-

masters, such as those of Usenet/newsgroups which never pay any

[Brad Guth]

I'll offer an update or edited version of this GuthVenus Airship under
it's own topic, not that the usual gauntlet of Usenet/newsgroup FUD-
masters will ever go away.

[Brad Guth]

A floating shuttle craft for Venus, capable of surface landings and
otherwise capable of cruising above them thick clouds, is not going to
be easy nor as insurmountable as we’ve been lead to believe.

Local space travels and the eventual exploitation of an extremely
nearby, hot and nasty planet like Venus is likely forever going to
remain banished, as though it’s too Goldilocks testy even though it
has been measurably cooling off, though perhaps for some of us with
imagination it is not going to be quite as bad off as accomplishing
the exploitation of our naked and physically dark moon.

On the surface, one m3 of that hot, compressed and otherwise heavy

density of acidic atmosphere is worth something like a specific

gravity offset of 65 kg (give or take a kg). Actually, a tonne worth

of an Earthly alloy or most any solid geometric substance would only
weigh 905 kg in terms of Venus mass (in addition to whatever volume
displacement of -65 kg/m3), and otherwise quite unlike the always
naysay of Wayne Throop as well as most others here in Usenet/
newsgroups that are forever stuck in their own failsafe mainstream

naysay mode, I’ll gladly take and run with that nearly 10% advantage

of less gravity and 65 kg/m3 of buoyancy, especially when there’s so
many other complex issues to contend with, such as any composite rigid

airship constructed out of these mostly composite panels of a thin

metal alloy sheathed forms filled with a mix of essentially fused or

bonded milliballoons, of perhaps not larger than 12.7 mm diameter or 1

cm3 hollow spheres and of others not any smaller than .1 cm3, as their

uncompressible structural rated insulation that’s displacing 65 kg/m3,
would mean that a 100 kg outer shell panel of this composite rigid

airship would only apply 35 kg of constructed mass per m3 or even per
4 m2 if this outer shell/hull of geometric interlocking panels

creating this airship were only 250 mm thick.

Of purely insulation fluff utilized as a void filler for nonstructural
thermal insulation that’s made of milliballoons (no larger than 12.7
mm diameter) filled with hydrogen, could easily achieve R-1024/m or

the thermal coefficient of .0009765 w/m2/k, and of its composite
density per any given volume could easily become less than 64 kg/m3.
In other words, even using terrific volumes of this basalt balloon
fluff is not going to contribute any significant amount of constructed
mass, nor is this minimal thermal coefficient ever going to require

any great deal of heat exchanging in order to maintain a very cool
airship cabin interior.

Ceramic foams are relatively common place, offering their extremely
light volumetrics and their terrific geometric compression toughness
(for instance the space shuttles were each covered with ceramic tiles
that easily insulated their frail aluminum shell against the nearly
2000 K reentry heat, as similar to what hollow basalt spheres that can

also withstand such heat and remain as terrific compression toughness

even if their interior void was evacuated to .01 atmosphere. On Venus
these basalt or even carbonado spheres could be initially made to
contain one full atmosphere worth of hydrogen, even though a soft

vacuum of containing just .1 H2 atmosphere really shouldn’t be all

that tough to create and mass produce.

Try to remember that Venus has no apparent shortages of hydrogen nor
that of renewable energy to burn (so to speak), in that processing
almost anything (including ceramics, carbonado and tough metals like
titanium and thorium) should really not be any problem, and consider
that every 19 months it conveniently gets to within 100 LD of us (in

other words, the only thing out there that’s any closer to us and also

worth exploiting, is our moon).

However, it seems Wayne Throop’s lack of hand-waving plus his purely
negative and/or naysay closed mindset about absolutely anything that
wasn’t of his idea to begin with, is noted as would be expected of

most others of his mainstream kind of closed mindsets. Perhaps the

very next time there is something of any great importance and value to
humanity that we don’t need to accomplish, we’ll certainly have to put
Wayne right at the very top of the short list of being our chief
naysayer in charge.

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in

> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

[Brad Guth]

The GuthVenus Airship:

An airship offering its internal gas displacement volume of 1e6 m3

(roughly 5 times that volume of the Hindenburg LZ 129) which had to
deal with 118 tonnes worth of its own inert mass, whereas our Venus
airship should lift at maximum 65e6 kg minus the inert mass of the

composite rigid airship itself. If this floating craft were given
half or 32.5e6 kg(32,500 tonnes) as the all-inclusive inert dry or

empty mass, leaves us with a live payload (including its crew and
provisions of food, water, outfitting plus other supplies and fuel)

worth 32,500 tonnes. However, if the Hindenburg was an inert mass of
118 tonnes, it seems highly unlikely that our much larger and more
complex Venus rated airship is ever going to exceed a hundred times
that amount, or 11,800 Earth tonnes, which makes it worth only 10,679
tonnes as having been constructed and parked on Venus. Thus 65,000
tonnes minus 10,679 tonnes equates to a potential live working payload

of 54,321 tonnes worth of its all-inclusive added payload mass, and

it’ll still float not to mention whatever added lift obtained from the
multiple(6) maneuvering thrusters.

Airship lifting capability as created via atmospheric displacement
using Venus hydrogen at 90.5% gravity is always going to remain a big
variable, because at the maximum surface pressure is where the mass

per m3 at 96 bar compressed but otherwise when heated to 735 K and, by
using the H2 (J/kg K) SGC of 4124 is what gets that Venus heated H2

density substantially revised. In other words if Venus H2 were given
3.167 * .905 = 2.866 kg/m3.

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/individual-universal-gas-constant-d_588.html
http://www.ajdesigner.com/idealgas/ideal_gas_law_density.php

A million cubic meters worth of hot H2 at 2.87 kg/m3 = 2,870 tonnes,

or roughly 4.4% of the estimated 65,000 tonnes worth of its zero
elevation inert mass plus its maximum usable payload and the variable
of control ballast which still has to be continually managed on the
fly, as always depending upon the lifting gas temperature and its
pressure, as well as for adding or subtracting CO2 as the dynamic

ballast compensation in order to suit the lifting capacity on demand,
as continually managing this on the fly in order to suit whatever
change in altitudes and temperature. This would be quite simple for a
computer managed issue.

Obviously this one is going to be a highly complex and otherwise
represent an extreme engineering task for only the most expertise of

advanced airship, and perhaps using a little submarine applied

technology, and as such it is not going to be nearly as simple to pull
off as the Hindenburg. Accomplishing this craft while on Venus might
also suggest that it’s not a viable idea unless a preexisting facility
or one as having been constructed is accomplished first. What would a
properly motivated Venusian do?

Even a modern hybrid airship as revised for Earth transoceanic
transportation and cargo has great potential, whereas a modern

terrestrial constructed Hindenburg would likely have a dry inert mass
of 100 tonnes, thereby transferring those 18 inert tonnes back into
usable live payload and accommodating the twice heavier helium gas

that’ll weigh 34 tonnes instead of the 17+ tonnes of hydrogen, is

putting the working live payload of this new and improved “Hindenburg

2.0” as nearly right back where it started, except a couple tonnes
lighter, more fuel efficient, a whole lot easier to maintain and
operate plus a 25% faster and otherwise safer with a need of nearly
half the crew and thereby capable of hauling at least 40+ additional
passengers for a total commercial manifest of accommodating 76+
passengers in style, shouldn’t be all that unlikely.

The silly notion that our planet is always going to be good to go as

is, regardless of its overpopulation, industrial pollution and

depleted resources, as such seems perfectly fine and dandy to the
oligarchs and their brown-nosed minions. Of course, the usual

mainstream gauntlet of systemic FUD kinds of non-thinkers like our

most always naysay Wayne Throop would likely have to keep insisting
that any such off-world airship technology application on behalf of

exploiting such an extremely nearby planet like Venus is simply not
worth the risky effort or the scientific achievements that would
perhaps only directly benefit the rest of us in multiple ways, and so
why bother.

Perhaps in spite of Throop’s pretentious denial and naysay expertise
that’s otherwise keeping oligarchs as happy campers, just maybe on
behalf of this one exception we should bother, because the mainstream

terrestrial oligarchs in charge regardless of whomever we elect or

appoint are clearly not ever going to allow any threat of future
competition to ever build competition against any of their terrestrial

hoarded and insider market speculated to death resources, unless it’s
entirely forced upon them. Plus otherwise, we’ll need to exercise our

rights in order to explore and exploit other new worlds and their
moons, so that advancements in science and technology continue to flow
and move us forward instead of stagnate at the alternative of costly
inflation and proxy wars due to the limited natural resources at hand.

Problem is, even the most forward thinking William Mook was always
quite opposed as to creating surpluses of anything, perhaps because

that’s what oligarchs have always managed to avoid creating a surplus

of anything, and otherwise doing their best in order to maximize
return on investment. For this analogy, consider if any one oligarch

were to suddenly flood the global market with a new form of cheaper

energy or having mass produced less spendy products via such cheaper
energy, and thereby offered whatever surplus of resources to an open
free market, whereas most of the other oligarchs of Earth could become
badly screwed, and apparently we simply can’t allow any of that to

happen.

On the other hand, independent off-world exploitations can’t be
entirely stopped by other than proxy wars and social/political

dysfunctions, as we know from experience that their revenge karma can

bring most anything to a screeching halt.

Btw; be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement

software to this one small area of Venus, using your independent
expertise as to enlarge or magnify the mountainous area of Venus that
I’ve focused upon. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic
software variations accomplish this automatically, although some extra
filtering and dynamic range compensations can further improve on the
end result (no direct pixel modifications necessary).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

[Brad Guth]

>  http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/individual-universal-gas-constant-d...

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus

Just for the added fun of it:

An airship as I’ve specified of roughly 640 meters by 90 meters
diameter is going to represent an all-inclusive geometric volume of
roughly 2.6 million cubic meters, whereas a million cubic meters of

its internal volume is specifically allocated as to accommodating the

necessary volume of H2 lifting gas. Remember that this is just a very
rough estimate without the benefit of actual computer assisted
drawings(CAD) or that of others offering their own expertise that’s
supposedly equal or better than Einstein according to the way they so
often suggest.

The outer composite shell surface area of roughly 1.4e5 m2, and if the

all-inclusive mass of its thick shell and its innards as extrapolated
per outer surface area, were allowed to reach 100 kg/m2, makes the
outer shell or rigid hull and the complex innards of this enormous
craft worth 1.4e7 kg or 14,000 tonnes, which at first may seem a tad
excessive considering the total dry/inert mass of the Hindenburg
hovering around 118 tonnes. However, given the 65 kg/m3 buoyancy and
90.5% less gravity than Earth means that we should not have any
insurmountable problem with offsetting several thousand tonnes worth

of reduced inert/dry mass via its structural composite volumetric
buoyancy or structural specific gravity if you like, especially when
the volume of its constructed composite elements are of those being

offset by their individual buoyancy or lower specific gravity.
Personally I’d tend to favor that our Venus composite rigid airship
simply could not easily exceed 75 kg/m2 of its outer hull area,
creating a dry/inert mass of 10,500 tonnes, although its extensive
outfitting of propulsion and complex systems along with its well

insulated cabin interior might conceivably contribute a bit more than
an extra thousand tonnes.

In other words, the dry/inert all-inclusive mass of this Venus airship

could conceivably manage to become worth 120 times greater dry/inert
mass than the dry/inert mass of the Hindenburg, but that’s only if
each of these were situated as parked side by side here on Earth.
However, as per this enormous one being situated upon Venus is where
our composite rigid airship that also gets the structural volumetric
benefit of 64 kg/m3 applied in addition to utilizing the 9.5%
advantage worth of reduced gravity, of which the lesser gravity alone
brings our comparative inert mass ratio closer to 108.6:1, and the
volume of the structural composites with such low specific gravity
shouldn’t have any problems in further reducing this ratio to roughly
100:1.

To be fair, having such a truly large composite rigid airship offering

a usable interior volume of perhaps 1.55 million cubic meters for

accommodating its infrastructure and those well insulated cabin areas
plus all of its complex systems in addition to accommodating its

million cubic meters of lifting gas, is going to be offering a

downright impressive airship of a very spacious scientific and planet
exploitation worthy form of transportation, offering loads of spacious
cargo hauling capacity, especially if there were only a thousand
humans onboard.

Of course those large and spacious interior cabins and work areas that
are extremely well insulated from the external heat and sealing out
all of that higher density of acidic atmosphere comprised of mostly
CO2, as instead having its cabin atmosphere displaced by a little O2

and otherwise mostly displaced with cool He which is also a lifting
gas, as such is also going to be providing some considerable buoyancy,
as to more than offsetting whatever the all-inclusive interior live

mass represents. In other words, accommodating a thousand humans plus

a great deal of their extra payloads along with constant ballast and
lifting gas volume management that needs to be given its credit,

especially as the various cruising altitudes are taken into account.

No doubt this proposed Venus airship as I’ve suggested is just

offering a rough preliminary representation of whatever should become

the actual thing, so don’t be all that concerned or get yourself
uppity if these numbers are adjusted as we go along. Obviously
smaller exploration airships as scout probes would come first,
including those of purely telerobotic controlled versions that could
get really small, acting as our scout drones capable of going into
caves or remaining as easily hidden behind those large surface
features of mostly hot rocks, in order to spy on whoever or whatever
else is already there.

The only significant drawback to this spacious airship interior

offering at the very least 1.5e6 m3 in usable open area for live
loading, may be the issue of everyone always speaking like Melvin and
the Chipmunks. At first this could be rather entertaining, but

shortly thereafter it would not be all that noticeable nor
distracting. However, at the much greater atmospheric pressure
that’ll take some getting used to, may actually minimize the Melvin
Chipmunk voice issue, as well as for altitude changes would still need

to be accomplished gradually. Of course there could be hyperbolic
sleeping or even small habitat chambers for those in need of
additional physiological and atmospheric adjustment time (France has
already had those operational for more then a decade).

In order to fly an airship of this size and mass above those Venus
clouds is going to require that most of the ballast and unessential
mass be removed, as well as propulsion applied for the aerodynamics of
added lift, but none the less a 65+ km cruising altitude could be
managed, whereas liquid fueled rocket thrusters of micro-fusion
propulsion would likely become necessary for going into orbit. More
likely smaller spacecraft modules could be deployed away from this
mother-ship.

Sorry about all those silly numbers that I tend to over-utilize in
order to help others visualize this truly enormous composite rigid
airship. Of course the traditional naysayers and their fellow FUD-

masters, such as those of these public Usenet/newsgroups which never

pay any attention anyway, because they’re only here to topic/author
stalk and to discredit anyone having an original idea or that of any
interpretation of science and physics that isn’t entirely mainstream

status-quo, and thereby fully accredited as to others to begin with.

It seems that FUDs and their fellow army of brown-nosed naysayers are
simply incapable of having an original thought or interpretation that

isn’t mainstream status-quo parrot certified to begin with, and it
sure as hell is not their job to assist or support anyone else.

[Brad Guth]

>  http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/individual-universal-gas-constant-d...

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus

Just for the added fun of it:
An airship as I’ve specified of roughly 640 meters by 90 meters
diameter is going to represent an all-inclusive geometric volume of

roughly 2.5~2.75 million cubic meters depending on its final exterior
form, whereas a million cubic meters of its internal volume is

specifically allocated as to accommodating the necessary volume of H2
lifting gas. Remember that this is just a very rough estimate without

benefit of actual computer assisted drawings(CAD) or that of others
offering their own expertise that’s supposedly equal or better than
Einstein according to the way they so often suggest.

The outer composite shell/hull surface area of roughly 1.4e5 m2, and
if the all-inclusive mass of its thick shell and innards as if

extrapolated per outer surface area, were allowed to reach 100 kg/m2,

makes the thick outer shell or rigid hull and the complex innards of

this enormous craft worth 1.4e7 kg or 14,000 tonnes, which at first
may seem a tad excessive considering the total dry/inert mass of the
Hindenburg hovering around 118 tonnes. However, given the 65 kg/m3
buoyancy and 90.5% less gravity than Earth means that we should not
have any insurmountable problem with offsetting several thousand
tonnes worth of reduced inert/dry mass via its structural composite

volumetric buoyancy or that of its structural specific gravity if you

like, especially when the volume of its constructed composite elements
are of those being offset by their individual buoyancy or lower
specific gravity. Personally I’d tend to favor that our Venus
composite rigid airship simply could not easily exceed 75 kg/m2 of its
outer hull area, creating a dry/inert mass of 10,500 tonnes, although
its extensive outfitting of propulsion and complex systems along with

its well insulated cabin interior might conceivably contribute more

than an extra thousand tonnes.

In other words, the dry/inert all-inclusive mass of this Venus rigid
composite airship could conceivably manage to become worth 120 times
greater dry/inert mass than the comparative dry/inert mass of the

Hindenburg, but that’s only if each of these were situated as parked
side by side here on Earth. However, as per this enormous one being
situated upon Venus is where our composite rigid airship that also

gets the structural volumetric benefit of at least 64 kg/m3 applied in

addition to utilizing the 9.5% advantage worth of reduced gravity, of
which the lesser gravity alone brings our comparative inert mass ratio

closer to 109:1, and the internal volume of these structural

composites with such low specific gravity shouldn’t have any problems
in further reducing this ratio to roughly 100:1.

To be fair, having such a truly large composite rigid airship that’s
offering a usable interior volume of perhaps 1.5 million cubic meters

for accommodating its infrastructure and those well insulated cabin

areas plus all of its complex systems and ballast in addition to
accommodating its other million cubic meters worth of lifting gas, is

going to be offering a downright impressive airship of a very spacious
scientific and planet exploitation worthy form of transportation,
offering loads of spacious cargo hauling capacity, especially if there

were only a thousand humans onboard. Even giving up another 5e5 m3
for use as atmospheric ballast/trim consideration that can very
between the natural 96% CO2 atmosphere of 64 kg/m3 and that of using
96% helium with 4% oxygen which by rights shouldn’t ever exceed 16 kg/
m3, making a simple ballast variable of 48 kg/m3 * 5e5 = 24e6 kg or
24,000 tonnes, with the remaining 1e6 m3 displaced by the 16 kg/m3 of
mostly He and a little O2 offering to offset yet another 48,000
tonnes. In other words, there’s no such thing as having too much
ballast or internal structural mass and considerable payloads (might
even have to fill its landing skids with a few thousand tonnes of
thorium). Actually the entire volume of its H2 lifting gas can be
recycled into pressure bottles, with the upper buoyancy volume allowed
to refill with as much other heavier gases as needed.

There’s actually no insurmountable downside as to what any of this
GuthVenus airship has to offer, and there is literally sure as hell no
shortage of local hydrogen or helium to work with. The only naysay or
obfuscation and denial seems to comes from those most at risk and
always intent on promoting and distributing as much mainstream FUD as
possible.

Of course those large and spacious interior cabins and other open work

areas that are extremely well insulated from the external heat and

otherwise quite easily capable of always sealing out all of that

higher density of acidic atmosphere comprised of mostly CO2, as
instead having its cabin atmosphere displaced by a little O2 and

otherwise mostly displaced with cool He (which by the way is also a
valid lifting gas), as such is going to also be providing some

considerable buoyancy, as to more than offsetting whatever the all-
inclusive interior live mass represents. In other words,
accommodating a thousand humans plus a great deal of their extra
payloads along with constant ballast and lifting gas volume management

that always needs to be given its full management credits, especially

as the various cruising altitudes are taken into account.

No doubt this proposed Venus airship as I’ve suggested for the past
decade is just offering a rough preliminary representation of whatever

should become the actual thing, so don’t be all that concerned or get
yourself uppity if these numbers are adjusted as we go along.

Obviously this represents a highly complex airship, and most certainly
there will be smaller exploration airships as scout probes that would

come first, including those of purely telerobotic controlled versions

that could get really small, acting as our exploratory scout drones

capable of going into caves or remaining as easily hidden behind those

large surface features of mostly hot rocks, in order to stealth
periscope and/or telephoto spy on whomever or whatever else is already

there.

The only significant drawback to this spacious airship interior
offering at the very least 1.5e6 m3 in usable open area for

accommodating its live loading, may be the issue of everyone always

speaking like Melvin and the Chipmunks. At first this could be rather
entertaining, but shortly thereafter it would not be all that
noticeable nor distracting. However, at the much greater atmospheric

pressures that’ll take some getting used to, whereas this pressure may

actually minimize the Melvin Chipmunk voice issue, as well as for
altitude changes would still need to be accomplished gradually. Of
course there could be hyperbolic sleeping or even small habitat
chambers for those in need of additional physiological and atmospheric
adjustment time (France has already had those operational for more
then a decade).

In order to fly an airship of this size and mass above those Venus

clouds where the atmosphere is thin and even near cryogenic cold, is

going to require that most of the ballast and unessential mass be
removed, as well as propulsion applied for the aerodynamics of added
lift, but none the less a 65+ km cruising altitude could be managed,
whereas liquid fueled rocket thrusters of micro-fusion propulsion

would likely become necessary for going into orbit. More likely there
would be a few smaller spacecraft modules as shuttles that could be

deployed away from this mother-ship.

Sorry about all those silly numbers that I tend to over-utilize in
order to help others visualize this truly enormous composite rigid
airship. Of course the traditional naysayers and their fellow FUD-

masters are never too far away, such as those of these public Usenet/
newsgroups which never pay any attention to the intent of any topic or
reply anyway, because they’re only here to topic/author stalk and to
discredit anyone having an original idea or that of any honest

interpretation of science and physics that isn’t entirely mainstream

status-quo, and thereby all good ideas are fully accredited as to
others to begin with. It seems that mainstream applied FUDs and their

fellow army of brown-nosed naysayers are simply incapable of having an

original thought or deductive interpretation that isn’t mainstream

status-quo parrot certified to begin with, and it sure as hell is not

their job to ever assist or support anyone else.

A more detailed engineered plan for this airship can be accomplished
by most anyone that has a positive/constructive motivated mindset, as
opposed to the usual gauntlet of naysay and denial sorts of the closed
mindset, which is unfortunately commonplace within Usenet/newsgroups,
of such individuals of FUD that are only here to tank anything and
everything presented of others.

[Brad Guth]

accommodating its other dedicated million cubic meters worth of

lifting gas, is going to be offering a downright impressive airship of
a very spacious scientific and planet exploitation worthy form of
transportation, offering loads of spacious cargo hauling capacity,
especially if there were only a thousand humans onboard. Even giving
up another 5e5 m3 for use as atmospheric ballast/trim consideration
that can very between the natural 96% CO2 atmosphere of 64 kg/m3 and

that of using 96% helium with 4% oxygen which by rights shouldn’t have
to ever exceed 16 kg/m3, making for another simple ballast variable

of 48 kg/m3 * 5e5 = 24e6 kg or 24,000 tonnes, with the remaining 1e6

m3 interior displaced by the 16 kg/m3 of mostly He and a little O2

offering to offset yet another 48,000 tonnes. In other words, there’s
no such thing as having too much ballast or internal structural mass
and considerable payloads (might even have to fill its landing skids
with a few thousand tonnes of thorium). Actually the entire volume of
its H2 lifting gas can be recycled into pressure bottles, with the
upper buoyancy volume allowed to refill with as much other heavier

gases as needed for proper buoyancy and trim.

Sorry about all those silly numbers that I tend to over-utilize and
even update on the fly (so to speak) in order to help others visualize

this truly enormous composite rigid airship. Of course the

traditional naysayers and their fellow FUD-masters are never too far
away, such as those regulars of these public Usenet/newsgroups which
never pay any attention to the intent of any given topic or reply

anyway, because they’re only here to topic/author stalk and to

discredit anyone having an original thought or idea of any honest

interpretation of science and physics that isn’t entirely mainstream

status-quo certified, and thereby all good ideas plus other derived
from such are always going to be fully accredited as to others to
begin with, and everyone else getting shot down with as much friendly
and unfriendly fire as it takes. It seems that mainstream applied

FUDs and their fellow army of brown-nosed naysayers are simply

incapable of ever having an original thought or deductive

interpretation that isn’t mainstream status-quo parrot certified to
begin with, and it sure as hell is not their job to ever assist or
support anyone else.

A more detailed engineered plan for this airship can be accomplished
by most anyone that has a positive/constructive motivated mindset, as
opposed to the usual gauntlet of naysay and denial sorts of the closed
mindset, which is unfortunately commonplace within Usenet/newsgroups,
of such individuals of FUD that are only here to tank anything and
everything presented of others.

Btw; be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement
software to this one small area of Venus, using your independent
expertise as to enlarge or magnify the mountainous area of Venus that
I’ve focused upon. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic
software variations accomplish this automatically, although some extra
filtering and dynamic range compensations can further improve on the
end result (no direct pixel modifications necessary).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus

[Brad Guth]

A mostly floating city in the form of a composite rigid airship with
its propulsion, enough surplus buoyancy to pack along a couple of
spare iron clad battleships, plus easily insulated well enough to host
the winter Olympics while efficiently cruising around the most
geothermally active planet in the solar system, is perhaps just the
tip of this iceberg potential.

Humans as well as most other forms of complex life can manage to adapt
to more or less pressure, as we’ll as managing to adapt to variations
of gravity and even temperature extremes as long as those demands of
physiological adjustments are not getting imposed too quickly. It has
also been proven that complex life accustomed to using those lunar
cycles can also manage to adapt themselves to drastic environmental
changes that totally messes with their accustomed lunar cycles. So,
frail life even as we know it on Earth is perhaps not really all that
Eden specialized or limited as for Goldilocks and company of most
other humans to begin with, as other worlds become especially doable
when applied physics and scientific technology gets applied, whereas
this greater survivable scope should be capable of making a wide range
of other planets and even moons as Goldilocks approved, and perhaps
this analogy of utilizing applied physics and the best available
science should seem rather logical to anyone thinking it through.

Obviously most of Earth is not even naked Goldilocks survivable as is,
whereas 90+% is either too high, too deep, too hot, too cold, too
baron, too wet or too dry to suit the likes of any naked Goldilocks
that we know of, although the other 99.9999% of the complex
biodiversity on Earth that’s without any benefit of having any
religion or industrial military complex, isn’t the least bit
restricted or otherwise impaired if allowed to coexist without their
being hunted down, harvested or tormented to death by us humans.

The good news is that pretty much any dastardly or that of nasty
things we could possibly do to the environment of Venues, shouldn’t
matter worth squat, because how could it possibly get any worse off?

Btw; be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement

software to this one small but interesting area of Venus, using your

independent expertise as to enlarge or magnify the mountainous area of
Venus that I’ve focused upon. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other
photographic software variations accomplish this automatically,
although some extra filtering and dynamic range compensations can
further improve on the end result (no direct pixel modifications
necessary).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

[Brad Guth]

The GuthVenus Airship:
An airship offering its internal lifting gas displacement volume of

1e6 m3 (roughly 5 times that volume of the Hindenburg LZ 129) which

had to deal with 118 tonnes worth of its own dry inert mass, whereas

our Venus airship should lift at maximum 65e6 kg minus the inert mass
of the composite rigid airship itself. If this floating craft were

given half or 32.5e6 kg(32,500 tonnes including its H2 lifting gas) as
representing the all-inclusive inert dry or empty mass, only leaves us

with a live payload (including its crew and provisions of food, water,
outfitting plus other supplies and fuel) worth 32,500 tonnes.
However, if the Hindenburg was an inert mass of 118 tonnes, it seems
highly unlikely that our much larger and more complex Venus rated
airship is ever going to exceed a hundred times that amount, or 11,800

Earth tonnes, which makes this one worth only 10,679 tonnes as having

been constructed and parked on Venus. Thus 65,000 tonnes minus 10,679
tonnes equates to a potential live working payload of 54,321 tonnes

worth of its all-inclusive added payload mass, and it’ll still float,
not to mention whatever added lift obtained from all of the He+O2 of
cabin atmosphere and that of whatever its multiple(6) maneuvering
thrusters can muster.

Airship lifting capability as created via atmospheric displacement
using Venus hydrogen at 90.5% gravity is always going to remain a big
variable, because at the maximum surface pressure is where the mass
per m3 at 96 bar compressed but otherwise when heated to 735 K and, by
using the H2 (J/kg K) SGC of 4124 is what gets that Venus heated H2
density substantially revised. In other words if Venus H2 were given

3.167 * .905 = 2.866 kg/m3, and for the most part there’d be no good
reason to cool any of this H2 that’s easily contained at a slight
vacuum, and those much larger molecules of CO2 are certainly not going
to leak inward unless someone intentionally leaves a hatch wide open.
http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/individual-universal-gas-constant-d_588.html
http://www.ajdesigner.com/idealgas/ideal_gas_law_density.php

A million cubic meters worth of hot H2 at 2.87 kg/m3 = 2,870 tonnes,
or roughly 4.4% of the estimated 65,000 tonnes worth of its zero

elevation inert mass along with its maximum usable payload and the
always variable of control ballast which has to be continually managed

on the fly, as always depending upon the lifting gas temperature and

its pressure, as well as for adding or subtracting CO2 as a dynamic

ballast compensation in order to suit the lifting capacity on demand,

as continually managing this buoyancy trim on the fly in order to suit
whatever change in altitudes and temperature. This would actually be

quite simple for a computer managed issue.

Obviously this airship is going to be a highly complex and otherwise

represent an extreme engineering task for only the most expertise of

advanced airship and perhaps using a little submarine applied

technology, and as such it is not going to be nearly as simple to pull

off as the Hindenburg which had only a few variable to contend with.

Accomplishing this craft while on Venus might also suggest that it’s
not a viable idea unless a preexisting facility or one as having been
constructed is accomplished first. What would a properly motivated
Venusian do?

Even a modern hybrid airship as revised for Earth transoceanic

transportation and cargo offers great potential, whereas a modern

terrestrial constructed Hindenburg would likely have a dry inert mass
of 100 tonnes, thereby transferring those 18 inert tonnes back into
usable live payload and accommodating the twice heavier helium gas
that’ll weigh 34 tonnes instead of the 17+ tonnes of hydrogen, is
putting the working live payload of this new and improved “Hindenburg
2.0” as nearly right back where it started, except a couple tonnes
lighter, more fuel efficient, a whole lot easier to maintain and

operate plus 25% faster and otherwise safer with a need of nearly half

the crew and thereby capable of hauling at least 40+ additional
passengers for a total commercial manifest of accommodating 76+

passengers in grand style (perhaps half again as many if passengers
had mostly carry-on luggage), shouldn’t be all that unlikely to
accommodate 100+ passengers, and obviously thousand pound humans need
not apply unless classified as cargo or if they can be used as
expendable ballast. Of course there’s really nothing unsafe about
using a lifting gas of hydrogen instead of helium, so that’s worth
another 17 tonnes of live payload.

The silly notion that our planet is always going to be good to go as
is, regardless of its overpopulation, industrial pollution and
depleted resources, as such seems perfectly fine and dandy to the
oligarchs and their brown-nosed minions. Of course, the usual

mainstream gauntlet of systemic FUD kinds of non-thinkers, like our

most always naysay Wayne Throop would likely have to keep insisting
that any such off-world airship technology application on behalf of

exploiting such an extremely nearby planet as Venus is simply not

worth the risky effort or the scientific achievements that would
perhaps only directly benefit the rest of us in multiple ways, and so
why bother.

Perhaps in spite of the pretentious denial and naysay expertise that’s

otherwise keeping oligarchs as happy campers, just maybe on behalf of

this one exception we should bother to move forward, because the

mainstream terrestrial oligarchs in charge regardless of whomever we

elect or appoint are clearly not ever going to allow any perceived
threat of future competition to ever build against any of their

terrestrial hoarded and insider market speculated to death resources

of easy profits, unless it’s entirely forced upon them. Plus

otherwise, we’ll need to exercise our rights in order to explore and
exploit other new worlds and their moons, so that advancements in
science and technology continue to flow and move us forward instead of
stagnate at the alternative of costly inflation and proxy wars due to
the limited natural resources at hand.

Problem is, it seems even the most forward thinking William Mook was
always quite opposed as to creating surpluses of most anything,

perhaps because that’s what oligarchs have always managed to avoid

creating a surplus, and otherwise doing their best in order to

maximize return on investment. For this analogy, consider if any one
oligarch were to suddenly flood the global market with a new form of

cheaper energy, or as having mass produced less spendy products via

such cheaper energy, and thereby offered whatever surplus of resources
to an open free market, whereas most of the other oligarchs of Earth
could become badly screwed, and apparently we simply can’t allow any

of that to ever happen. On the other hand, independent off-world

exploitations can’t be entirely stopped by other than proxy wars and
social/political dysfunctions, as we know from experience that their
revenge karma can bring most anything to a screeching halt.

Btw; be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement
software to this one small area of Venus, using your independent
expertise as to enlarge or magnify the mountainous area of Venus that
I’ve focused upon. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic
software variations accomplish this automatically, although some extra
filtering and dynamic range compensations can further improve on the
end result (no direct pixel modifications necessary).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in

question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in

> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

[Brad Guth]

>  http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/individual-universal-gas-constant-d...

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>

[Brad Guth]

A floating shuttle craft for Venus, capable of surface landings and

otherwise capable of efficiently cruising above them thick clouds, is

not going to be easy nor as insurmountable as we’ve been lead to
believe.

Local space travels and the eventual exploitation of an extremely
nearby, hot and nasty planet like Venus is likely forever going to

remain banished, as though it’s simply too Goldilocks testy even

though it has been measurably cooling off, though perhaps for some of
us with imagination it is not going to be quite as bad off as
accomplishing the exploitation of our naked and physically dark moon.

Of course the usual mainstream gauntlet of naysayers will continually
point to the hellish exterior environment of Venus that’s always going
to nullify anything we ever attempt to accomplish, but then they’ve
never actually accomplished anything of any terrestrial value anyway,
so it’s hard to imagine any off-world exploitations that will ever
comply to their level of usefulness or value regardless of whatever we
propose.

On the surface, one m3 of that hot, compressed and otherwise heavy
density of acidic atmosphere is worth something like a specific

gravity offset of 65 kg (give or take a kg). Actually, any tonne

worth of an Earthly alloy or most any solid geometric substance would
only weigh 905 kg in terms of Venus mass (in addition to whatever

solid volume displacement of -65 kg/m3), and otherwise quite unlike

the always naysay of Wayne Throop as well as most others here in

Usenet/newsgroups that are forever stuck in their own failsafe
mainstream naysay mode of poopooing virtually everything that isn’t
mainstream status quo certified or of their own idea to begin with,

I’ll gladly take and run with that nearly 10% advantage of less

gravity and put 65 kg/m3 of buoyancy to good use, especially when

there’s so many other complex issues to contend with, such as any
composite rigid airship constructed out of these mostly composite

panels of a thin metal alloy sheathed form that’s filled with a mix of

essentially fused or bonded milliballoons, of perhaps not larger than

12.7 mm diameter or 1 cm3 hollow spheres and of a few other sizes not

any smaller than .1 cm3, as their uncompressible structural rated

insulation of solid forms that’s capable of displacing 65 kg/m3, would
mean that a robust 100 kg outer shell panel of this composite rigid
airship might only apply 35 kg of constructed mass per m3 or even per

4 m2 if this outer shell/hull of geometric interlocking panels
creating this airship were only 250 mm thick.

If given some refinements as to creating these composite interlocking
outer hull panels, whereas perhaps their net all-inclusive mass per
cubic meter as measured on Venus will drop to 25 kg/m3, with silica
Aerogels or possibly a carbon nanofoam used to bind these spheres
wherever a low density sold structural form is necessary in order to
fully displace and as otherwise intended to easily seal off the
external atmosphere of mostly CO2 and thereby contain the H2 lifting
gas as well as accommodating the He+O2 portions of all the other
atmosphere within this craft.

Of purely insulation fluff utilized as a void filler for nonstructural
thermal insulation that’s made of milliballoons (no larger than 12.7
mm diameter) filled with hydrogen, could easily achieve R-1024/m or
the thermal coefficient of .0009765 w/m2/k, and of its composite
density per any given volume could easily become less than 64 kg/m3.
In other words, even using terrific volumes of this basalt balloon
fluff is not going to contribute any significant amount of constructed
mass, nor is this minimal thermal coefficient ever going to require
any great deal of heat exchanging in order to maintain a very

efficiently cooled airship cabin interior.

Ceramic foams are relatively common place, offering their extremely

light or low density volumetrics and their terrific geometric

compression toughness (for instance the space shuttles were each
covered with ceramic tiles that easily insulated their frail aluminum
shell against the nearly 2000 K reentry heat, as similar to what
hollow basalt spheres that can also withstand such heat and remain as
terrific compression toughness even if their interior void was
evacuated to .01 atmosphere. On Venus these basalt or even carbonado

spheres could be initially made to contain one full surface atmosphere

worth of hydrogen, even though a soft vacuum of containing just .1 H2
atmosphere really shouldn’t be all that tough to create and mass
produce.

Try to always remember that Venus has no apparent shortages of

hydrogen nor that of renewable energy to burn (so to speak), in that
processing almost anything (including ceramics, carbonado and tough
metals like titanium and thorium) should really not be any problem,

and to always consider that every 19 months it conveniently gets to

within 100 LD of us (in other words, the only thing out there that’s
any closer to us and also worth exploiting, is our moon).

However, it seems the typical response such as from Wayne Throop’s

lack of hand-waving plus his purely negative and/or naysay closed
mindset about absolutely anything that wasn’t of his idea to begin

with, is noted, as would be expected of most others of his mainstream

kind of closed mindsets. Perhaps the very next time there is
something of any great importance and value to humanity that we don’t
need to accomplish, we’ll certainly have to put Wayne right at the
very top of the short list of being our chief naysayer in charge.

[Brad Guth]

>  http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/individual-universal-gas-constant-d...

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>

A floating city in the form of a composite rigid airship with its
propulsion and enough surplus buoyancy to pack along a couple of spare

iron clad battleships, plus easily insulated well enough to host the
winter Olympics while efficiently cruising around the most
geothermally active planet in the solar system, is perhaps just the

tip of this composite rigid airship iceberg potential.

Humans as well as most other forms of complex life can manage to adapt
to more or less pressure, as we’ll as managing to adapt to variations
of gravity and even temperature extremes as long as those demands of
physiological adjustments are not getting imposed too quickly. It has
also been proven that complex life accustomed to using those lunar
cycles can also manage to adapt themselves to drastic environmental
changes that totally messes with their accustomed lunar cycles. So,
frail life even as we know it on Earth is perhaps not really all that
Eden specialized or limited as for Goldilocks and company of most

other lunatic humans to begin with, whereas this broad scope of
survivable planets becomes especially doable when applied physics and
scientific technology gets involved, allowing this greater survivable
scope that should be capable of making a wide range of other planets
and even moons as Goldilocks approved, and perhaps this analogy of our
utilizing applied physics and the best available science should even

seem rather logical to anyone thinking it through.

Obviously most of Earth is not naked Goldilocks survivable as is,

whereas 90+% is either too high, too deep, too hot, too cold, too
baron, too wet or too dry to suit the likes of any naked Goldilocks
that we know of, although the other 99.9999% of the complex
biodiversity on Earth that’s without any benefit of having any

religion or industrial military complex as their security blanket,

isn’t the least bit restricted or otherwise impaired if allowed to

coexist without their being hunted down, harvested or otherwise

tormented to death by us humans.

The good news, is that pretty much any dastardly or that of nasty
things we could possibly do to the environment of Venues, honestly

shouldn’t matter worth squat, because how could it possibly get any
worse off?

Btw; be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement

software to this one small but interesting area of Venus, using your

[Brad Guth]

A floating city in the form of a composite rigid airship with its
propulsion and enough surplus buoyancy to pack along a couple of spare
iron clad battleships, plus easily insulated well enough to host the
winter Olympics while efficiently cruising around the most
geothermally active planet in the solar system, is perhaps just the

tip of what this composite rigid airship iceberg potential has to
offer.

Humans as well as most other forms of complex life can manage to adapt
to more or less pressure, as we’ll as managing to adapt to variations
of gravity and even temperature extremes as long as those demands of
physiological adjustments are not getting imposed too quickly. It has
also been proven that complex life accustomed to using those lunar
cycles can also manage to adapt themselves to drastic environmental
changes that totally messes with their accustomed lunar cycles. So,
frail life even as we know it on Earth is perhaps not really all that
Eden specialized or limited as for Goldilocks and company of most
other lunatic humans to begin with, whereas this broad scope of
survivable planets becomes especially doable when applied physics and
scientific technology gets involved, allowing this greater survivable
scope that should be capable of making a wide range of other planets
and even moons as Goldilocks approved, and perhaps this analogy of our
utilizing applied physics and the best available science should even
seem rather logical to anyone thinking it through.

Obviously most of Earth is not even naked Goldilocks survivable as is,

whereas 90+% is either too high, too deep, too hot, too cold, too
baron, too wet or too dry to suit the likes of any naked Goldilocks
that we know of, although the other 99.9999% of the complex

biodiversity on Earth that’s without any benefit of having a religion
or industrial military complex as their job and investment security

blanket, isn’t the least bit restricted or otherwise impaired if
allowed to coexist without their being hunted down, harvested or
otherwise tormented to death by us humans.

The good news, is that pretty much any dastardly or that of nasty
things we could possibly do to the environment of Venues, honestly
shouldn’t matter worth squat, because how could it possibly get any
worse off?

Btw; be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement

software to this one small but interesting area of Venus, using your

independent expertise as to enlarge or magnify the mountainous area of
Venus that I’ve focused upon. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other
photographic software variations accomplish this automatically,
although some extra filtering and dynamic range compensations can
further improve on the end result (no direct pixel modifications
necessary).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>

> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>

> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

How much mainstream obfuscation and their applied FUD is too much?

In the wide open public free-for-all newsgroup “alt.astronomy” as
hosted by Google Groups and via numerous other news readers that
connect us to the global Usenet, it seems as though pretty much all is
fair game, as to topic/author stalk and trash others without a stitch
of any policing or karma.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/topics

Even though recent advancements in hybrid airships is literally
taking off and exceeding for all the right reasons, however being that
our Pentagon/DoD, DARPA and of course the always NASA infomercial
domination throughout Usenet/newsgroups and of their relentless
mainstream context with loads of spiffy eyecandy published in
mainstream media, as well as throughout science journals and textbooks
has always had a long standing taboo/obfuscation or naysay policy
pertaining as to airships (soft or rigid), represents a perfectly good
FUD kind of logic as to why the past and current generation of K-12s
and the public in general is so often dumbfounded and even snookered
as to their not understanding or appreciating much of anything
pertaining to the applied physics and usage of most any sort of
terrestrial airships.

It’s certainly easy enough to focus on any one of several airship
limitations, rather than to hype and exploit any of their strong
benefits and superior attributes to that of conventional aircraft.
Therefore most any uneducated moron can criticize the use of airships
as being a really bad idea, even though they know nothing about how
they work or how they can be adapted to function within almost any
environment, such as basically a submarine is a rigid airship that
just so happens to function best within water.

Of course for those few of us having investigative persistence and
deductive reasoning can always find a few private newsgroups and blogs
as created for the general public to read about and post whatever
airship related topics and replies, asking as many questions as they
like, and thereby constructively interact with others sharing similar
interest. Of those few privately created newsgroups, whereas you’ll
have to officially join and then individually access them in order
that the owners of such groups may retain control over their context,
though unfortunately the general public is typically unwilling or even
afraid to join any such private newsgroups, but otherwise seemingly
not the least bit afraid to post private and even security information
in multiple social networks, as well as multitask with others as they
drive and road-rage, nor any too afraid to allow their kids to have
most of those unsupervised street-gang and horrific warfare video
games, or to see those utmost violent of movies that are even
sufficiently unfit for most adults, then having the nerve to wonder
why their private cache of AK-47s and AR-15s stored under the bed are
getting used inappropriately by their kids and friends to essentially
play-out or act-out exactly like what their games and movies depict as
acceptable revenge and karma behaviors. Gee whiz, what could possibly
go wrong?

In other words, according to our most devout critics, we should put
the NRA in charge so that we can all pack heat and pretty much get to
stand our ground, and otherwise we can simply forget about whatever
off-world applied physics and science advancements on behalf of
exploiting anything (including our moon), other than allowing their
military industrial complex to expand along with their puppet
government of other many sock-puppet agencies to do as they please
with as little regulation or remorse as possible, because whenever bad
stuff happens it’s never any of their fault for not having policed
their own kind.

Problem is, for achieving off-world exploitations and sharing the
subsequent benefits of any significant kind to do us any good, these
mainstream oligarchs will have to start policing their own kind, and
imposing this requirement would be something entirely new for many of
these oligarchs to even comprehend.

This brings us right back around to us outsiders doing our own thing
in spite of the mainstream gauntlet that’s borg like collectively
opposing just about anything we might suggest, and it’s their job to
disparage as many K-12s and young adults as possible from even reading
about our stuff, much less acting responsibly on behalf of any of it.

Btw; be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement

software to this one small but rather interesting area of Venus, using
your independent expertise as to enlarge or magnify this mountainous

area of Venus that I’ve focused upon. Most of modern PhotoZoom and

other photographic software variations tend to accomplish this

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

How much mainstream obfuscation and their applied FUD is too much?

In the wide open public free-for-all newsgroup “alt.astronomy”, as

hosted by Google Groups and via numerous other news readers that
connect us to the global Usenet, it seems as though pretty much all is

fair game, as for accommodating our resident FUD-masters that get to
post unlimited off-topic context and otherwise hijack as much as they
like, as well as topic/author stalk and trash others without ever a
stitch of any policing, remorse or fear of karma.

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/topics

Even though recent advancements in hybrid airships is literally
taking off and exceeding for all the right reasons, however being that

our Pentagon/DoD, DARPA and of course having the always NASA

infomercial domination throughout Usenet/newsgroups and of their
relentless mainstream context with loads of spiffy eyecandy published
in mainstream media, as well as throughout science journals and

textbooks has always had a long standing FUD of taboo/obfuscation or

naysay policy pertaining as to airships (soft or rigid), represents a

perfectly good example of their FUD kind of media damage-control
logic, as to why the past and current generation of K-12s and the
public in general is so often dumbfounded and even snookered, as to

their not understanding or appreciating much of anything pertaining to
the applied physics and usage of most any sort of terrestrial
airships.

It’s certainly easy enough for most any fool to focus upon any one of
several airship limitations, rather than to hype and exploit on any
behalf of their strong benefits and superior attributes to that of
conventional aircraft or even fly-by-rocket landers that are clearly
still in R&D as well as for their being unusable in most
applications. Therefore most any uneducated moron can criticize the

use of airships as being a really bad idea, even though they know
nothing about how they work or how they can be adapted to function
within almost any environment, such as basically a submarine is

essentially a rigid airship that just so happens to function best

within water.

Of course for those few of us having investigative persistence and
deductive reasoning can always find a few private newsgroups and blogs

created for the general public to read about and post whatever airship
related topics and replies, asking as many questions as they like, and
thereby constructively interact with others sharing similar interest.
Of those few privately created newsgroups, whereas you’ll have to
officially join and then individually access them in order that the

owners of such groups may retain control over the quality of their

context, though unfortunately the general public is typically

unwilling or even deathly afraid to join any such private newsgroups,
but otherwise seemingly not the least bit afraid to post the most
private and even security information as shared within multiple social
networks, as well as having no fear of multitasking with others as
they drive and road-rage, nor having been any too afraid to allow
their kids to having most of those unsupervised street-gang and

horrific warfare video games, or to see those utmost violent of movies
that are even sufficiently unfit for most adults, then having the
nerve to wonder why their private cache of AK-47s and AR-15s stored
under the bed are getting used inappropriately by their kids and
friends to essentially play-out or act-out exactly like what their
games and movies depict as acceptable revenge and karma behaviors.
Gee whiz, what could possibly go wrong?

In other words, according to our most devout critics that have nothing
better to do, we should put the NRA in charge so that we can all pack

heat and pretty much get to stand our ground, and otherwise we can
simply forget about whatever off-world applied physics and science
advancements on behalf of exploiting anything (including our moon),
other than allowing their military industrial complex to expand along

with their puppet government plus those many other sock-puppet
agencies that get to do as they please with as little regulation or
remorse as possible, because whenever the really bad stuff happens

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 16, 11:12 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> > It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> > hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> > Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> > rock seem about right.
>
> > The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> > clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> > what gives with that?
>
> > As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> > irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> > roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> > wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> >http://translate.google.com/#
> > Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> > Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> > “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> > question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth

> Venus”,GuthVenus- Hide quoted text -

If you can not brave the notion of simply looking at this one
interesting area of Venus, then perhaps you shouldn't be looking at
anything our NASA has to offer.

From the very get-go, as of 12+ years ago, our NASA was willing to
obfuscate/exclude everything interpreted by others/outsiders about
this hot planet, so it's not just me. In fact, as policy there is no
official or unofficial channel for outsiders to investigate, interpret
or share anything about this extremely nearby planet.

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in

> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

If you simply can not brave the notion of looking at this one most

interesting area of Venus, then perhaps you shouldn't be looking at
anything our NASA has to offer.

From the very get-go, as of 12+ years ago, our NASA was willing to
obfuscate/exclude everything interpreted by others/outsiders about

whatever this hot planet had to offer, so it's not just me. In fact,
as policy it seems there is no official or even unofficial channel(s)
for outsiders to further investigate, interpret or share anything

about this extremely nearby planet.

Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software

to this one small but rather interesting area of Venus, using your
independent expertise as to enlarge or magnify this mountainous area
of Venus that I’ve focused upon. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other
photographic software variations tend to accomplish this
automatically, although some extra filtering and dynamic range

compensations of artificially applied contrast can further improve on

the end result (no direct pixel modifications necessary).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 18, 4:41 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> > It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> > hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> > Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> > rock seem about right.
>
> > The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> > clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> > what gives with that?
>
> > As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> > irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> > roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> > wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> >http://translate.google.com/#
> > Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> > Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> > “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> > question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>

> If you simply can not brave the notion of looking at this one most
> interesting area of Venus, then perhaps you shouldn't be looking at
> anything our NASA has to offer.
>
> From the very get-go, as of 12+ years ago, our NASA was willing to
> obfuscate/exclude everything interpreted by others/outsiders about
> whatever this hot planet had to offer, so it's not just me.  In fact,
> as policy it seems there is no official or even unofficial channel(s)
> for outsiders to further investigate, interpret or share anything
> about this extremely nearby planet.
>
> Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software
> to this one small but rather interesting area of Venus, using your
> independent expertise as to enlarge or magnify this mountainous area
> of Venus that I’ve focused upon.  Most of modern PhotoZoom and other
> photographic software variations tend to accomplish this
> automatically, although some extra filtering and dynamic range
> compensations of artificially applied contrast can further improve on
> the end result (no direct pixel modifications necessary).
>
> “GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus

It seems there is a strong majority of folks that consistently
dominate throughout these public Usenet/newsgroups, that think the
past is a perfectly good sort of done deal as is, that which the
public record doesn’t have to ever bother getting back into updating
or revising, nor much less republished in any of our official K-12
history books in order to reflect the whole truth and nothing but the
truth, and that all of these worse possible and otherwise despicable
bastards responsible for the most carnage and collateral damage plus
global inflation (regardless of their motivations or ulterior motives)
should be automatically pardoned on any and all of their dastardly
deeds or skulduggery that’s any older than 24 hours, because that’s
simply history that we supposedly can’t ever get a do-over.

The fact that these exact same bastards of the past have obtained and
maintained positions of public-funded authority and power regardless
of whomever we elect or appoint, is simply what the mainstream status
quo is all about, and supposedly this oligarch cabal of quo should not
be challenged regardless of the consequences of just letting these
bastards and their oligarch genetic bloodline of replacements off the
hook.

In other words, global proxy wars and their multiple consequences, all
of which directly and indirectly benefit oligarchs that are
extensively comprised of white Semites or pretend-Atheists that act/
react exactly the same as, is simply destine to happen regardless of
whomever we elect or appoint because, global resources and especially
the necessary energy demand is being intentionally kept as deficient
and otherwise as speculated out to the highest bidder (which by the
way is insider traded and thus never of any constructive or collective
benefit to most of us stuck in the lower 99.9% caste that always get
to pay for everything in more ways than mere hard earned loot).

Perhaps this is why the extremely nearby planet Venus remains such a
taboo or nondisclosure thing, is that it represents as much of a
threat to the oligarchs as does any notions of exploiting our moon.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus

[Brad Guth]

The weird geophysics of the Venus terrain represents the one and only
planet with such extremely odd surface geometries that look as though
having been artificially created and otherwise seemingly organized in
a perfectly rational community of infrastructure (with respect to the
area of GuthVenus). At least thus far, not a soul within our DARPA,
NASA or any other affiliated, government appointed or that of any
contracted private research agency, or even that of any subgroup team
of supposed scientific interpretive expertise has given us comparative
images or mapping of any other planet or moon depicting anything
remotely similar, whereas at the very least I’m suggesting that Venus
has truly special complex forms of geophysics like none other.

The interpretation of the Magellan radar obtained composite and/or its
derivative image that our NASA and team Magellan have to offer isn’t
about natural terrain being somehow magically converted into
artificial looking items by way of some special proprietary kind of
software, so much as it’s about such a highly reliable imaging method
simply not being capable of transforming or otherwise morphing those
random pixels of raw mountainous terrain into such nifty geometrics
and of otherwise unified shapes depicting rational infrastructure, at
least not without a great deal of highly unusual happenstance as
having never before or anywhere elsewhere having been accomplished.
This is not to say that an active geology planet like Venus is not a
one of a kind highly unusual planet where all sorts of its natural
geology couldn’t be one for the books, except that other equally
complex terrain of Venus as well as that of all other planets and
moons as equally offering the same or even more so mountainous and
eroded areas, as such did not manage to become depicted as anything
other than rugged terrain looking every bit as natural as anyone
(including myself) would expect, given the same resolution and
downward perspective FOV angle(43 degrees) that offers us nearly a 3D
look-see.

In other words, for mapping a planet from a 75 meter/pixel source of
radar imaged pixels, you can’t get a much better nor more truthful
imaging technology from a polar orbiting mission, other than from a
new and improved mapping mission that honestly shouldn’t have any
problems achieving a 2.5 meter/pixel format.

Venus SO2 isn’t messing around, though mostly sequestered within and
otherwise under those robust and acidic clouds, whereas it seems to
have briefly come back into full force and for nearly a year reaching
a saturation of 400 ppbv as a heavy element of 2.63 kg/m3 showing up
within its upper atmosphere.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2242164/Could-volcanoes-Venus-spewing-sulphur-dioxide-atmosphere.html
“Venus is covered in hundreds of volcanoes, but whether they remain
active today is much debated, providing an important scientific goal
for researchers studying the planet.
The planet's thick atmosphere contains over a million times more
sulphur dioxide as Earth's. On our own planet almost all the pungent,
toxic gas is generated by volcanic activity.”

“Most of the sulphur dioxide on Venus is hidden below the planet’s
dense upper cloud deck, because the gas is readily destroyed by
sunlight. That means any sulphur dioxide detected in Venus’ upper
atmosphere above the cloud deck must have been recently supplied from
below.”

It is highly unlikely that Venus geology has been dormant or otherwise
incapable of geothermal venting from thousands of active points of
volcanism and gas vents, many of which contributing volcanic mud/lava
flows along with those enormous volumes of hot SO2, CO2 plus always CO
along with a little bit of H2O, O2 and N2, plus there’s always the
upwelling and spewing of considerable raw upwelling and vented heat
that’s getting pumped into that cloud insulated environment. Now
unless the gravity of our sun varies, there’s hardy any tidal issues
other than the 19 month cycle of passing within 110 LD of us, or
anything else modulating the extremely slow rotation of the thin crust
of Venus, and it’ll take one hell of a violent eruption in order to
spew its SO2 contents above the 65 km altitude of those dense cloud
tops, but that seems to be the case of what dozens of extremely active
volcanic events of an immature planet could manage. Of course you
can’t have an acidic atmospheric or nasty cloud environment without
water, because without H2O is where all you have left to work with is
that of an inert kind of harmless crystal dry environment, and to the
best of all the available science about Venus is telling us that those
thick and robust clouds of considerable mass are in fact not made of
crystal dry dust particles.

Venus actually gets much colder than anywhere above Earth:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121002185050.htm
Unlike our NASA that likes to button everything up as soon as
possible and call it good, whereas team ESA just keeps plugging along
at a fraction the cost, and most every time they seem to deliver, like
this time “-175ºC in the atmosphere 125 km above the planet's
surface”. Now that’s cold, an especially weird cryosphere considering
that its half illuminated terminator is always kept so much brighter
than here on Earth, and the night-side of Venus is quite naturally
even worse off.
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Venus_Express/index.html
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/area/index.cfm?fareaid=64
http://www.esa.int/images/Picture6_H.jpg
http://www.esa.int/images/Picture5_H.jpg
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Venus_Express/SEMILCERI7H_1.html#subhead1
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Venus_Express/SEM5A373R8F_1.html#subhead1
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Venus_Express/SEMANY808BE_0.html
“a new analysis based on five years of observations using ESA’s
Venus Express, scientists have uncovered a very chilly layer at
temperatures of around –175ºC in the atmosphere 125 km above the
planet’s surface.”

Venus isn’t even a dry and dusty kind of forbidden place as once
thought. At least those complex clouds and directly blow are not the
sort of baked deserts which our NASA teams of supposed expertise have
always had to say.
http://www.optcorp.com/edu/articleDetailEDU.aspx?aid=114
http://www.tecca.com/news/2012/10/03/venus-atmosphere-cold-layer/
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Venus-May-Have-a-Snowy-Atmosphere-295945.shtml

The saturation of surface h2o isn’t all that impressive at something
less than 50 ppm (25 ppm at 35 km), however at such heat, pressure and
atmospheric density is where that actually amounts to a great deal of
water vapor, whereas geothermal vents of superheated vapors could be
saturated well above 1000 ppm(0.1%).

There’s actually a lot of thermal convection and its unavoidable IR
radiation taking place, most extreme differentials found at those
polar vortex issues. The ESA Venus EXPRESS is not all that bad of
science considering its minimal cost and never having its primary PFS
instrument functional.

Once again, it seems our NASA has been holding out on us. In other
words, besides there not having a Magellan 2.0 to offer, I got nothing
new to report about any of that need-to-know policy of our government
agencies so often caught obfuscating as much as they can muster in
order to lead us on and at the same time prevent outsiders from
advancing any alternative interpretations.

The best radar imaging resolution of asteroid “2007 PA8 was about
3.75 meters per pixel” obtained at the distance of 17 LD or 6.5e6 km,
via our “NASA's 230-foot-wide (70-meter) Deep Space Network antenna at
Goldstone, Calif.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Space_Network
Translating that kind of radar imaging performance into a better look-
see at Venus when it’s within 100 LD is capable of delivering roughly
24 meters per pixel, or three times as good as our previous Magellan
mission accomplished, and yet upon several opportunities that happen
every 19 months, we the public that always get to pay for everything
have seen absolutely nothing from our NASA teams of wizards pertaining
to any new radar imaging of Venus.

Of course by now a truly new and greatly improved Magellan 2.0 mission
could probably out-perform our DSN capability by yet another
magnitude, by accomplishing 2.5 m/pixel resolution.

The double standards of deductive image interpreting (aka
observationology) depends on which side (naysay or prosay) you happen
to be stuck on, and apparently not otherwise based upon the easily
replicated science and physics that the rest of us as outsiders get to
work with. So, perhaps this time you’ll get to pick and decide for
yourself.

How can the extremely nearby planet Venus have always been so
invisible (as having been excluded from each and every frame of view
obtained from the surface and from orbit) to those of our NASA/Apollo
era? (especially odd on two of those Apollo missions when Venus was
passing so nearby, and their having nothing but the very best of Kodak
film, finest cameras and optics with no atmospheric filtering or
distortions to contend with). In other words, how can such a nearby
hot and active geology planet like Venus have become so media and K-12
taboo/nondisclosure rated?

Somehow the SAR imaging derived from our Magellan mission that’s
offering us such a quality derivative/composite of using 36 radar
looks or confirming scans per pixel, is simply never good enough nor
trustworthy enough imaging for deductively interpreting anything, and
yet the supposed expertise of what our NASA considers exceptionally
good science and thereby gives us their certified interpretation of
this hot terrain by allowing the use of interpreting even smaller
resolution items on behalf of supporting their own process of image
interpreting, and then having published their findings along with
loads of artificially colorized eyecandy as further hype for
supporting only their own conclusions, is somehow totally mainstream
acceptable policy that can’t ever be revised, challenged nor much less
refuted.

Thumbnail images of Venus, including mgn_c115s095_1.gif (225 m/
pixel)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
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
“Guth Venus”, at 1:1, then 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5630418595926178146
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5629579402364691314

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus
“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in

> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

[Brad Guth]

>  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2242164/Could-volcanoe...

>  http://news.softpedia.com/news/Venus-May-Have-a-Snowy-Atmosphere-2959...

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>
It's as though our nearsighted, mineral colorblind and even braille
FUD-masters have no need of actually observing anything, much less
interpreting squat about Venus offering us anything but perfectly
natural geology randomness. I suppose any such radar derivative or
subsequent composite image of Earth obtained from a similar radar
satellite imaging resolution, and limited as to 36 confirming looks or
scans per pixel, would give us the very same poor resolution
impression that our planet had nothing all that intelligent worthy or
that of any rational infrastructure to offer.

Since I’m the initial one that’s a persistent outsider, proposing
certain patterns of geology on Venus are simply more than a little bit
unusual, and that I’ve made efforts at having suggested as to what I
can deductively interpret those patterns of geometries could
conceivably represent, whereas you most certainly do not have to
believe little old me any more so than accepting whatever your parents
and grandparents ever told you about history, especially when the only
history that ever counts is your K-12 mainstream indoctrinated
version, that’s in most instances almost entirely derived from the
victors interpretation.

However, by way of just allowing your own eyes and that supposedly
intelligent brain of yours that should be capable of seeing and
deductively interpreting for itself, as to whatever should or
shouldn’t exist as natural or artificial, and at the very least
acknowledging that in fact such odd pixel patterns of this weird
terrain do exist on a very nearby planet, would at least be an honest
start as to interpreting exactly what those extremely complex
geophysical patterns could represent, as only based upon whatever you
will get to decide for yourself, that is unless you’d rather play it
failsafe by only accepting whatever your government agencies and their
mostly public funded brown-nosed minions have to say. Of course the
vast majority of Americans would much rather follow than lead, so
understandably I can go along with appreciating that sort of failsafe
mindset.

At the very least, the weird surface geophysics of Venus represents
the one and only planet with such odd surface geometries that so
happen to look as though having been artificially created and as

seemingly organized in a perfectly rational community of

infrastructure. Unfortunately, not a soul within our DARPA, NASA or
any other government appointed or private research agency, nor even
that of any subgroup of supposed image interpreting expertise has ever
bothered to have given us any comparative images or surface mapping of
any other planet or moon that’s depicting anything remotely similar,
at the very least suggesting that Venus has developed truly special
geophysics like none other.

If this is too much to deal with, then just sit back and enjoy the
ride that Carl Sagan only started to develop the vast cosmos for us.
Consider that the second stop after having exploited our moon, is
going to be our outreach to the extremely nearby planet Venus
(assuming there’s still a viable Earth to outreach from).

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus
“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

[Brad Guth]

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Mention anything about exploiting the extremely nearby planet Venus or
the use of any composite rigid airships, lo and behold everything
comes down to a screeching halt.

[Brad Guth]

Here’s another link as to uncovering the darker side of past infowars,
as brought to our attention by the investigative expertise of William
Mook that’s currently residing in New Zeeland, in demonstrating that
he still has a little soft spot for those of us that can’t quite
believe how systematically snookered and dumbfounded we have been for
decades, as to being unaware of who is really in charge and of what
has really been going on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj2qrl6Q2rk
Of course it’s another wordy story of revised history, in that at
least this time isn’t derived from the victors, and it’s a bit time
consuming because of this version of history having to named names,
dates, places and disclose a fairly complex matrix of associations, in
another effort to unravel a highly complex web of deceptions.

Mind you, as cloak and dagger worthy of double-triple intrigue agendas
have become, whereas we get to learn that we have essentially a puppet
government of rogue agencies being run by our Pentagon and the likes
of diehard Nazis of the highest authority under Hitler, given the
green flag and free reign for doing all sorts of collaborative things
that only the most oligarch satanic devil himself could appreciate.
Secondly, we need to appreciate that if ETs have mastered any
survivable level of space travel or even as having accomplished
interactive probe deployments, they sure as hell wouldn’t have any
insurmountable problems whatsoever dealing with exploiting our moon or
that of the extremely nearby planet Venus, not to mention their
fooling around with Earth. By the very nature of space travel
expertise and its required technology of advanced physics, all by
itself more than demonstrates the capability of dealing with naked
moons or anything from the most icy cold to extremely hot planets.

As long as the gravity and temperatures are not too extreme, and there
is a local resource of energy plus other element resources to exploit,
should represent that any space travel capability and its applied
physics should be more than sufficient as to dealing with whatever
moon or planet extremes have to offer. Of course, going extensively
underground is providing a nearly ideal failsafe solution for
exploiting our moon, and as for a hot planet like Venus simply needs a
degree of common sense applied, as to using the appropriate materials
and technology for logically establishing whatever community of
surface infrastructure to suit.

Of course I’ve been pointing this out for more than a decade, and
unfortunately having rum myself smack into any number of brick walls
as having been erected and fortified by the mainstream status-quo that
doesn’t want any outsiders informing them or anyone else about a damn
thing.

Somehow the SAR imaging derived from our Magellan mission that’s
offering us such a quality derivative/composite of using 36 radar
looks or confirming scans per pixel, is simply never good enough nor
trustworthy enough imaging for deductively interpreting anything, and
yet the supposed expertise of what our NASA considers exceptionally
good science and thereby gives us their certified interpretation of

this hot terrain by allowing others the use of interpreting even

smaller resolution items on behalf of supporting their own process of

image interpreting, and then having extensively published their

findings along with loads of artificially colorized eyecandy as
further hype for supporting only their own conclusions, is somehow
totally mainstream acceptable policy that can’t ever be revised,
challenged nor much less refuted.

Perhaps you can have a look-see for yourself, and report back.

Thumbnail images of Venus, including mgn_c115s095_1.gif (225 m/pixel)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
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

“Guth Venus”, at 1:1, then 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5630418595926178146
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5629579402364691314

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus
“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in

> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

[Brad Guth]

Here’s another link as to uncovering the darker side of past infowars,
as brought to our attention by the investigative expertise of William

Mook that’s currently residing in New Zeeland, demonstrating that he

still has a little soft spot for those of us that can’t quite believe
how systematically snookered and dumbfounded we have been for decades,
as to being unaware of who is really in charge and of what has really
been going on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj2qrl6Q2rk
Of course it’s another wordy story of revised history, in that at
least this time isn’t derived from the victors, and it’s a bit time

consuming because of this version of history as having to name names,
dates, places and disclose a fairly complex matrix of extremely weird
though real associations, in another effort to unravel a highly
complex web of government and agency deceptions.

Mind you, as cloak and dagger worthy of double-triple intrigue agendas

have become, whereas we get to learn once again that we have
essentially a puppet government (regardless of whomever we elect or
appoint) of rogue agencies being run by our Pentagon and the likes of
diehard Nazis obtained from the highest authority under Hitler, as
having been given the green flag and free reign for doing all sorts of
collaborative things behind closed doors that only the most oligarch
satanic devil himself could appreciate. Secondly, we need to also

appreciate that if ETs have mastered any survivable level of space
travel or even as having accomplished interactive probe deployments,
they sure as hell wouldn’t have any insurmountable problems whatsoever
dealing with exploiting our moon or that of the extremely nearby
planet Venus, not to mention their fooling around with Earth. By the
very nature of space travel expertise and its required technology of
advanced physics, all by itself more than demonstrates the capability
of dealing with naked moons or anything from the most icy cold to
extremely hot planets.

As long as the gravity and temperatures are not too extreme, and there
is a local resource of energy plus other element resources to exploit,
should represent that any space travel capability and its applied
physics should be more than sufficient as to dealing with whatever
moon or planet extremes have to offer. Of course, going extensively
underground is providing a nearly ideal failsafe solution for
exploiting our moon, and as for a hot planet like Venus simply needs a

degree of common sense applied along with existing technology, as to
using the appropriate materials and advanced technology for logically

establishing whatever community of surface infrastructure to suit.

Of course I’ve been pointing this observation out for more than a

[Brad Guth]

“The Secret Space Program” as authored by Peter Levenda:
Apparently the bogus church of Scientology has nothing on the truly
bogus one that our black ops run government of pagan oligarchs had
created for cloaking their very own skulduggery. It seems that using
a bogus religion allowed those cloaked within to act/react exactly
like rogue Zionists Nazis, whereas their own cult/cabal formulated
church in fact catered to the will and whim of such SS Nazis obtained
via operation “Paperclip”, which of course also didn’t have to believe
in hell nor having to follow the teachings of Jesus Christ, because
that simply wasn’t within their private mission to begin with. Over
the years I’ve pointed out how insiders of government (regardless of
whomever we elect or appoint) have always made use of the special
privileges of mainstream religion in order to cloak their true
intentions and to cover the tracks of their deeds, and now there’s
collaborative investigative efforts by others as having uncovered
objective documentation as to that being the case.

Here’s yet another link as to uncovering the darker side of past

infowars, as brought to our attention by the investigative expertise
of William Mook that’s currently residing in New Zeeland,
demonstrating that he still has a little soft spot for those of us
that can’t quite believe how systematically snookered and dumbfounded
we have been for decades, as to being unaware of who is really in
charge and of what has really been going on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj2qrl6Q2rk
Of course it’s another wordy story of revised history, in that at

least this time is not derived from the victors, and as such it’s a
bit time consuming because of this revised version of history as

having to name names, dates, places and disclose a fairly complex

matrix of extremely weird though perfectly real associations, in

another effort to unravel a highly complex web of government and

agency deceptions, that which JFK had those unfortunate notions of
weeding out.

Mind you, as cloak and dagger worthy of double-triple intrigue agendas

have become, whereas we get to learn once again that our republic has

essentially a puppet government (regardless of whomever we elect or

appoint), of rogue agencies being run by our Pentagon and the likes of
diehard SS Nazis obtained from the highest authority under Hitler, as

having been given the green flag and free reign for doing all sorts of
collaborative things behind closed doors that only the most oligarch

satanic devil himself could appreciate, by way of their Zionist
Catholic collaborative methodology giving these folks their Holy Mafia
like powers and authority that remains superior to nearly anything we
can elect or appoint.

This published video that’s attempting to uncover those responsible
for some of the most tragic and horrific times in history, that have
taken the most resources and diverted our best talent and expertise in
order to suit their own goals, is just another one of many independent
investigative efforts that have essentially come to the same
conclusions.

Secondly, we need to also appreciate that if ETs have mastered any

survivable level of extended space travel or even as having
accomplished interactive probe deployments, whereas they sure as hell

wouldn’t have any insurmountable problems whatsoever dealing with
exploiting our moon or that of the extremely nearby planet Venus, not
to mention their fooling around with Earth. By the very nature of
space travel expertise and its required technology of advanced
physics, all by itself more than demonstrates the capability of
dealing with naked moons or anything from the most icy cold to

extremely hot planets, and especially attentive of exploiting those
with the most easily obtained resources such as what a planet like
Venus has to offer.

As long as the gravity isn’t too great and temperatures are not too
extreme, and there are local resources of energy plus valuable raw
element resources to exploit, should represent of any space travel

capability and its applied physics should be more than sufficient as
to dealing with whatever moon or planet extremes have to offer. Of

course, by way of going extensively underground is providing a nearly
ideal failsafe solution for exploiting our moon, and as for dealing
with a hot planet like Venus simply needs a degree of common sense

applied along with existing technology, as to using the appropriate
materials and advanced technology for logically establishing whatever
community of surface infrastructure to suit.

Of course I’ve been pointing this observation out for more than a
decade, and unfortunately having rum myself smack into any number of
brick walls as having been erected and fortified by the mainstream

oligarch status-quo that doesn’t want any outsiders informing them or

anyone else about a damn thing.

Somehow the highly trustworthy SAR imaging derived from our Magellan

mission that’s offering us such a quality derivative/composite of
using 36 radar looks or confirming scans per pixel, is simply never
good enough nor trustworthy enough imaging for deductively
interpreting anything, and yet the supposed expertise of what our NASA
considers exceptionally good science and thereby gives us their

certified interpretation of this hot terrain, by allowing others the
freedom of interpreting even smaller resolution items on behalf of
supporting their own subjective process of image interpreting, and

then having extensively published their findings along with loads of
artificially colorized eyecandy as further hype for supporting only
their own conclusions, is somehow totally mainstream acceptable policy
that can’t ever be revised, challenged nor much less refuted.

Perhaps you can have an independent look-see for yourself, and report
back as to sharing whatever your own deductive image interpretive form
of observationology has to offer.

[Brad Guth]

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

????
It seems there has always been a strong majority of folks that

consistently dominate throughout these public Usenet/newsgroups, that

think the past is always a perfectly good sort of done deal as is,

that which the public record doesn’t have to ever bother getting back
into updating or revising, nor much less republished in any of our
official K-12 history books in order to reflect the whole truth and
nothing but the truth, and that all of these worse possible and
otherwise despicable bastards responsible for the most carnage and
collateral damage plus global inflation (regardless of their
motivations or ulterior motives) should be automatically pardoned on

behalf of any and all of their dastardly deeds or skulduggery that’s

any older than 24 hours, because that’s simply history that we
supposedly can’t ever get a do-over.

The fact that these exact same bastards of the past have obtained and
maintained positions of public-funded authority and power regardless
of whomever we elect or appoint, is simply what the mainstream status
quo is all about, and supposedly this oligarch cabal of quo should not
be challenged regardless of the consequences of just letting these
bastards and their oligarch genetic bloodline of replacements off the
hook.

In other words, global proxy wars and their multiple consequences, all

of which directly and indirectly benefit the military industrial
complex that’s owned by these same oligarchs that are extensively
comprised of white Semites or pretend-Atheists that act/react exactly
the same as, is simply destine to happen again regardless of whomever

we elect or appoint because, global resources and especially the
necessary energy demand is being intentionally kept as deficient and
otherwise as speculated out to the highest bidder (which by the way is
insider traded and thus never of any constructive or collective

benefit to most the vast majority of us stuck in the lower 99.9% caste
that always get to pay for everything, in more ways than mere hard
earned loot).

In a few other words; please clarify which side are you on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj2qrl6Q2rk

Perhaps this is why the extremely nearby planet Venus remains as such
an ongoing taboo or nondisclosure thing, is that it represents as much
of a threat to the oligarchs as does any notions of independents
exploiting our moon or even utilizing our moon as a perfectly viable
kind of geoengineered do-everything solution to GW+AGW.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus
“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

[Brad Guth]

Is Venus every bit as truly insurmountable as we’ve been mainstream
taught, or rather indoctrinated to believe?

Even though it passes extremely nearby (within as near as 100 LD or
38.2e6 km) every 19 months, nevertheless it is definitely placed on
most every NO-FLY list as the utmost taboo of places for accommodating
any of our naked Goldilocks. Perhaps it’s not exactly a Goldilocks
friendly kind of Eden, only because it’s certainly quite physically
hot and seriously pressurized at the surface, and otherwise because of
those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and all of the
associated hot bedrock terrain seem as though having been naturally
formed as looking about right, even as though by some having
speculated that Venus once had a very large and massive moon helping
that complex geology happen.

The atmosphere of Venus is considered by most as acidic and thereby
toxic to us (of course most of our very own Goldilocks planet of Eden
is covered by an enormous amount of toxic water which we also can’t
survive within, not to mention other extremes of off-limit terrain
elevations and other vast areas offering too much heat, cold, dry, wet
and/or icy conditions being as equally off-limits for accommodating
any naked Goldilocks without applied physics and using a reasonably
good amount of scientifically proven survival expertise), but
otherwise back on Venus and well above them thick, acidic and even
cryogenic icy clouds of Venus, and within its solar illuminated
terminator zone is where it manages to get way colder than anywhere
here or even far above Earth, and so what gives with that and not to
mention those terrific polar vortices?

On Earth are highly intelligent forms of complex life that have
already more than tenfold exceeded the human evolutionary era, and
many of these will likely exist long after humans have all but
expired, as well as so many aquatic species as having adapted to those
extreme pressure and thermal differentials of our oceans should exist
long after us humans have gone extinct. So why is it always so
mainstream difficult to accept that some evolutionary adaptations as
to surviving the Venus environment is insurmountable?

As to its geothermally and rather dynamically active surface of
volcanic, geothermal upwelling and subsequent venting that’s
contributing to its weather and liquefied lava and bedrock erosion
formed canyons, is where anything that’s otherwise interpreted as out
of place or geometrically unified upon its hot crust and situated
within its mountainous geology, as placed or having been constructed
upon its mostly roasted to death terrain, as surrounded by all of that
erosion, is perhaps where anything even a wee bit unnatural or
unexpected needs to be closely inspected?

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus

“GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in

[Brad Guth]

To suggest that our government and religious leaders (especially of
the bogus ones established in order to suit the ongoing FUD of their
Skull and Bones ulterior motives) haven’t always been forthcoming, as
to telling us the whole truth and nothing but the truth, is perhaps
asking a bit too much, because who wants to admit being snookered.

“The Secret Space Program” as authored by Peter Levenda:

Is not so much about space as it is about what goes on behind closed
doors, whereas apparently the bogus church of Scientology has nothing

on the truly bogus one that our black ops run government of pagan
oligarchs had created for cloaking their very own skulduggery. It
seems that using a bogus religion allowed those cloaked within to act/

react exactly like rogue Zionists Nazis, whereas their very own cult/

cabal formulated church in fact catered to the will and whim of such
SS Nazis obtained via operation “Paperclip”, which of course also
didn’t have to believe in hell nor having to follow the teachings of

Jesus Christ (hard to get any more Semite than that), because that
simply wasn’t within their mission to begin with. Over the years

I’ve pointed out how insiders of government (regardless of whomever we
elect or appoint) have always made use of the special privileges of
mainstream religion in order to cloak their true intentions and to
cover the tracks of their deeds, and now there’s collaborative
investigative efforts by others as having uncovered objective
documentation as to that being the case.

Here’s yet another link as to uncovering the darker side of past
infowars, as brought to our attention by the investigative expertise
of William Mook that’s currently residing in New Zeeland,
demonstrating that he still has a little soft spot for those of us
that can’t quite believe how systematically snookered and dumbfounded
we have been for decades, as to being unaware of who is really in
charge and of what has really been going on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj2qrl6Q2rk
Of course it’s another wordy story of revised history, in that at
least this time is not derived from the victors, and as such it’s a
bit time consuming because of this revised version of history as
having to name names, dates, places and disclose a fairly complex
matrix of extremely weird though perfectly real associations, in

another effort to unravel a highly complex web of government agency
and oligarch deceptions, that which JFK had those unfortunate notions

of weeding out.

Mind you, as cloak and dagger worthy of double-triple intrigue agendas
have become, whereas we get to learn once again that our republic has
essentially a puppet government (regardless of whomever we elect or

appoint), of rogue agencies being financed by the Rothschilds and
otherwise run by the likes of our Pentagon and even those diehard SS

Nazis obtained from the highest authority under Hitler, as having been
given the green flag and free reign for doing all sorts of
collaborative things behind closed doors that only the most oligarch
satanic devil himself could appreciate, by way of their Zionist
Catholic collaborative methodology giving these folks their Holy Mafia
like powers and authority that remains superior to nearly anything we
can elect or appoint.

This somewhat recently published documentation and its video that’s

attempting to uncover those responsible for some of the most tragic
and horrific times in history, that have taken the most resources and
diverted our best talent and expertise in order to suit their own

goals, is just another one of many independent investigative published

efforts that have essentially come to the same conclusions.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans refuse to believe in
such dastardly deeds (regardless of the objective evidence),
especially if perpetrated by our government officials and those of
their faith-based partners in crimes against humanity, as I like to
put it.

Secondly, we need to also appreciate that if ETs have mastered any
survivable level of extended space travel or even as having
accomplished interactive probe deployments, whereas they sure as hell
wouldn’t have any insurmountable problems whatsoever dealing with
exploiting our moon or that of the extremely nearby planet Venus, not
to mention their fooling around with Earth. By the very nature of
space travel expertise and its required technology of advanced
physics, all by itself more than demonstrates the capability of
dealing with naked moons or anything from the most icy cold to
extremely hot planets, and especially attentive of exploiting those
with the most easily obtained resources such as what a planet like
Venus has to offer.

As long as the gravity isn’t too wild and temperatures are not too

extreme, and there are local resources of energy plus valuable raw

element resources to exploit, by rights should represent of any space
travel capability and its applied physics as being more than

sufficient as to dealing with whatever moon or planet extremes have to
offer. Of course, by way of going extensively underground is
providing a nearly ideal failsafe solution for exploiting our moon

(because then it doesn’t matter how nasty or lethal it is outside on
the naked surface), and as for dealing with a hot planet like Venus

simply needs a degree of common sense applied along with existing
technology, as to using the appropriate materials and advanced
technology for logically establishing whatever community of surface
infrastructure to suit.

Of course I’ve been pointing out this observation for more than a

decade, and unfortunately having rum myself smack into any number of
brick walls as having been erected and fortified by the mainstream
oligarch status-quo that doesn’t want any outsiders informing them or

anyone else about a damn thing. In other words, I’ve hit a very
sensitive status-quo nerve.

Somehow the highly trustworthy SAR imaging derived from our Magellan
mission that’s offering us such a quality derivative/composite of
using 36 radar looks or confirming scans per pixel, is simply never
good enough nor trustworthy enough imaging for deductively
interpreting anything, and yet the supposed expertise of what our NASA
considers exceptionally good science and thereby gives us their
certified interpretation of this hot terrain, by allowing others the
freedom of interpreting even smaller resolution items on behalf of
supporting their own subjective process of image interpreting, and
then having extensively published their findings along with loads of
artificially colorized eyecandy as further hype for supporting only
their own conclusions, is somehow totally mainstream acceptable policy
that can’t ever be revised, challenged nor much less refuted.

Perhaps in spite of whatever others have been telling us of what and
how to think, you can still have an independent look-see for yourself,

and report back as to sharing whatever your own deductive image

interpretive form of observationology has to offer. The vast majority
of these following images are not depicting of anything all that
unexpected, however a small portion of the “mgn_c115s095_1.gif” should
be quite interesting.

Thumbnail images of Venus, including mgn_c115s095_1.gif (225 m/pixel)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
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

“Guth Venus”, at 1:1, then 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5630418595926178146
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5629579402364691314

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

[Brad Guth]

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

Where's the official expertise when we need it?

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 21, 1:29 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

Where's the official expertise of image interpreting, when we need it?

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its

> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?

>
> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>

> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

We already have plutonium 238 and 239 coming out of our ears, and
there’s lots more of it on the way that’s also 100% public/consumer
funded as is. In other words, all nuclear fuel and any secondary
products such as its plutonium is 100% public owned, as in bought and
paid for several times over.

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-797
2000~2400 tonnes/year of spent reactor fuel that’s hosting 1.25%~2%
plutonium (Pu238) is becoming quite an issue because of its residual
heat and spendy complications of extracting it from our spent reactor
cores.

http://www.usnuclearenergy.org/PDF_Library/_GE_Hitachi%20_advanced_Recycling_Center_GNEP.pdf
“Today, in the US there are approximately 100 nuclear power reactors
in operation. Assuming that they each produce 20 tons of SNF a year
for 60 years of operation, then the current fleet will produce 120,000
tons of SNF.”

Conventional reactors consume roughly 210 tonnes of uranium fuel per
GW/year, so there’s obviously a need of recycling that fuel. Actually
the uranium fuel is still worthy of usable fission if it wasn’t for
the buildup of undesirable elements and the fatigue to the containment
fuel rods or tubes. Of course the thorium alternative is not only
failsafe, but it’s also extremely compact and it’s not going to be 1%
the all-inclusive reactor source-energy cost and even along with hefty
DOE fees or an energy tax, it’s not going to exceed 10% the end-use
cost of what conventional reactor produced energy represents.

At .5 watts/gram or 500 kw/tonne of Pu238 represents a lot of wasted
energy within spent reactor fuel that’s already at considerable volume
and accumulating tonnage within just our country, plus we’re busy
creating 2000+ tonnes/year (that’s not even including issues of DoD
spent nuclear fuel from numerous research and secret reactors that
remain as nondisclosure and thus unaccounted for), of which we’re
adding this 30~35 tonnes/yr of Pu238 derived from just our commercial
reactors isn’t exactly helping, because it’s a dirty form of Pu238
that’s not easily extracted.

I would suspect that our all-inclusive SNF and breeder reactor derived
Pu238 (including DoD reactors might give us 2400 tonnes/year to
extract those elements of plutonium 238 and 239 as well as a few other
nasty but useful elements) is perhaps closer to or perhaps exceeding
36 tonnes/year of Pu238 in addition to creating the weapons grade
Pu239 element (roughly .8% of SNF, or roughly half as much as Pu238).
This heavy Pu239 element is quite nifty in many ways other than its
use in nuclear weapons, though mostly left to rot within SNF, its
hoarding by our military industrial complex that’s run extensively by
oligarchs (some of which being ZNRs as having a free “paperclip”
ticket to ride) and its always secretive closed-door nature that has
most Americans and others around the world scared to death of such
nuclear elements, has been intent upon keeping those need-to-know lids
on tight, and otherwise making us pay dearly for its storage and
security that’s simply way overkill and spendy as hell.

Spent nuclear fuel is not actually a very good or much less offering a
clean method of obtaining Pu238 and Pu239, because processing it out
of conventional SNF is simply considered as a risky and spendy process
plus logistics and those way overkill security issues, although a MOX
kind of recycled fuel reuse is still worth doing because of our
extravagant inflated consumer cost of energy is what always gets to
pay dearly for it, as well as responsible for having artificially kept
the value of coal and other hydrocarbon fuels at the highest market
price. In other words, a remix of conventional old uranium fuel along
with a uniform 5~9% mix of plutonium blended with SNF is simply
another way of keeping the ever increasing inventory of SNF and the
ever increasing stockpiles of its plutonium elements safely stored
within operational reactors, thereby reactors using MOX should
continue to benefit by safely extracting thermal energy from the mix,
instead of their having to entirely replace a given load of SNF with
new load uranium oxide, and thereby somewhat reducing their holding-
pond inventory, or at least putting off the inevitable issue of what
future generations are going to be stuck with an even worse situation
once most all of our cooling ponds are chock full of SNF that’s
saturated with nearly 10% Pu238 and possibly 5% Pu239 along with a
little active kicker of Pu240 and 241 just to keep this extra hot MOX-
SNF unstable and the next hundred generations of snookered Americans
on their toes. Either way it’s spendy, although for the moment of our
reutilizing SNF as repacked with an extra dose of Pu238 is a bit more
desirable than having to keep storing it elsewhere and hoping for the
best.

Too bad that thorium(Th232) fuel was not utilized instead of uranium
from the very get-go, although unfortunately them reusable secondary
elements and especially those of any weapons grade could not be
created (at least not to accomplish any viable WMD or much less
suitable or capable of any significant toxic accident or possible
terrorist act contaminating our environment) unlike what spent uranium
fuel has to offer itself as a nearly ideal weapons grade inventory of
Pu239. Actually the used uranium fuel isn’t so much spent as
contaminated with plutonium that creates those uneven and thus
undesirable hot spots that damage the rods, and otherwise these metal
rods containing mostly uranium as having deteriorated from their usage
of generating superheated steam is what reduces their usable failsafe
life as power reactor fuel rods that have to safely contain and
sustain a centerline core temperature as great as 4000 F. Smarter
nations have put together low temperature reactors for their
industrial and domestic community hot water supply, thus creating
truly clean energy that’s incapable of wasting hardly any of that
extremely long-term nuclear heat, and thereby also creating not 10% as
much SNF.

Of course any conventional power reactor regardless of its fuel can
still have a horrific steam explosion and thereby cause all sorts of
nasty collateral damage issues, including irreversible damage to its
nuclear fuel rods. The absolute stupidity of reactor hydrogen and
helium gas containment simply adds further insult to injury. However,
if those fuel rods for its steam generator were loaded only with
thorium and salt, the failsafe shutdown or even worse case of
uncontrolled meltdown becomes practically a non issue.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Molten_salt_reactor

1 GW breeder reactor can also be specifically configured to produce 15
kg/year of clean Pu238 in addition to its annual SNF production of
roughly providing 300~500 kg/year of unavoidably dirty plutonium
that’s a bit tricky and thus spendy to extract. So, for the most part
there’s no apparent shortage of Pu238, and these mostly cooling-pool
stored fuel rods containing their SNF with their relatively small
percentage of Pu238 are not nearly as often messed with because it’s
simply too much bother that only our future generations will get to
deal with and pay dearly for, perhaps because they’ll be too stupid
and otherwise dumbfounded past the point of no return.

Of course the consumer end-use cost of such artificially spendy
electrical energy is already what pays for all of this clean and dirty
plutonium. If all goes according to the oligarch plan, future
generations will eventually get to pay an artificially inflated cost
of $1/kwhr, but since they can’t even accomplish basic math is why
they will not realize how totally screwed they are.

A little more good news bad news (aka education):
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765620752/Utah-nuclear-power-risks-no-big-deal.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejCQrOTE-XA&feature=youtu.be
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj2qrl6Q2rk

Keeping us and every K-12 generation to come as least informed and
thus easily snookered or simply as dumbfounded and scared to death of
this nuclear stuff is what creates and sustains a energy mafia like
cabal of highly paid oligarchs kept in authority over us, that get to
be always in charge regardless of whomever we elect or appoint,
telling us exactly what we can or cannot do with their nuclear stuff
(including relentless mainstream indoctrinated as to why we need to be
so deathly afraid of it) and otherwise paying whatever price only they
get to decide as for the energy derived from it. In other words, it a
very good win-win for the energy oligarchs that get the last word on
each and every aspect, as well as getting to disregard whatever
consequences of their actions.

A 100% Pu238 fueled reactor could actually be 100% failsafe and
extremely compact, though obviously as having to be engineered as for
avoiding those pesky critical density issues of creating too great of
heat that could damage the reactor core that’s used for creating
ordinary superheated steam. Otherwise if reactor facility space or
the volume and cost of conventional nuclear fuel is not an issue (of
which it usually isn’t because even modern solar farms can do equal or
better results within the same all-inclusive acreage), in which case
we’ve always had the truly failsafe thorium(232Th) option that’s even
a whole lot safer for large or small scale energy applications, as
much cleaner and in so many ways cheaper, to the point of cheapness
that it would make coal as a hydrocarbon/fossil fuel nearly worthless
for other than creating high quality liquid synfuels that would also
become relatively cheap and environmentally friendly. There’d also be
a surplus of this relatively clean energy for producing H2 and
otherwise H2O2, and if you still can’t think of any valid use for
either of those, never mind because, snookered and dumbfounded
Americans more than deserve what they’ve been asking for all along.

The ongoing ruse of having to intentionally create a pure form of
Pu238, for those of our NASA and DARPA RTGs, also provides yet another
private unmoderated channel for their creation of Pu239 plus a few
other nasty elements that our DoD and several unsupervised cloak and
dagger agencies will get to play with because, there’s no independent
supervision nor civilian review looking over any of those oligarch
shoulders. Gee whiz, what could possibly go wrong, this time?

With roughly 70,000 tonnes of SNF thus far, and roughly 2400 tonnes
that’s being added per year, it’s kinda hard to imagine that there’s
not a smart enough soul to figure out how to safely and affordably
extract the more than thousand tonnes of Pu238 plus roughly half that
amount of Pu239. I guess we’re just not smart enough to figure this
one out, and this no doubt speaks volumes as to why we had to sneak
those Paperclip SS Nazis into our DARPA and NASA in order to
eventually get us safely to/from our moon before our mutually
perpetrated cold-war partners did. Perhaps it’s a good thing that we
did not try to help Hitler dominate Earth because, he would have only
failed a lot more miserably if we had. Fortunately for everyone, the
Russians that sacrificed the most is what made Hitler a thing of the
past.

Besides continually fretting and fuming over spendy nuclear elements,
we may need to reconsider the finite bounty of rare earths:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_earth_element
Perhaps by putting copper, silver, gold and platinum as reclassified
in with “rare earth” elements will help to make it perfectly clear as
to how spendy those and even the depleted element of helium is going
to get unless something constructive is done before it’s too late. Of
course, running a few monstrous TBMs as digging and excavating through
thousands of miles worth of crust should allow for a very spendy
alternative, so that any thought of conserving other surface and
shallow pit mining resources of rare earths can be ignored regardless
of their environmental and human bloodshed consequences. Even lithium
might have to become a worthy reclassification as a rare earth, in
that its growing demand being much like that of helium can still
manage to survive and sustain us by way of allowing global inflation
and economic disparity to do its thing, that’ll only help justify
future proxy wars that’ll go a long ways towards making darn certain
that our military industrial complex and their Rothschild oligarchs
can continue living large at the ongoing expense and demise of others
that’ll never get out of their debt or out of harms way as long as
natural and contrived shortages persist.

Of course, any grand scale of creating new and clean resources of
essentially cheap and failsafe energy (such as via using solar, wind,
hydroelectric, fuel cells and thorium) would go a very long ways to
greatly help resolve most of these rare earth shortage issues, to the
point of recycled rare earths and most other valuable elements as
becoming quite affordable without their all-inclusive process doing
more harm than good. Then by utilizing surplus clean energy for
creating large inventories of H2 and H2O2 can only be interpreted as
another great improvement over the current situation that can only
boast of deficiencies and their relative costly aspects which makes
those energy related products as commercially unsuitable.

Any notions of our going off-world for the hot or cold prospects of
asteroid mining or otherwise extracting valuable elements from our
physically dark and naked moon, and/or from the extremely nearby
planet Venus, has to be considered on the long haul scale of what our
overpopulated planet is likely going to require generations from now,
not that fresh supplies of almost anything of rare earth value
couldn’t be constructively utilized and thus appreciated as is even if
it wasn’t sufficiently cost effective. Of course without any surplus
of cheap energy, we’re screwed.

[Brad Guth]

To suggest that our government and religious leaders (especially of
the bogus ones established in order to suit the ongoing FUD of their
Skull and Bones ulterior motives) haven’t always been forthcoming, as
to telling us the whole truth and nothing but the truth, is perhaps

asking a bit too much for most to accept, because who wants to admit
having being snookered.

“The Secret Space Program” as authored by Peter Levenda:
Is not so much about space as it is about what goes on behind closed
doors, whereas apparently the bogus church of Scientology has nothing
on the truly bogus one that our black ops run government of pagan

oligarchs had created for cloaking their very own special kind of
Catholic and Jewish cloaked skulduggery. It seems that using a bogus
religion allowed those cloaked within their bogus church to act/react
exactly like rogue Zionists SS Nazis, whereas their very own cult/
cabal formulated church in fact catered to their will and whim of such
SS Nazis that we obtained via operation “Paperclip”, which of course

also didn’t have to believe in hell nor having to follow the teachings
of Jesus Christ (hard to get any more Semite than that), because that

simply wasn’t within their primary mission to begin with. Over the

years I’ve pointed out how insiders of government (regardless of
whomever we elect or appoint) have always made use of the special
privileges of mainstream religion in order to cloak their true
intentions and to cover the tracks of their deeds, and now there’s
collaborative investigative efforts by others as having uncovered
objective documentation as to that being the case.

Here’s yet another link as to uncovering the darker side of past
infowars, as brought to our attention by the investigative expertise

of William Mook that’s currently residing in New Zealand,

demonstrating that he still has a little soft spot for those of us
that can’t quite believe how systematically snookered and dumbfounded
we have been for decades, as to being unaware of who is really in
charge and of what has really been going on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj2qrl6Q2rk
Of course it’s another wordy story of revised history, in that at

least this time is not of any context as derived from the victors, and

as such it’s a bit time consuming because of this revised version of
history as having to name names, dates, places and disclose a fairly
complex matrix of extremely weird though perfectly real associations,
in another effort to unravel a highly complex web of government agency

and oligarch deceptions, that which JFK and his brother had those

unfortunate notions of weeding out.

Mind you, as cloak and dagger worthy of double-triple intrigue agendas

within agendas have become, whereas we get to learn once again that

our republic has essentially a puppet government (regardless of
whomever we elect or appoint), of rogue agencies being financed by the
Rothschilds and otherwise run by the likes of our Pentagon and even

those diehard paperclip SS Nazis obtained from the highest authority

under Hitler, as having been given the green flag and free reign for
doing all sorts of collaborative things behind closed doors that only
the most oligarch satanic devil himself could appreciate, by way of
their Zionist Catholic collaborative methodology giving these folks

their Holy Mafia like special powers and authority that remains
superior as to nearly anything we can elect or appoint.

This somewhat recently published documentation and its video that’s
attempting to uncover those responsible for some of the most tragic
and horrific times in history, that have taken the most resources and
diverted our best talent and expertise in order to suit their own
goals, is just another one of many independent investigative published
efforts that have essentially come to the same conclusions.
Unfortunately, the vast majority of Americans refuse to believe in
such dastardly deeds (regardless of the objective evidence),

especially if perpetrated by those of our government officials and
otherwise by those of their faith-based partners in crimes against

humanity, as I like to put it.

Secondly, we need to also appreciate that if ETs have mastered any

survivable level of extended space travel, or even as having

accomplished interactive probe deployments, whereas they sure as hell
wouldn’t have any insurmountable problems whatsoever dealing with

exploiting our naked moon or that of the extremely nearby planet

Venus, not to mention their fooling around with Earth. By the very
nature of space travel expertise and its required technology of
advanced physics, all by itself more than demonstrates the capability
of dealing with naked moons or anything from the most icy cold to
extremely hot planets, and especially attentive of exploiting those
with the most easily obtained resources such as what a planet like
Venus has to offer.

As long as the gravity isn’t too wild (say under 2g of whatever
they’re used to) and temperatures are not too extreme, and there are

local resources of energy plus valuable raw element resources to
exploit, by rights should represent of any space travel capability and
its applied physics as being more than sufficient as to dealing with
whatever moon or planet extremes have to offer. Of course, by way of
going extensively underground is providing a nearly ideal failsafe
solution for exploiting our moon (because then it doesn’t matter how
nasty or lethal it is outside on the naked surface), and as for
dealing with a hot planet like Venus simply needs a degree of common

sense applied along with existing thermodynamic technology, as to

using the appropriate materials and advanced technology for logically

establishing whatever community of an insulated and air conditioned
surface infrastructure to suit. CO2 is actually a terrific
refrigerant or freon replacement.

Of course I’ve been pointing out this observation for more than a

decade, and unfortunately having run myself smack into any number of

brick walls as having been erected and fortified by the mainstream
oligarch status-quo that doesn’t want any outsiders informing them or

anyone else about a damn thing. In other words, I’ve hit more than my
fair share of very sensitive status-quo nerves.

Somehow the highly trustworthy SAR imaging derived from our Magellan
mission that’s offering us such a quality derivative/composite of
using 36 radar looks or confirming scans per pixel, is simply never
good enough nor trustworthy enough imaging for deductively
interpreting anything, and yet the supposed expertise of what our NASA
considers exceptionally good science and thereby gives us their
certified interpretation of this hot terrain, by allowing others the
freedom of interpreting even smaller resolution items on behalf of
supporting their own subjective process of image interpreting, and
then having extensively published their findings along with loads of
artificially colorized eyecandy as further hype for supporting only
their own conclusions, is somehow totally mainstream acceptable policy
that can’t ever be revised, challenged nor much less refuted.

Perhaps in spite of whatever others have been telling us of what and
how to think, you can still have an independent look-see for yourself,
and report back as to sharing whatever your own deductive image
interpretive form of observationology has to offer. The vast majority
of these following images are not depicting of anything all that

unexpected of such a hot planet, however, within a small portion of
the “mgn_c115s095_1.gif” image should be quite interesting.

Thumbnail images of Venus, including mgn_c115s095_1.gif (225 m/pixel)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
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

“Guth Venus”, at 1:1, then 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5630418595926178146
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5629579402364691314

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

On Jan 24, 12:46 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> > It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> > hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> > Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> > rock seem about right.
>
> > The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> > clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> > what gives with that?
>
> > As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> > irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> > roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> > wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> >http://translate.google.com/#
> > Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> > Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> > “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> > question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>

> We already have plutonium 238 and 239 coming out of our ears, and
> there’s lots more of it on the way that’s also 100% public/consumer
> funded as is.  In other words, all nuclear fuel and any secondary
> products such as its plutonium is 100% public owned, as in bought and
> paid for several times over.
>
> http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-12-797
> 2000~2400 tonnes/year of spent reactor fuel that’s hosting 1.25%~2%
> plutonium (Pu238) is becoming quite an issue because of its residual
> heat and spendy complications of extracting it from our spent reactor
> cores.
>

> http://www.usnuclearenergy.org/PDF_Library/_GE_Hitachi%20_advanced_Re...

> A little more good news bad news (aka education): http://www.deseretnews.com/article/765620752/Utah-nuclear-power-risks... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejCQrOTE-XA&feature=youtu.be http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cj2qrl6Q2rk

>
> Keeping us and every K-12 generation to come as least informed and
> thus easily snookered or simply as dumbfounded and scared to death of
> this nuclear stuff is what creates and sustains a energy mafia like
> cabal of highly paid oligarchs kept in authority over us, that get to
> be always in charge regardless of whomever we elect or appoint,
> telling us exactly what we can or cannot do with their nuclear stuff
> (including relentless mainstream indoctrinated as to why we need to be
> so deathly afraid of it) and otherwise paying whatever price only they

> get to decide as for the energy derived from it.  In other words, it's

[Brad Guth]

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>
How hard can it be to look at a quality radar obtained image, and
simply interpret whatever we can see?

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>

> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>

> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

Now the big guns of our mainstream status-quo are even afraid to shoot
back.

[Brad Guth]

This isn't so much about accepting whatever I interpret that's so gosh
darn interesting, but about what you and others can extrapolate or
deductively interpret as to what such a hot and geodynamically active
planet surface has to offer.

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 26, 9:53 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> > It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> > hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> > Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> > rock seem about right.
>
> > The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> > clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> > what gives with that?
>
> > As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> > irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> > roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> > wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> >http://translate.google.com/#
> > Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> > Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> > “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> > question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>

> This isn't so much about accepting whatever I interpret that's so gosh
> darn interesting, but about what you and others can extrapolate or
> deductively interpret as to what such a hot and geodynamically active
> planet surface has to offer.

Perhaps the only items rotating any slower than Venus are tidal locked
moons. Venus is actually a bit retrograde orbiting, which makes it
stand out even more so.

Other thumbnail images, including mgn_c115s095_1.gif (225 m/pixel)

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
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

“Guth Venus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5630418595926178146
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5629579402364691314
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
http://groups.google.com/groups/search

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 26, 9:53 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> > It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> > hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> > Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> > rock seem about right.
>
> > The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> > clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> > what gives with that?
>
> > As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> > irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> > roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> > wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> >http://translate.google.com/#
> > Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> > Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> > “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> > question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>

> This isn't so much about accepting whatever I interpret that's so gosh
> darn interesting, but about what you and others can extrapolate or
> deductively interpret as to what such a hot and geodynamically active
> planet surface has to offer.

Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
as to viewing this one small but rather interesting area of Venus,

using your independent expertise as to enlarge or magnify this

mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon shouldn’t be asking
too much. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic software

variations tend to accomplish this automatically, although some extra

filtering and dynamic range compensations can further improve on the

end result (no direct pixel modifications necessary).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

[Brad Guth]

A floating or buoyant shuttle craft for Venus, as capable of surface

landings and otherwise capable of efficiently cruising above them

thick clouds, is not going to be an easy accomplishment, nor is this
one nearly as insurmountable as we’ve been lead to believe.

Local space travels and the eventual exploitation of an extremely
nearby, hot and nasty planet like Venus is likely forever going to

remain banished and otherwise forbidden, as though it’s simply too
Goldilocks testy even though it has been measurably cooling off.
Though perhaps for some of us with imagination and consideration for
what good technology applications can manage to deal with, it is not

going to be quite as bad off as accomplishing the exploitation of our

naked and physically dark moon that’s also going to demand a great
deal from applied technology yet to be developed or even as having
been prototype proven.

Of course we’ll still have to put up with the usual mainstream
gauntlet of naysayers that will continually point out the hellish

exterior environment of Venus that’s always going to nullify anything

we could ever attempt to accomplish, but then these very same
naysayers have never actually accomplished anything of terrestrial
value anyway, so it’s hard to imagine any level of off-world
exploitations that will ever comply to their traditional naysay and
FUD(fear, uncertainty and doubt) usefulness or that of any other
science value regardless of whatever we independent outsiders attempt
to propose.

On the surface, one m3 of that hot, compressed and otherwise heavy
density of acidic atmosphere is worth something like a specific
gravity offset of 65 kg (give or take a kg). Actually, any tonne
worth of an Earthly alloy or most any solid geometric substance would
only weigh 905 kg in terms of Venus mass (in addition to whatever
solid volume displacement of -65 kg/m3), and otherwise quite unlike

the always naysay of our local wizards as well as most others here in

Usenet/newsgroups that are forever stuck in their own failsafe

mainstream naysay mode, of always poopooing or discrediting virtually
everything that isn’t already mainstream status quo certified or of
their own idea to begin with, whereas I’ll gladly take and run with
that nearly 10% advantage of less gravity and put the 65 kg/m3 of

buoyancy to good use, especially when there’s so many other complex
issues to contend with, such as any composite rigid airship
constructed out of these mostly composite panels of a thin metal alloy
sheathed form that’s filled with a mix of essentially fused or bonded
milliballoons, of perhaps not larger than 12.7 mm diameter or 1 cm3

hollow spheres and of a few other sizes not any smaller volume than .1
cm3, as providing the uncompressible structural rated insulation of

solid forms that’s capable of displacing 65 kg/m3, would mean that a
robust 100 kg outer shell panel of this composite rigid airship might
only apply 35 kg of constructed mass per m3 or even per 4 m2 if this
outer shell/hull of geometric interlocking panels creating this
airship were only 250 mm thick.

If given some refinements as to creating these composite interlocking
outer hull panels, whereas perhaps their net all-inclusive mass per
cubic meter as measured on Venus will drop to 25 kg/m3, with silica
Aerogels or possibly a carbon nanofoam used to bind these spheres
wherever a low density sold structural form is necessary in order to
fully displace and as otherwise intended to easily seal off the

external atmosphere of mostly CO2, and thereby contain the H2 lifting

gas as well as accommodating the He+O2 portions of all the other

atmosphere as easily contained within this enormous craft.

Of purely insulation fluff utilized as a void filler for nonstructural
thermal insulation that’s made of milliballoons (no larger than 12.7
mm diameter) filled with hydrogen, could easily achieve R-1024/m or
the thermal coefficient of .0009765 w/m2/k, and of its composite

density per any given volume should easily become less than 64 kg/m3.
In other words, even using terrific volumes of this mostly basalt

balloon fluff is not going to contribute any significant amount of
constructed mass, nor is this minimal thermal coefficient ever going

to require any great deal of heat exchanging in order to maintain an
efficiently cooled airship cabin interior. And by the way, the raw
CO2 itself makes for a terrific refrigerant, which doesn’t even have
to be recirculate because it’s found just about everywhere.

Ceramic foams are relatively common place, offering their extremely
light or low density volumetrics and their terrific geometric
compression toughness (for instance the space shuttles were each
covered with ceramic tiles that easily insulated their frail aluminum
shell against the nearly 2000 K reentry heat, as similar to what
hollow basalt spheres that can also withstand such heat and remain as
terrific compression toughness even if their interior void was
evacuated to .01 atmosphere. On Venus these basalt or even carbonado
spheres could be initially made to contain one full surface atmosphere
worth of hydrogen, even though a soft vacuum of containing just .1 H2
atmosphere really shouldn’t be all that tough to create and mass
produce.

Try to always remember that Venus has no apparent shortages of
hydrogen nor that of renewable energy to burn (so to speak), in that

processing almost anything (including ceramics, basalt, carbonado and

tough metals like titanium and thorium) should really not be any
problem, and to always consider that every 19 months it conveniently
gets to within 100 LD of us (in other words, the only thing out there
that’s any closer to us and also worth exploiting, is our moon).

However, it seems the typical response such as from Wayne Throop’s

lack of hand-waving, plus his purely negative and/or naysay closed
mindset about absolutely anything that isn’t already mainstream or

wasn’t of his idea to begin with, is noted, as would be expected of

most others of his serial mainstream kind of closed mindsets. Perhaps

the very next time there is something of any great importance and
value to humanity that we don’t need to accomplish, we’ll certainly

have to put Wayne right at the very top of our short list of being
selected for our chief naysayer in charge, because it’s a job that
only the most qualified FUD-masters are suited for.

-

http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/individual-universal-gas-constant-d_588.html

Btw; be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement
software to this one small area of Venus, using your independent

expertise as to enlarge or magnify this mountainous area of Venus that

I’ve focused upon. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic
software variations accomplish this resampling automatically, although

[Brad Guth]

This is a very wide scope and complex topic, so don't even bother if
you merely need some snippet of information in order to impress your
friends that you happen to know a little something they don't.

>  http://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/individual-universal-gas-constant-d...

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

[Brad Guth]

Don't seriously look at Venus if you do not want to learn how
dysfunctional and/or deceptive our NASA has been.

Is there any terrain on any other planet or moon that’s as unusual or
as geometric utility looking, as what this one small area of Venus has
to offer?

Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,

as to viewing this one small but rather interesting area of Venus,

using your independent expertise as to enlarge or magnify this

mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon shouldn’t be asking

too much. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic software
variations tend to accomplish this automatically, although some extra

filtering and dynamic range compensations can further improve on the
end result (no direct pixel modifications necessary).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus

[Brad Guth]

Why not instead of our having to alter the global environment of the
planet, or having to wait millions of years for nature to take its
course, whereas instead we could just adapt ourselves by using raw
intelligence and applied physics?

Do open pit mining operations do anything as to making their pits look
and feel pretty?

Do underground mining operations make their excavated tunnels into
tunnels of Eden?

Do submarine crews attempt to drain their oceans so that the
surrounding pressure goes away?

Do astronauts have to keep sucking up any passing particles so that
space remains a vacuum?

Where exactly does it say that heaven isn't too hot or too cold, or
simply too wet or too dry, and having an atmosphere that isn’t any
different than our terrestrial air?

[Brad Guth]

Why not instead of our having to alter the global environment of the
planet, or having to wait millions of years for nature to take its
course, whereas instead we could just adapt ourselves by using raw

intelligence and applied physics.

Do open pit mining operations do anything as to making their pits look
and feel pretty?

Do underground mining operations make their excavated tunnels into
tunnels of Eden?

Do submarine crews attempt to drain their oceans so that the

surrounding pressure and the pesky buoyancy goes away?

Do astronauts have to keep sucking up any nearby or passing particles,

so that space remains a vacuum?

Where exactly does it say that heaven isn't too hot or too cold, or
simply too wet or too dry, and having an atmosphere that isn’t any
different than our terrestrial air?

Is there any terrain on any other planet or moon that’s as unusual or
as geometric utility looking, as what this one small area of Venus has
to offer?

Earth isn’t hardly 5% directly usable as is to naked Goldilocks that
are too dumbfounded and otherwise helpless to begin with. The vast
majority of other planets are not going to be naked Goldilocks
approved, although perhaps at least .1% should be exactly right and
via applied physics should make at least 1% as good enough or better
than Earth.

[Brad Guth]

Why not instead of our having to alter the global environment of the
planet, or having to wait millions of years for nature to take its

course of gradually cooling off from the inside out, whereas instead
we could just as easily adapt ourselves by using raw intelligence and
applied physics, because any number of products do already exist that
can withstand 811 K.

Are open pit mining operations doing anything as to making their pits
look and feel pretty?

Do underground mining operations have to make their excavated tunnels

into tunnels of Eden?

Do submarine crews attempt to drain their oceans so that the

surrounding pressure and the issues of pesky buoyancy goes away?

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>

> It’s not exactly a naked Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s

> certainly hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>

> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>

> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

[Brad Guth]

Really big stuff cools off quickly, and smaller stuff taking next to
forever. By all accounts, the planet Venus qualifies as being
sufficiently large and thus perfectly capable of cooling itself off,
especially since it has no big-ass moon modulating the entire planet,
and otherwise its extremely slow retrograde rotation offers
practically zilch worth of tidal interactions.

The thermodynamics of Venus are not within balance, unless you
consider an ongoing upwelling and subsequent outflux of 20.5 w/m2 as
balanced. Of course we can always sit around for the next million
years, waiting for Venus to get a bit more Eden Goldilocks worthy, or
we can dawn our trusty OveGlove suits with their individual cooling
systems, and have at it. But then riding within a thermally regulated
airship of what I’ve proposed, is a whole lot better yet.

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#

>  BradGuth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,GuthUsenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus

>
> On Jan 2, 7:45 am, BradGuth<bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> > It’s not exactly a naked Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s
> > certainly hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> > Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> > rock seem about right.
>
> > The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> > clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> > what gives with that?
>
> > As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> > irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> > roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> > wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> >http://translate.google.com/#

> > BradGuth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,GuthUsenet/”Guth

[Brad Guth]

Why not instead of our having to geoengineer a solution in order to
alter the global environment of the whole planet, or having to wait

millions of years for nature to take its course of gradually cooling
off from the inside out, whereas instead we could just as easily adapt
ourselves by using raw intelligence and applied physics, because any

number of products already exist that can withstand 811 K.

Are terrestrial open pit mining operations doing anything as to making

their pits look and feel pretty?

Do underground mining operations have to make their excavated tunnels
into tunnels of Eden?

Do submarine crews ever attempt to drain their oceans so that the

surrounding pressure and the issues of pesky buoyancy goes away?

Do astronauts have to keep sucking up any nearby or passing particles,
so that space remains a vacuum?

Where exactly does it say that heaven isn't too hot or too cold, or
simply too wet or too dry, and having an atmosphere that isn’t any
different than our terrestrial air?

Is there any terrain on any other planet or moon that’s as unusual or
as geometric utility looking, as what this one small area of Venus

(aka GuthVenus) has to offer?

Earth isn’t hardly 5% directly usable as is to naked Goldilocks that
are too dumbfounded and otherwise helpless to begin with. The vast
majority of other planets are not going to be naked Goldilocks
approved, although perhaps at least .1% should be exactly right and
via applied physics should make at least 1% as good enough or better
than Earth.

Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
as to viewing this one small but rather interesting area of Venus,
using your independent expertise as to enlarge or magnify this
mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon shouldn’t be asking
too much. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic software

variations tend to accomplish this automatically (including iPhone and
Safari), although some extra filtering and dynamic range compensations

can further improve on the end result (no direct pixel modifications
necessary).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

http://translate.google.com/#

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>

> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly

> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>

> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>

> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

Why not instead of our having to geoengineer a very hard and
outrageously spendy solution in order to alter the global environment

[Brad Guth]

On Feb 5, 6:33 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> > It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> > hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> > Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> > rock seem about right.
>
> > The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> > clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> > what gives with that?
>
> > As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> > irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> > roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> > wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> >http://translate.google.com/#
> > Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> > Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> > “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> > question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>
>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus

Putting Goldilocks in harms way isn't necessary for accomplishing the
exploitation of Venus.

[Brad Guth]

No doubt microbes exist within the upper atmosphere of Venus, as they
do right here at 30,000+'.

[Brad Guth]

Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
as to viewing this one small but rather interesting area of Venus,
using your independent expertise as to enlarge or magnify this
mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon shouldn’t be asking
too much. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic software
variations tend to accomplish this automatically (including iPhone and
Safari), although some extra filtering and dynamic range compensations
can further improve on the end result (no direct pixel modifications

are ever necessary).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

[Brad Guth]

On Feb 11, 6:36 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
> as to viewing this one small but rather interesting area of Venus,
> using your independent expertise as to enlarge or magnify this
> mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon shouldn’t be asking
> too much.  Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic software
> variations tend to accomplish this automatically (including iPhone and
> Safari), although some extra filtering and dynamic range compensations
> can further improve on the end result (no direct pixel modifications
> are ever necessary).
>
> “GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>
>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”, GuthVenus

If you can't see anything that looks the least bit unusual, geometric
or even naturally intriguing, then perhaps you are limited to braille
imaging or otherwise out of focus as to the area of "GuthVenus", as a
highly mountainous terrain that really shouldn't have any roundish
features or much less offering any community of rectangular geometries
that seem arranged in a perfectly rational community like setting
including a bridge item.

I’ve never specified nor having in any way implied that Venus wasn’t
hot and nasty. However, using the best available science and
technology, that which the regular laws of physics allows, can’t be so
insurmountable for that of exploiting such an extremely nearby planet.

We managed to bully and barge our way into native Indian lands,
telling them lies and essentially cheating them at most every
encounter, whereas Venusians (if any) probably will not fair all that
much better. On the other had, if Venusian were placed or deployed
there for the task of exploiting whatever Venus has to offer, we could
have a problem.

Why not instead of our having to geoengineer a very hard to manage and
outrageously spendy solution in order to artificially alter the global

environment of the whole planet, or having to wait millions of years
for nature to take its course of gradually cooling off from the inside
out, whereas instead we could just as easily adapt ourselves by using
raw intelligence and applied physics, because any number of products

and methods of technology already exist or can be modified so that
they withstand 811 K.

So, instead of turning Venus into a Goldilocks Eden, how about we
simply reconsider adapting ourselves to the situation at hand?

Are terrestrial open pit mining operations doing anything special, as
to making their pits look and feel pretty for Goldilocks? (not that
I’ve ever heard of)

Do underground mining operations have to make their excavated tunnels

into fancy love tunnels of Eden that’s suitable for naked Goldilocks?
(not hardly, although our Pentagon and DoD have some really nifty
tunnels)

Do submarine crews ever attempt to drain their oceans so that the

surrounding pressure and the issues of pesky buoyancy goes away? (not
a change in hell)

Do our Goldilocks astronauts have to keep holding their breath while

sucking up any nearby or passing particles, so that space remains a

vacuum? (or is it already filled up with aether?)

Where exactly does it say that heaven or Eden for Goldilocks isn't too

hot or too cold, or simply too wet or too dry, and having an

atmosphere that isn’t the least bit any different than our terrestrial
polluted and acidic air? (perhaps we were meant to exist on Venus,
except our intelligent designers probably figured we would never be
smart enough)

Is there any complex terrain on any other planet or moon that’s as
unusual or as geometric and rational utility looking, as what this one
small mountainous area of Venus (aka GuthVenus) has to offer? (our
NASA and everyone associated has certainly been looking, but at least
so far they haven’t identified squat that’s even 10% as complex
looking)

Earth isn’t hardly 5% directly usable as is for accommodating our
naked Goldilocks that are frail and usually too dumbfounded and
otherwise helpless to begin with. No doubt the vast majority of other
planets are simply not going to be naked Goldilocks approved, although

perhaps at least .1% should be exactly right and via applied physics

should make at least 1% of those exoplanets as good enough or better
than Earth, and perhaps 10% of exoplanets should at least become
technically manageable for future exploitation. Our existing
technology can manage to deal with our moon, Mars and even Venus,
although naysayers and mainstream FUD-masters need not even bother to
try, because they have no intensions of every allowing anything off-
world to happen as long as they and their equally genetic mutated
offspring are alive.

Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
as to viewing this one small but rather interesting area of Venus,

using your independent deductive expertise as to enlarge or magnify
this mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon, shouldn’t be

asking too much. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic

software variations tend to accomplish this enlargement process

[Brad Guth]

At the rate FUD-masters and redneck ZNRs are falling dead, soon we'll
be free to share and deductively compare our ideas without the usual
gauntlet of topic/author stalking and bashings.

[Brad Guth]

On Feb 11, 6:36 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
> as to viewing this one small but rather interesting area of Venus,
> using your independent expertise as to enlarge or magnify this
> mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon shouldn’t be asking
> too much.  Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic software
> variations tend to accomplish this automatically (including iPhone and
> Safari), although some extra filtering and dynamic range compensations
> can further improve on the end result (no direct pixel modifications
> are ever necessary).
>
> “GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>
>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”, GuthVenus

Earth from space / NOVA

Pulling up 1 inch radar resolution as to ocean surface levels and its
hidden terrain (below sea level), while an even more advanced Canadian
satellite imaging radar accomplishes better than a quarter inch
resolution, are each state of the art forms of remote imaging science
that we can take to the observationology bank.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/earth-from-space.html

This means that a modern satellite mission of “Magellan 2.0” should
nowadays be capable of accomplishing at least as good as 25 mm radar
mapping resolution of Venus, without our having to reinvent a damn
thing.

In this instance, I can only support and applaud those of NOVA and
their combined scientific collective efforts on behalf of educating us
about the global energy balance and its subsequent diversity of a
complex environment forced upon our planet, that which probably can
not manage as for sustaining 7+ billion humans without its constant
internal resupply of minerals, microbes and diatoms to go along with
the solar influx, not to mention the other secondary/recoil influx of
everything from IR to gamma that’s coming off our naked moon that also
modulating our entire planet 3:1 more so than is the tidal forces of
our sun.

Of course using a composite rigid airship as a shuttle like
exploratory capability of hosting our science instruments, safely and
efficiently cruising below those acidic clouds (perhaps as well as
others of somewhat conventional balloons/blimps configured as capable
of easily getting above them clouds), as such should not be banished
or otherwise excluded from this ongoing need of our exploiting such
extreme off-world locations, like Venus which offers us so much.

[Double-A]

Venus for dummies? How come you're the only dummy posting here?

Double-A

[Brad Guth]

Unlike yourself, I seem to have lots of readers. Sorry about that.

Are you suggesting that a nearby planet like Venus offers no value?


"Just because the government lies, doesn't mean that everyone else is
telling the truth.” / Bast

[Double-A]

Good for what? Poisonous atmosphere. Lethal temrperatures. Crushing
barometric pressure. No Venusians to be seen.

Double-A

[Brad Guth]

If Venus is supposedly made of the exact same stuff as Earth, just
imagine all the easily available cache of valuable metals, not to
mention carbonado, diamonds and just about anything of value that you
can think of. There's also unlimited local energy to burn, so to
speak, but you'd have to know a little something about physics-101 in
order to take advantage of any such energy. There's also sufficient
buoyancy to float battleships or iron clad airships.

This whole nearby planet could become our next military industrial
complex on steroids, except environmentally and otherwise labor
unregulated, as well as no stinking oceans blocking access to its
wealth of metals and energy resources.

What's not to like about Venus?

[Brad Guth]

Gold, silver, platinum and many other rare elements to us that require
extensive excavations and bloody processing along with consuming loads
of energy that's also in short supply, not to mention some of their
toxicity and subsequent trashing of our global environment, are all
reasons why off-world exploitations can't be a bad idea.

The likes of our moon and Venus should offer at least a teratonne of
gold, and otherwise many teratonnes of metals like silver, nickel,
copper and zinc, not to mention those heavy reactive atomic elements
like uranium, thorium and always radium.

Where’s the down side?

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>

> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in

> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

Gold, silver, platinum and many other rare and valuable elements to
most of us that require extensive mining excavations with often bloody
consequences as well as spendy processing along with consuming loads
of energy that's also in short supply, not to mention our having to
deal with some of their toxicity and subsequent trashing of our global

environment, are all reasons why off-world exploitations can't be a
bad idea.

The likes of our moon and Venus should offer at least a teratonne of

gold, and otherwise many teratonnes of precious metals like silver,

nickel, copper and zinc, not to mention those heavy reactive atomic

elements like uranium, thorium and of course always radium.

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

Extracting valuable raw elements from the innards of our physically
dark and paramagnetic moon, can’t be put off forever. Venus can
always wait, although no other planet is situated so nearby(100 LD)
and so easily accessible to our remote science (according to a recent
NOVA production of “Earth From Space” whereas our modern satellite
radar imaging can nowadays obtain 25 mm resolution of it’s surface),
and it’s at least better than half that for mapping the naked surface
of our moon at just 6 mm/pixel. Even terrestrial ground based radar
imaging of Venus can achieve 25 meter resolution, or figure 0.25 meter
resolution of our moon.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/earth-from-space.html

Gold, silver, platinum and many other rare and valuable elements to

most of us, that typically require extensive mining excavations with
often bloody and lethal consequences as well as spendy processing

along with consuming loads of energy that's also in short supply, not

to mention our having to deal with the subsequent pollution along with

some of their toxicity and subsequent trashing of our global

environment, are all perfectly good reasons as to why off-world
exploitations can't be such a bad idea.

The likes of our moon and Venus should offer at least a combined
teratonne of gold, and otherwise many teratonnes of other precious

metals like silver, nickel, copper and zinc, not to mention those
heavy reactive atomic elements like uranium, thorium and of course

always radium. We can also use nuclear energy as well as
thermonuclear weapons in order to mine and excavate our way through
vast amounts of crust. Nuclear powered TBMs could be used for
tunneling into our moon, and unlimited environment damage can become
an acceptable tradeoff.

Where’s the down side?

Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
as to viewing this one small but rather interesting area of Venus,

using your independent deductive expertise as to enlarge or magnify
this mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon, shouldn’t be

asking too much. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic

software variations tend to accomplish this enlargement process

automatically (including iPhone and Safari), although some extra
filtering and dynamic range compensations can further improve on the
end result (no direct pixel modifications are ever necessary).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

[Brad Guth]

On Feb 16, 4:40 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> > It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> > hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> > Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> > rock seem about right.
>
> > The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> > clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> > what gives with that?
>
> > As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> > irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> > roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> > wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> >http://translate.google.com/#
> > Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> > Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> > “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> > question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>
>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth

> Venus”, GuthVenus- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

The all-inclusive cost of extracting rare elements is what needs to be
taken into account. On Earth, that all-inclusive cost in some cases
has far exceeded the current and future value of consuming such
elements.

[Brad Guth]

On Feb 16, 4:40 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> > It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> > hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> > Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> > rock seem about right.
>
> > The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> > clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> > what gives with that?
>
> > As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> > irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> > roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> > wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> >http://translate.google.com/#
> > Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> > Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> > “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> > question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>
>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#

>  Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth,BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus

If we just sit around long enough we will not have to bother with
going to our moon or Venus in order to get rare elements, because
asteroids from the Sirius Oort cloud will be delivering those to us
within 10,000+ tonne asteroids that our best observations and radars
apparently can not detect until it's too late.

However, it would be kinda nice of us to at least warn ISS of future
asteroids passing through their NO FLY zone, whereas our astronauts
only have a limited supply of Depends.

Russia has estimated their 16+ meter rock/asteroid of 10% iron and
nickel that only barely missed impacting a major populated city, is
perhaps only representing the tip of the cosmic iceberg arriving in
the form of the Sirius Oort cloud, that's highly populated by such
asteroids and likely to offer a few dozen planetoid size items.

Apparently our fancy radars are useless at detecting these fast moving
and fast arriving items of 1e4 to 1e6 tonnes until it's too late.
Perhaps this is not exactly good news for those onboard our spendy
ISS.

Venus of course has a really nifty thick and dense atmosphere that
should fend off even 1e5 tonne asteroids, as well as otherwise
moderating the arrival of any 1e6 tonne item down to a dull roar of
causing hardly if any surface damage unless it was made of mostly pure
heavy metals. The naked moon on the other hand is always at serious
risk of even dealing with a one kg arrival, including a lethal spray
of secondary debris that could radius and/or downrange for 1000 km, if
not sent back into low orbit to only fall back at 2.35 km/sec upon the
whole 1.1e4 km circumference.

[Brad Guth]

> whole 1.1e4 km circumference.- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

The deployment and use of TBMs on the moon is the only failsafe way of
avoiding death from asteroids. Even relatively small 1 km items of
debris encountered at 2.4 km/sec is downright lethal if experienced
while on the surface of our naked moon.

As the Sirius Oort cloud closes in on our Oort cloud, it's going to
get hot and heavy action from a gauntlet of asteroids and lose debris
coming our way. Perhaps a 10,000 tonne asteroid per day will become
the norm. Fortunately the vast majority of our planet surface area is
unpopulated.

[Brad Guth]

Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
as to viewing this one small but rather interesting area of Venus,
using your independent deductive expertise as to enlarge or magnify
this mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon, shouldn’t be
asking too much. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic
software variations tend to accomplish this enlargement process
automatically (including iPhone and Safari), although some extra
filtering and dynamic range compensations can further improve on the
end result (no direct pixel modifications are ever necessary).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

http://translate.google.com/#

Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”, GuthVenus


What part of looking critically at the surface of Venus is upsetting
to you?

[Brad Guth]

On Feb 20, 2:59 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
> as to viewing this one small but rather interesting area of Venus,
> using your independent deductive expertise as to enlarge or magnify
> this mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon, shouldn’t be
> asking too much.  Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic
> software variations tend to accomplish this enlargement process
> automatically (including iPhone and Safari), although some extra
> filtering and dynamic range compensations can further improve on the
> end result (no direct pixel modifications are ever necessary).
>
> “GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>
>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”, GuthVenus
>
> What part of looking critically at the surface of Venus is upsetting
> to you?

Too bad the nearby planet Venus is always so taboo/non-disclosure
rated.

Earth From Space / NOVA

According to the latest science capability as having been reported to
us via NOVA, of looking at a given planet from space (via satellite),
extracting one inch radar resolution as to terrestrial ocean surface
levels and thereby interpreting its hidden terrain (far below sea
level), while an even more advanced Canadian satellite imaging via
radar accomplishes better than a quarter inch resolution mapping above
sea level, are each state of the art forms of remote imaging science

that we can take to the observationology bank.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/earth-from-space.html

This new and improved imaging capability means that a modern satellite

mission of “Magellan 2.0” should nowadays be capable of accomplishing

at least as good as 25 mm radar mapping resolution of Venus, and
accomplishing this without our having to reinvent a damn thing.

Of course you’d still have to be smart enough as to interpreting radar
derivative composites of the given terrain, as hopefully
differentiating between any potentially artificial or unnatural
attributes as opposed to whatever should be perfectly natural, because
without some deductive interpretation skill is where nothing remote
imaged via camera, radar, laser altimeters or even by the naked eye
can ever be trusted to interpret as artificial or natural. In other
words, without basic image interpreting skills, might as well hire the
blind to deal with all of our science observationology issues.

This is where all of my critics come off as being extra special, all-
knowing and first-hand expertise at absolutely everything, which of
course they are in fact capable of delivering nothing of the kind.
Instead they impose FUD and maintain absolute authority over the rest
of us, because that’s their real job.

In this instance of a NOVA public media production, I can only support
and applaud those of the NOVA team and their combined investigative
scientific efforts on behalf of further educating the rest of us about
the global energy balance and its subsequent diversity of a highly

complex environment forced upon our planet, that which probably can

not manage as for sustaining 7+ billion humans without its solar
influx plus constant internal resupply of minerals, microbes and
diatoms to go along with the mostly passive solar influx, not to
mention tidal issues along with all the other secondary/recoil influx

of everything from IR to gamma that’s coming off our naked moon that

is also modulating our entire planet at least twice more so than is

the tidal forces of our sun.

Of course using a composite rigid airship as a shuttle like probe of
such extended exploratory capability hosting our science instruments,
as safely and efficiently cruising below those acidic clouds (perhaps
as well as for using others of somewhat conventional balloon/blimp
configured as capable of easily getting their science payloads above

them clouds), as such should not be banished or otherwise excluded
from this ongoing need of our exploiting such extreme off-world

locations, like Venus which offers us so much in mineral and/or raw
element diversity.

The vast majority of this new and improved imaging science is of
course public funded, and even televised production from NOVA is
mostly public funded as well as otherwise indirectly commercially
funded via Google and those higher prices that we get to pay for
various goods and services. This kind of science infomercial
production doesn’t come cheap, not to mention the national
broadcasting service itself isn’t without public and/or consumer added
cost issues, that this and the next generation always get to pay for.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus

“GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in

[Brad Guth]

> that we can take to the observationology bank.http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/earth-from-space.html

> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>
> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
> https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

At some near point in time (especially as a very resource demanding
global population exceeds 10 billion), our terrestrial resources are
going to become too bloody and otherwise too spendy for most of us.
Of course oligarchs could care less because, they actually get richer
and more powerful with global inflation and proxy wars.

In case some of you know-it-all pucks missed the fundamental pretext
or concept as represented by this topic; to further clarify it’s not
about how to topic/author stalk in order to systematically fail this
topic from the very get go, nor is this about how to selectively
obfuscate and intentionally do everything conceivably wrong on
purpose, just so that you get to brag to yourself and others of your
kind that are equally FUD and oligarch capable of proving that only
failure, doom and gloom is but the one and only option regardless of
the intended path and motivation of what this topic has to offer those
few of us willing to conceive of future opportunities, whereas instead
of our having to constantly dwell and/or focus only upon each and
every conceivable negative that most any moron can just as easily
elaborate upon, as we few intelligent folks can elect to look forward
and consider the value of the positive/constructive attributes instead
of focusing only upon the doom and gloom.

For those that wish only to promote the utmost FUD of naysay
constrictive and/or doom and gloom worthy outcomes, you can go right
ahead and create as many of those silly topics as you like, and you
can even pretend that anyone other than yourself actually gives a
tinkers damn.

Meanwhile, the extremely nearby planet Venus should offer more
obtainable value and greater bang for the buck than all the other
planets and moons of our solar system combined, especially since our
NASA is not willing to help anyone get back on our supposedly inert
and monochromatic moon, or even to utilize its L1. So, imagine that
we have full access to the very best terrestrial science, technology
and materials (as mostly having been public-funded thus far) for
assisting in our quest of adapting ourselves and otherwise as much as
possible terraforming Venus to suit our future needs, as well as best
suited for even sustaining life as we know it right here on Earth.

With added resources, our planet can manage to survive with 10+
billion humans, regardless of the GW and/or AGW issues. Of course we
could also be utilizing our moon if it wasn’t for the mutually
perpetrated cold-war era making it so taboo/nondisclosure rated.

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>

> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

What part of looking at the hot and dry surface of Venus is upsetting
to you?

If you can't see anything that looks the least bit unusual, geometric
or even naturally intriguing, then perhaps you are limited to braille
imaging or otherwise out of focus as to the area of "GuthVenus", as a
highly mountainous terrain that really shouldn't have any roundish
features or much less offering any community of rectangular geometries
that seem arranged in a perfectly rational community like setting
including a bridge item.

I’ve never specified nor having in any way implied that Venus wasn’t
hot and nasty. However, using the best available science and
technology, that which the regular laws of physics allows, can’t be so
insurmountable for that of exploiting such an extremely nearby

planet. For the most part, the hot and dry surface of Venus is nearly
as inert as is its atmosphere.

If going by American history, it seems we managed to bully and barge

our way into native Indian lands, telling them lies and essentially
cheating them at most every encounter, whereas Venusians (if any)
probably will not fair all that much better. On the other had, if

Venusians were intentionally placed or deployed there for the task of

exploiting whatever Venus has to offer, we could have a problem.

Why not instead of our having to geoengineer a very hard to manage and
outrageously spendy solution in order to artificially alter the global
environment of the whole planet, or having to wait millions of years
for nature to take its course of gradually cooling off from the inside
out, whereas instead we could just as easily adapt ourselves by using
raw intelligence and applied physics, because any number of products

and methods of technology already exist or can be modified to suit, so

that they withstand 811 K.

So, instead of turning Venus into a Goldilocks Eden, how about we
simply reconsider adapting ourselves to the situation at hand?

Are terrestrial open pit mining operations doing anything special, as
to making their pits look and feel pretty for Goldilocks? (not that
I’ve ever heard of)

Do underground mining operations have to make their excavated tunnels
into fancy love tunnels of Eden that’s suitable for naked Goldilocks?
(not hardly, although our Pentagon and DoD have some really nifty
tunnels)

Do submarine crews ever attempt to drain their oceans so that the
surrounding pressure and the issues of pesky buoyancy goes away? (not
a change in hell)

Do our Goldilocks as astronauts have to keep holding their breath

while sucking up any nearby or passing particles, so that space

remains a vacuum? (or is it already filled up with the sort of aether
tat we do not understand?)

Where exactly does it say that heaven or Eden for Goldilocks isn't too
hot or too cold, or simply too wet or too dry, and having an
atmosphere that isn’t the least bit any different than our terrestrial
polluted and acidic air? (perhaps we were meant to exist on Venus,
except our intelligent designers probably figured we would never

become smart enough)

Is there any complex terrain on any other planet or moon that’s as
unusual or as geometric and rational utility looking, as what this one
small mountainous area of Venus (aka GuthVenus) has to offer? (our
NASA and everyone associated has certainly been looking, but at least
so far they haven’t identified squat that’s even 10% as complex
looking)

Earth isn’t hardly 5% directly usable as is for accommodating our
naked Goldilocks that are frail and usually too dumbfounded and
otherwise helpless to begin with. No doubt the vast majority of other
planets are simply not going to be naked Goldilocks approved, although
perhaps at least .1% should be exactly right and via applied physics
should make at least 1% of those exoplanets as good enough or better
than Earth, and perhaps 10% of exoplanets should at least become
technically manageable for future exploitation. Our existing
technology can manage to deal with our moon, Mars and even Venus,
although naysayers and mainstream FUD-masters need not even bother to
try, because they have no intensions of every allowing anything off-
world to happen as long as they and their equally genetic mutated
offspring are alive.

Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
as to viewing this one small but rather interesting area of Venus,
using your independent deductive expertise as to enlarge or magnify
this mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon, shouldn’t be
asking too much. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic
software variations tend to accomplish this enlargement process
automatically (including iPhone and Safari), although some extra
filtering and dynamic range compensations can further improve on the
end result (no direct pixel modifications are ever necessary).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

Too bad the extremely nearby(100 LD) planet Venus is always so
mainstream taboo/non-disclosure rated.

Earth From Space / NOVA
According to the latest science capability as having been reported to
us via NOVA, of looking at a given planet from space (via satellite),
extracting one inch radar resolution as to terrestrial ocean surface

levels and thereby a derivative of method interpreting its hidden

terrain (far below sea level), while an even more advanced Canadian
satellite imaging via radar accomplishes better than a quarter inch
resolution mapping above sea level, are each state of the art forms of
remote imaging science that we can take to the observationology bank.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/earth-from-space.html

This new and improved imaging capability means that a modern satellite

mission of “Magellan 2.0” by rights should nowadays be capable of

accomplishing at least as good as 25 mm radar mapping resolution of

the Venus surface, and accomplishing this imaging capability without

our having to reinvent a damn thing.

Of course you’d still have to be smart enough as to interpreting radar
derivative composites of the given terrain, as hopefully
differentiating between any potentially artificial or unnatural
attributes as opposed to whatever should be perfectly natural, because
without some deductive interpretation skill is where nothing remote
imaged via camera, radar, laser altimeters or even by the naked eye

can ever be trusted to interpret anything as artificial or natural.
In other words, without basic image interpreting skills(as viewed from
above), might as well hire the blind to deal with all of our science

observationology issues.

This is where all of my critics come off as being extra special, all-
knowing and first-hand expertise at absolutely everything, which of
course they are in fact capable of delivering nothing of the kind.

Instead they impose obfuscation to suit as well as FUD and maintain

absolute authority over the rest of us, because that’s their real job.

In this instance of a NOVA public science media infomercial
production, I can only support and applaud those of the Google NOVA

team and their combined investigative scientific efforts on behalf of

gathering the best available science in order to be further educating

the rest of us about the global energy balance and its subsequent
diversity of a highly complex environment forced upon our planet, that
which probably can not manage as for sustaining 7+ billion humans

without its reliable solar influx plus constant internal resupply of

minerals, microbes and diatoms to go along with the mostly passive
solar influx, not to mention tidal issues along with all the other
secondary/recoil influx of everything from IR to gamma that’s coming
off our naked moon that is also modulating our entire planet at least

twice more so than is the tidal forces of our sun representing only a
third of what matters.

Of course using a composite rigid airship as a shuttle like probe of
such extended exploratory capability hosting our science instruments,
as safely and efficiently cruising below those acidic clouds (perhaps
as well as for using others of somewhat conventional balloon/blimp
configured as capable of easily getting their science payloads above
them clouds), as such should not be banished or otherwise excluded
from this ongoing need of our exploiting such extreme off-world
locations, like Venus which offers us so much in mineral and/or raw
element diversity.

The vast majority of this new and improved imaging science is of

course public funded, and even televised production provided via NOVA

is mostly public funded as well as otherwise indirectly commercially

funded via Google and those always higher prices that we get to pay

for various goods and services. This kind of science infomercial
production doesn’t come cheap, not to mention the national
broadcasting service itself isn’t without public and/or consumer added
cost issues, that this and the next generation always get to pay for.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus

“GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

[Brad Guth]

On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> rock seem about right.
>
> The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> what gives with that?
>
> As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> http://translate.google.com/#
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gifhttps://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

It’s always amazing how topics associated with the investigative
exploitation of our moon, Venus or even that of utilizing their L1 or
L2, has been so systematically policy taboo/nondisclosure controlled
by those of our mainstream status-quo facade of authority, in that
any honest attempt of a given topic to expose is automatically
forbidden (other than being topic/author stalked and trashed for all
those at risk of façade exposure can muster).

As soon as any topic or its author is the least bit suggestive that
our government is capable of not having told us the whole truth about
anything, a gauntlet of all sorts of topic/author stalking hell breaks
loose on behalf of mainstream damage-control.

Of course we also do not see any K-12s anywhere within public Usenet/
newsgroups for a darn good reason, because freedom of speech is
actually managed as something entirely conditional as to the audience
at hand. This is also why most institutionalized prisoners are never
given internet access as to any public forums or mainstream media that
might offer an audience that isn’t being controlled or manipulated,
and most Americans as well as other Nations of oligarch controlled
intellect seem to like it that way.

Social media forums like Facebook, Twitter and even Google+ are
equally managed on a client by client basis, of receiving context as
well as for transmitting information to any other given client or
group/circle of friends, making it really quite downright handy for
our NSA/CIA and you name it agency or special-interest group of
pretentious or self-righteous authority to monitor as well as to step
right in and covertly control opr dominate any given situation,
because public publishing of too much truth isn’t actually tolerated.
Nowadays, mainstream internet and especially intranet servers are
capable of managing each individual client, as to whatever they get to
see, because most Americans are simply not smart enough to get past
the mainstream façade.

“Façade is an artificial intelligence-based art/research experiment in
electronic narrative – an attempt to move beyond traditional branching
or hyper-linked ...”

Façade/facade: “An artificial or deceptive front: ideological slogans
that were a façade for geopolitical power struggles.”

Most proxy wars are essentially façades for reasons that the general
public isn’t allowed to discover, and the ongoing ruse and usually FUD
involved within our mainstream façade, is quite real, as is the faith-
based façade that’s continually indoctrinated into us from birth to
grave.

On the other positive/constructive hand; where’s the down side to off-
world exploitations?

Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
as to viewing this one small but rather interesting area of Venus,
using your independent deductive expertise as to enlarge or magnify
this mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon, shouldn’t be
asking too much. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic
software variations tend to accomplish this enlargement process
automatically (including iPhone and Safari), although some extra
filtering and dynamic range compensations can further improve on the
end result (no direct pixel modifications are ever necessary).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in

question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

[Brad Guth]

On Feb 26, 4:32 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> > It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> > hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> > Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> > rock seem about right.
>
> > The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> > clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> > what gives with that?
>
> > As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> > irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> > roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> > wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> >http://translate.google.com/#
> > Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> > Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> > “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> > question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>
>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”, GuthVenus

K-12 accessible newsgroups outside of Usenet are quite one-sided or
closed mindset, such as SpaceBanter.com allows known redneck ZNRs and
oligarch GOPs to topic/author stalk and hijack as much out of context
as they like. No question that our DARPA and Hitler would highly
approve of their actions.

Public forums of Usenet/newsgroups as best accessed via the original
Google Groups format or somewhat worse via Google+, are not K-12
friendly by design.

The .0001% or fewer K-12s actively involved with public Usenet/news
groups is proof that it's a broken system of media that's oligarch
dominated and being manipulated to suit the hidden agenda and ulterior
motives of those in charge regardless of whomever we elect or appoint.

Any K-12 person can look at the best available science as to what our
moon and Venus has to offer, and decide for themselves if there's
anything worth going after. Instead, K-12s are being systematically
indoctrinated by their peers and even by their best friends.

[Brad Guth]

How are the oligarchs of our planet going to manage to overlord the
rest of us, once were off onto other planets and moons?

Perhaps our own moon and the extremely nearby planet Venus are prime
examples of the forbidden fruit.

On the other positive/constructive hand; where’s the down side to off-
world exploitations?

Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
as to viewing this one small but rather interesting area of Venus,
using your independent deductive expertise as to enlarge or magnify
this mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon, shouldn’t be
asking too much. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic
software variations tend to accomplish this enlargement process
automatically (including iPhone and Safari), although some extra
filtering and dynamic range compensations can further improve on the
end result (no direct pixel modifications are ever necessary).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

[Brad Guth]

On Feb 26, 4:32 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> > It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> > hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> > Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> > rock seem about right.
>
> > The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> > clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> > what gives with that?
>
> > As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> > irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> > roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> > wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> >http://translate.google.com/#
> > Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> > Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> > “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> > question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>
>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”, GuthVenus

How are the oligarchs of our planet going to manage to overlord the

rest of us, once we’re off onto other planets and moons?

Perhaps our own moon and the extremely nearby(100 LD) planet Venus are
prime examples of the forbidden fruit. The ongoing farce of other
planets and moons not being Goldilocks suitable is just mainstream
oligarchs trying to hold onto their terrestrial benefits for as long
as possible.

Of course, without proxy wars is where all sorts of technological
advancements for the greater good could be accomplished, though less
profitable for the upper 0.0001% that require a thousand times as much
global resources as most of us need.

[Brad Guth]

Just because our mainstream oligarchs are not in favor of exploiting
our moon or the extremely nearby(100 LD) planet Venus which our entire
Apollo era couldn't even manage to get a view of within any FOV
including our physically dark moon(at best a third as reflective as
Earth and in may locations as physically dark as coal and that of
Venus being at least twice as vibrant as Earth), really isn't my fault.

[Brad Guth]

How are the oligarch mafias of our planet going to manage to overlord
the rest of us, once we’re off onto exploiting other planets and

moons?

Perhaps our own moon and the extremely nearby(100 LD) planet Venus are

each prime examples of the forbidden fruit. The ongoing farce of

other planets and moons not being Goldilocks suitable is just

mainstream oligarchs trying to hold onto their terrestrial perks and

benefits for as long as possible.

Of course, without proxy wars is where all sorts of technological
advancements for the greater good could be accomplished, though less
profitable for the upper 0.0001% that require a thousand times as much

global resources as most of us require.

Just because our mainstream oligarchs are not in favor of exploiting
our moon or the extremely nearby(100 LD) planet Venus which our entire
Apollo era couldn't even manage to get a view of within any FOV
including our physically dark moon(at best a third as reflective as

Earth and in many locations as physically dark as coal and that of

Venus being at least twice as vibrant as Earth), really isn't my
fault.

On Feb 26, 4:32 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> > Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> > It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> > hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> > Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> > rock seem about right.
>
> > The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> > clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> > what gives with that?
>
> > As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> > irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> > roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> > wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> >http://translate.google.com/#
> > Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> > Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> > “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> > question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

[Brad Guth]

On Feb 20, 2:59 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
> as to viewing this one small but rather interesting area of Venus,
> using your independent deductive expertise as to enlarge or magnify
> this mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon, shouldn’t be
> asking too much.  Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic
> software variations tend to accomplish this enlargement process
> automatically (including iPhone and Safari), although some extra
> filtering and dynamic range compensations can further improve on the
> end result (no direct pixel modifications are ever necessary).
>
> “GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> question:

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>
>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”, GuthVenus
>
> What part of looking critically at the surface of Venus is upsetting
> to you?

How are the oligarch mafias of our planet going to manage to overlord

the rest of us while living large, once some of us are off exploiting

other planets and moons?

Perhaps our own moon and the extremely nearby(100 LD) planet Venus are
each prime examples of the forbidden fruit. The ongoing farce of

other planets and moons not being fully Goldilocks suitable is just

mainstream oligarchs trying to hold onto their terrestrial perks and
benefits for as long as possible.

Of course, without proxy wars is where all sorts of technological

advancements for the greater good (including off-world exploitations)

could be accomplished, though less profitable for the upper 0.0001%

that typically require a thousand times as much global resources as

most of us require.

Just because our mainstream oligarchs are not in favor of exploiting
our moon or the extremely nearby(100 LD) planet Venus which our entire
Apollo era couldn't even manage to get a view of within any FOV
including our physically dark moon(at best a third as reflective as
Earth and in many locations as physically dark as coal and that of
Venus being at least twice as vibrant as Earth), really isn't my
fault.

It’s always amazing how topics associated with the investigative
exploitation of our moon, Venus or even that of utilizing their L1 or
L2, has been so systematically policy taboo/nondisclosure controlled

by those of our public funded mainstream status-quo facade of
authority, in that any honest attempt of a given topic to expose the
off-world potential is automatically forbidden (other than being topic/

author stalked and trashed for all those at risk of façade exposure

can muster), and with no policing of those doing this kind of
mainstream damage-control means we’re in for a rough and arduous
future ride.

As soon as any topic or its author is the least bit suggestive that

our government is capable of not having told us the whole truth and
nothing but the truth about anything, a devout brown-nosed gauntlet of

all sorts of topic/author stalking hell breaks loose on behalf of
mainstream damage-control.

Of course we also do not see any extent of K-12s anywhere within these
unmoderated public Usenet/newsgroups for a darn good reason, because

freedom of speech is actually managed as something entirely

conditional as to influencing whatever audience is at hand. This is
also why most institutionalized prisoners or inmates are never given
internet access as to accessing any public forums or mainstream media

that might offer an audience that isn’t being controlled or
manipulated, and most Americans as well as other Nations of oligarch

controlled intellect seem to like keeping it that way, perhaps because
the victors are supposedly always right about everything.

Social media forums like Facebook, Twitter and even Google+ are
equally managed on a client by client basis, of receiving context as
well as for transmitting information to any other given client or
group/circle of friends, making it really quite downright handy for
our NSA/CIA and you name it agency or special-interest group of
pretentious or self-righteous authority to monitor as well as to step

right in and covertly control or dominate any given situation, because
public publishing of too much truth isn’t actually tolerated when it
puts oligarchs at risk. Nowadays, mainstream internet and especially

intranet servers are capable of managing each individual client, as to

custom formatting and/or moderating whatever they get to see, and

because most Americans are simply not smart enough to get past the

mainstream façade is why independent outsiders are becoming fewer and
farther between.

“Façade is an artificial intelligence-based art/research experiment in
electronic narrative – an attempt to move beyond traditional branching
or hyper-linked ...”

Façade/facade: “An artificial or deceptive front: ideological slogans
that were a façade for geopolitical power struggles.”

Most proxy wars are essentially façades for reasons that the general
public isn’t allowed to discover, and the ongoing ruse and usually FUD

involved within our mainstream façade is quite real, as is the faith-

based façade that’s continually indoctrinated into us from birth to

grave, keeping us afraid of the unknown and thereby unwilling to even
allow others to investigate or exploit.

On the other positive/constructive hand; where’s the honest down side
to off-world exploitations?

[Brad Guth]

Perhaps the rich and powerful of Earth are always going to be very
nice about taking care of the lower 99.9% of us, so we should not have
to worry about whatever some other moon or planet has to offer.

After all, the upper 0.1% represents 700+ million, which is way more
than sufficient for taking care of the upper most 0.0001%. The lower
99.9% can just fend for themselves, while the upper 0.1% get to live
large and the upper most .0001% get to call all the shots without ever
lifting a finger or taking any risk whatsoever.

[Brad Guth]

Math correction:

Perhaps the rich and powerful of Earth are always going to be very
nice about taking care of the lower 99.9% of us, so we should not have
to worry about whatever some other moon or planet has to offer.

After all, the upper 0.1% represents 7+ million, which is more than
sufficient for taking care of the upper most 0.0001%(7000). The lower

99.9% can just fend for themselves, while the upper 0.1% get to live

large, and the upper most .0001% always get to call all the shots
without their ever lifting a finger or taking any risk whatsoever,
because we get to fight their proxy wars and we always get to pay for
everything.

[Brad Guth]

So many of us think they are in charge, when actually only the upper
most 0.0001%(one out of a million) get to be in charge regardless of

[Brad Guth]

How long would it take for us humans to fully exploit and deplete
another planet or large moon?

Using Earth as an example, and knowing that only since the last ice-
age cycle abruptly terminated as of 11,712 years ago (as a timeline
starting-point), would suggest that at the outside most another planet
or moon could manage to survive our advances and fulfill our needs of
mass consumption is roughly 10,000 years. However, further
considering that we’ve only recently advanced our rate of
overpopulation and mass consumption with nearly total disregard as to
the environment and its biodiversity within the last thousand years,
as such might bring that off-world survival timeline down to a more
realistic span of a thousand years, or 50 generations before the
surface of any new planet or livable moon is systematically maximized
to death (assuming a similar composite surface and seasonal tilt as
Earth along with hosting numerous proxy wars).

This means we’ll not only need to discover and populate another
Goldilocks certified planet from time to time, but that other planets
and moons will have to be continually lined up as each new planet and
moon gets overpopulated and consumed by a infestation of humanity that
knows no bounds and has no remorse whatsoever for any consequences of
its actions.

Of course, if we’d just discovered a suitable other Earth 2.0 as of a
century ago, and of knowing what we can easily accomplish with our
existing bigotry, greed, insider trading and proxy wars, could easily
bring our next oligarch overlord dominated planet to its knees, as
traumatized past the point of no return within as little as a century
if the various faith-based and political rivals get to speculate,
insider trade and essentially do as they please regardless of whomever
we the republic elect or appoint.

Ideally, what we need to discover is a very large planet of 9800 km
radius with somewhat less density of perhaps averaging 3.5 g/cm3, so
that surface gravity is similar or somewhat less, and the surface area
is worth perhaps twice that of Earth, however for several reasons it
would be nice having at least twice as much atmospheric density.
Otherwise, each new planet or moon that’s Goldilocks approved would
have to be restricted as to accommodating only a few fully compatible
groups of humans that have most everything in common.

Secondly (as our plan B), in order to hold onto whatever terrestrial
resource remainders and survive within the GW/AGW consequences we have
at hand, whereas instead of our migrating to another planet or
habitable moon of a gas giant or brown dwarf, we could simply relocate
our moon, as to station-keeping within the Earth L1 halo orbit. This
would require some complex logistics of orbital expertise and applied
physics, as well as always forward-thinking which is actually hard to
come by nowadays, especially when moon relocation is not going to be
any geoengineered quick fix. Of course the use of TBMs in order to
excavate and tunnel inside as to establishing a vast number of human
complex habitats, would make even our little moon as perfectly good to
go for many thousands of years, and this effort of moon relocation
would also eliminate our out-of-control GW and more than offset AGW
issues, as well as cut our ocean tides by 50% and reduce seismic plate
tectonic issues by 75% (thereby saving the infrastructure and
biodiversity of Earth at the very least 0.1 trillion dollars per
month, or a full trillion per month in 2050 dollars) by figuring on
Earth hosting ten billion humans, and essentially not enough of
anything to go around.

I’ll have to continue editing in order to add better context to this
one, but hopefully this initial concept of our human off-world
expansion will get you Moors thinking as to what we should do once
we’ve managed to get ourselves onto another planet (hot or cold).

On Feb 26, 4:32 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> > It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> > hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> > Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> > rock seem about right.
>
> > The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> > clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> > what gives with that?
>
> > As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> > irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> > roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> > wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> >http://translate.google.com/#
> > Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> > Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> > “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> > question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

[Brad Guth]

Ignoring what our moon and the extremely nearby planet Venus has to
offer, is exactly what the mainstream oligarchs in charge want of the
rest of us. Apparently, the only thing that matters is sustaining
their mainstream status-quo w/o revisions. Such a pity when the brown-
nosed minions get to topic/author stalk and trash these public Usenet/
newsgroups (unmoderated newsgroups like alt.astronomy), keeping K-12s
and anyone else they can intimidate and even terrorize at free will.

https://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/topics?hl=en

No wonder this nation is becoming such a lost cause, and future
generations are already destined to being past the point of no return.

For those few willing and brave enough to read and contribute to this
and other public topics, you need to be aware of what the motivations
and hidden agendas are of those disrupting and even hijacking our
topics have at risk. If you can't deal with this intellectual
terrorism gauntlet imposed by those trashing Usenet/newsgroups, then
perhaps you have no business reading or contributing to anything, much
less edgy stuff that needs an open mindset. If you can't
independently think for your self, you might as well give up and just
parrot or robot your way though whatever life these oligarchs have
planned for you, and do it with a smile.

[Brad Guth]

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus

“GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

On Mar 9, 12:17 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Brad Guth]

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>
>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>

This topic about Venus and the little area of GuthVenus isn’t about
promoting all the negatives and allowing the maximum extent of
obfuscation and denial that one can muster, but instead it’s about
considering as to what that worse than toasty planet has to offer, and
what level(s) of expertise and technology it’ll take for us to safely
exploit that extremely nearby planet.

Of course, if we just sit around long enough we will not have to
bother with going to our moon, Mars or Venus in order to exploit those
worlds for their rare and perhaps common elements that are only rare
to us because of our extensive global resource depletions, because
asteroids from the Sirius Oort cloud will be delivering those items of
value to us within 10,000+ tonne asteroids that our very best

observations and radars apparently can not detect until it's too

late. However, perhaps it would be kinda nice of us to at least warn
the crew of ISS, of future asteroids passing through their NO FLY
zone, whereas our ISS astronauts only have a limited supply of
Depends.

Russia has estimated their 16+ meter rock/asteroid of roughly 10% iron

and nickel that only barely missed impacting a major populated city,
is perhaps only representing the tip of the cosmic iceberg arriving in
the form of the Sirius Oort cloud, that's highly populated by such
asteroids and likely to offer a few dozen planetoid size items.

Apparently our fancy radars have become useless at detecting these
fast moving and typically fast arriving items of 1e4 to 1e6 tonnes

until it's too late. Perhaps this is not exactly good news for those

onboard our spendy ISS that are kind of sitting ducks with hardly any
physical protection or failsafe options other than early warnings
giving them a chance of using their escape pods before it’s too late.

Venus of course has a really nifty thick and dense atmosphere that by
rights should fend off even 1e5 tonne asteroids, as well as otherwise

moderating the arrival of any 1e6 tonne item down to a dull roar of

causing hardly if any surface damage unless it was made of mostly (50+
%) pure heavy metals. The naked moon on the other hand is always at
serious risk of even dealing with any one kg arrival, including a
lethal spray of secondary debris that could easily radius and/or

downrange for 1000 km, if not sent back into low orbit to only fall

back at the lethal velocity of at least 2.35 km/sec upon the whole
1.1e4 km circumference, covering a thousand km wide path.

Too bad that only Russians have been smart enough to deal with Venus,
where as our best talent can barely get a robotic mission onto a
mostly frozen to death planet that at least so far indicates as having
few if any rare element that we could use, because even our moon is at
least a hundredfold more valuable per cubic meter.

Extracting valuable raw elements from the innards of our physically
dark and paramagnetic moon, can’t be put off forever. Venus can
always wait, although no other planet is situated so nearby(100 LD)

and otherwise so easily accessible to our remote science (according to

a recent NOVA production of “Earth From Space” whereas our modern

satellite radar imaging of Earth can nowadays obtain 25 mm resolution
of its surface), and it’s at least better than half that for mapping
the naked surface of our moon at just 6 mm/pixel. According to recent
improvements in radar imaging, even terrestrial ground based radar
imaging of Venus should be able to achieve 25 meter resolution, or

figure 0.25 meter resolution of our moon.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/earth-from-space.html

Gold, silver, platinum and so many other rare and valuable elements

to most of us, that typically require extensive mining excavations

with often bloody and lethal consequences, as well as spendy

processing along with consuming loads of energy that's also in short
supply, not to mention our having to deal with the subsequent

environment pollution along with some of their direct toxicity and
global biodiversity impact issues (all of which being negative), are

perfectly good reasons as to why off-world exploitations can't be such
a bad idea.

The likes of our moon and Venus should offer at least a combined
teratonne of gold, and otherwise many teratonnes of other precious
metals like silver, nickel, copper and zinc, not to mention those

heavy reactive atomic elements like uranium, thorium and of course
always radium and natural plutonium shouldn’t be unexpected. We can

also use nuclear energy as well as thermonuclear weapons in order to

mine and excavate our way into and through vast amounts of crust.

Nuclear powered TBMs could be used for tunneling into our moon, and
unlimited environment damage can become an acceptable tradeoff.

Where’s the down side?

Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
as to viewing this one small but rather interesting area of Venus,
using your independent deductive expertise as to enlarge or magnify
this mountainous area of Venus that I’ve focused upon, shouldn’t be
asking too much. Most of modern PhotoZoom and other photographic
software variations tend to accomplish this enlargement process
automatically (including iPhone and Safari), although some extra

applied filtering and thereby image enhancing for dynamic range
compensations can further improve upon the end result (no direct pixel
modifications should ever be necessary, because it’s all a derivative
from the original Magellan radar imaging).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#

[Brad Guth]

As for Goldilocks surviving on the surface of Venus has never been my
intentions or any such suggestions for others. My thoughts were
always about the exploitation potential and accomplishing this via
mostly robotics, but otherwise using a well insulated composite rigid
airship that could easily accommodate a crew of more than a thousand
doesn’t seem all that insurmountable. The fact that others may have
already been their and doing their own exploitations, is just further
evidence and proof of why we should be doing the same.

A chemical fluid and nuclear powered airship still seems like a good
idea. Of course air conditioning the main cabin areas of this
enormous flying machine is going to take more than a few window
mounted air conditioners, and not that keeping the hydrogen gas as hot
as possible isn’t a perfectly good idea.

On Mar 13, 1:19 pm, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
> "The cooling elements are sandwiches of a normal metal, a 1-nanometer-
> thick insulating layer, and a superconducting metal. When a voltage is
> applied, the hottest electrons "tunnel" from the normal metal through
> the insulator to the superconductor. The temperature in the normal
> metal drops dramatically and drains electronic and vibrational energy
> from the object being cooled."
>
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130308183821.htm
>
> Maxwell's Demon:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_demon
>
> Double-A

Now that's getting our moneys worth out of a public investment. Too
bad our spendy NIF can’t seem to manage the same.

Besides all sorts of new and improved terrestrial applications, this
new and improved refrigeration as efficient heat transferring without
moving parts or using freons should do wonders for cooling
applications on Venus, as well as for managing temperatures within the
GuthVenus composite rigid airship.

This might eventually replace using helium, which is often not getting
recycled enough as is, and natural resources of helium are greatly
depleted or simply vented off as an unavoidable composite of our
hydrocarbons and natural gas exploitations and their mass consumption.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130308183821.htm

"It's one of the most flabbergasting results I've seen," project
leader Joel Ullom says. "We used quantum mechanics in a nanostructure
to cool a block of copper. The copper is about a million times heavier
than the refrigerating elements. This is a rare example of a nano- or
microelectromechanical machine that can manipulate the macroscopic
world."

“The technology may offer a compact, convenient means of chilling
advanced sensors below standard cryogenic temperatures -- 300
milliKelvin (mK), typically achieved by use of liquid helium -- to
enhance their performance in quantum information systems, telescope
cameras, and searches for mysterious dark matter and dark energy.
As described in Applied Physics Letters, the NIST refrigerator's
cooling elements, consisting of 48 tiny sandwiches of specific
materials, chilled a plate of copper, 2.5 centimeters on a side and 3
millimeters thick, from 290 mK to 256 mK. The cooling process took
about 18 hours. NIST researchers expect that minor improvements will
enable faster and further cooling to about 100 mK.”

This is the sort of positive/constructive R&D advancements that the
public should be willing to pay for. Perhaps sequestering of public
funding is going to turn out as a very good way of bringing forth any
number of technology improvements.

[Brad Guth]

On Feb 26, 5:32 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 2, 7:45 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Is Venus as truly insurmountable as we’ve been taught to believe?
>
> > It’s not exactly a Goldilocks kind of place, because it’s certainly
> > hot and seriously pressurized.
>
> > Those perfectly natural looking mountains, canyons and the associated
> > rock seem about right.
>
> > The atmosphere is mostly toxic to us, but well above them thick acidic
> > clouds it gets way colder than anywhere here or above Earth, and so
> > what gives with that?
>
> > As to its surface, is there anything that’s otherwise out of place or
> > irregular upon its hot crust and of the mountainous geology of its
> > roasted to death terrain and subsequent erosion that’s perhaps even a
> > wee bit unnatural or unexpected?
>
> >http://translate.google.com/#
> > Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
> > Venus”,GuthVenus
>
> > “GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> > question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
>

>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...

>
>  http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
>  https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
> Venus”, GuthVenus

As for Goldilocks ever surviving on the naked moon or the hellish
surface of Venus, this notion has never been any part of my intentions
or any such suggestions for others to consider, because only advanced
intelligent types could ever manage to accomplish this with ease. My

thoughts were always about the exploitation potential and
accomplishing this via mostly robotics, but otherwise using a well

insulated composite rigid airship that could if need be easily
accommodate a crew of more than a thousand, doesn’t seem all that
technically insurmountable. The fact that others may have already
been there and doing their own exploitations, is just further evidence

and proof of why we should be doing the same.

A step in the right direction would be to establish our OASIS/Gateway
of Venus L2, as our cool go-between depot for dealing with the task of
exploiting Venus. Of course the same analogy applies for establishing
our Earth-moon L1 OASIS/outpost and ultimate Gateway, that could have
been easily created decades ago for roughly 10% of what those nearly
worthless Apollo missions set us back.

For an even better off-world experience, a chemical/fluid and nuclear
powered airship still seems like a perfectly good idea. Of course air

conditioning the main cabin areas of this enormous flying machine is

going to take more than a few window mounted air conditioners from
WalMart, and not that keeping the hydrogen gas regulated as hot as
possible isn’t a perfectly good idea for increased buoyancy.

On Mar 13, 1:19 pm, Double-A <double...@hush.com> wrote:
> "The cooling elements are sandwiches of a normal metal, a 1-nanometer-
> thick insulating layer, and a superconducting metal. When a voltage is
> applied, the hottest electrons "tunnel" from the normal metal through
> the insulator to the superconductor. The temperature in the normal
> metal drops dramatically and drains electronic and vibrational energy
> from the object being cooled."
>
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130308183821.htm
>
> Maxwell's Demon:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_demon
>
> Double-A

Now that's getting our moneys worth out of our public NIST

investment. Too bad our spendy NIF can’t seem to manage the same

benefits, outside of improved fusion weapons. Might as well sequester
NIF in order to keep our NIST going strong.

Besides all sorts of new and improved terrestrial applications, this

new and improved quantum refrigeration as efficient heat transferring

public should be quite willing to pay for. Perhaps sequestering of

public funding is going to turn out as a very good way of bringing

forth any number of technology improvements, that perhaps our NIF,
DARPA and DOE should have gotten promoted as of a decade ago, such as
promoting thorium fueled reactors that could deliver failsafe clean
energy at not 10% the ongoing all-inclusive cost of conventional
nuclear fueled reactors, thereby making longer range electric cars,
trucks and buses into a win-win kind of affordable clean
transportation alternative, along with always improved batteries that
such application would promote. In fact, all sorts of energy
demanding products and services should become a done deal, benefiting
everyone from oligarchs on down to those living on the street.

[Brad Guth]

Too bad the extremely nearby(100 LD) planet Venus is always kept so
mainstream taboo/non-disclosure rated. Go figure how he mainstream
status-quo is always so frightened of what I’ve had to offer.

Earth From Space / NOVA
According to the latest science capability as having been reported to
us via NOVA, of looking at a given planet from space (via satellite),

and extracting one inch radar resolution as to terrestrial ocean

surface levels and thereby a derivative of method interpreting its
hidden terrain (far below sea level), while an even more advanced
Canadian satellite imaging via radar accomplishes better than a
quarter inch resolution mapping above sea level, are each state of the
art forms of remote imaging science that we can take to the
observationology bank.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/earth-from-space.html

This new and improved radar imaging capability means that a modern

satellite mission of “Magellan 2.0” by rights should nowadays be
capable of accomplishing at least as good as 25 mm radar mapping

resolution of the Venus surface, and nowadays accomplishing this

imaging capability without our having to reinvent a damn thing.

Of course you’d still have to be smart enough as to interpreting radar
derivative composites of the given terrain, as hopefully
differentiating between any potentially artificial or unnatural
attributes as opposed to whatever should be perfectly natural, because
without some deductive interpretation skill is where nothing remote
imaged via camera, radar, laser altimeters or even by the naked eye
can ever be trusted to interpret anything as artificial or natural.
In other words, without basic image interpreting skills(as viewed from
above), might as well hire the blind to deal with all of our science
observationology issues.

This is where all of my critics come off as being extra special, all-
knowing and first-hand expertise at absolutely everything, which of
course they are in fact capable of delivering nothing of the kind.
Instead they impose obfuscation to suit as well as FUD and maintain
absolute authority over the rest of us, because that’s their real job.

In this instance of a NOVA public science infomercial production, I

can only support and applaud those of the Google NOVA team and their

combined investigative scientific efforts, on behalf of gathering the

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”,GuthVenus

“GuthVenus” at 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow/5630418595926178146

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif

https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#