Apparently government(s) can do absolutely no wrong, no matters how
many mistakes, corruptions and skulduggery they’re caught red-handed
even red-pecker with, or their having been documented with having
orchestrated false-flag events and personal agendas that directly
benefited their own tax avoidance status-quo.
On Aug 2, 2:29 am, Painius <starswir...@aol.com> wrote:
> No, the SOVIETS were not our enemy, they were our COMPETITORS. Yes,
> we were doing things for them, like giving them tons of grain so they
> could feed their people. Communism simply does not work well in an
> industrialized nation or union of nations. A study was performed in
> 1960 that showed that while one farmer in the US could feed twelve
> people in the city, in the Soviet Union, one farmer could only feed
> one person in the city. The instinct of territoriality makes all the
> difference. Industrial states have far more people in the cities than
> they have farmers. In agricultural states there are far more farmers
> than there are city dwellers, so communism can actually work in such
> nations, but not in the USSR, an industrial state.
> The Soviets, however, were highly competitive when it came to the race
> for space. You would extend an already overwhelming conspiracy theory
> all the way to the USSR? Don't you see what a dipstick that makes you
> look like?
> Your argument has more holes than a coral reef, Bast. Nobody's been
> "caught" because they didn't do anything wrong. It's just plain silly
> to think they did.
> You may have the last word in this thread, but logic, reason and
> evidence that point to the reality of the Apollo Moon landings have
> the last word on this subject.
> Indelibly yours,
> Paine @http://astronomy.painellsworth.net/
> "When you stop dreaming, then you're only sleeping."
You mean that government corruption by the Oligarch Semites of that
era doesn't work any better than the upper caste corruption that got
our nation into such trillions of debt that obviously you and other
rednecks highly approve of.
Are you saying that Muslims imposing themselves as Semites were
somehow responsible for the cold-war era and everything of social/
political corruption ever since?
The USSR was in fact doing the exact same cover-thy-but and job
security or bust for their own government employed millions after
their having terminated Hitler for us, as were those military
industrial complex and political assholes of ours saving their butts
and after as much public funded loot as they could squeeze out of us.
What exactly is it about government funded folks (including those
retired or just receiving benefits) that think their government can do
Are you saying that the US and USSR didn't create North Korea, and not
having allowed it to fester?
Are you saying the Karma of 9/11 had absolutely nothing to do with the
actions of our government and their vast upper caste web of cloak and
dagger agencies running their own shows?
How many government agency and/or contracted failures and systemic
corruption does it take to make you notice how willfully untrustworthy
they've been all along?
JFK attempted to fix part of the mess, and it got him dead thanks to
those of your kind.
It seems our crazy mainstreamers keep insisting that our cold-war era
of spooks, moles, spies and unlimited national and international
skullduggery with loads of their need-to-know and nondisclosure policy
enforcements was unavoidable and supposedly put us walking upon that
physically dark and paramagnetic moon, was this one and perhaps only
era of their having been telling us the whole truth and nothing but
the truth, even though we still can't seem to replicate such
capability from that cloak and dagger era of mostly Nazi fly-by-rocket
technology and of Kodak that still offers no independent photographic
forensics? (perhaps because they simply wouldn’t dare)
Is there independent photographic and/or physical forensics that’ll
stand up in court? (because apparently the mainstream of public-funded
science never has to prove anything beyond their word)
It seems objective science that can be easily replicated by others is
only required for those of us that need to further substantiate
something interpreted as new or improved, whereas the mainstream
status-quo gets to wing-it by using their purely subjective science
and need-to-know references that never have to objectively prove
anything, nor having to pay a cent for their publishing that includes
getting into our K12 textbooks. Apparently it doesn’t even seem the
least bit odd that our physically dark and paramagnetic lunar
environment wasn’t even the least bit photographically contrasty due
to having only one source of illumination and otherwise offering no
diffused sky radiation or Rayleigh scattering, as well as having
recorded no indications whatsoever of any bluish planetshine nor
having depicted any photographic degrade from the raw solar influx
with loads of UV that should have produced secondary/recoil colors or
local radiation of X-rays and gamma? (because our moon is a very
special kind of inert place where such physics is conditional and
perhaps sodium hadn’t existed at the time, and it’s impossible to
photograph any planet other than Earth along with the local terrain
that’s physically dark)
Yourself and most others of perpetual naysayism or mainstream status-
quo is as good as it gets, as having thus far demonstrated no actual
photographic processing expertise or deductive interpretive skills, as
well as having no computer PhotoShop skills or similar expertise of
any kind, and yet you manage to interpret nothing the least bit
unusual or unexpected about the geology of such a nearby planet as
Apparently those natural geology rules of bedrock formation and
erosion for the extremely nearby planet Venus are functioning entirely
different than any other planet or moon. Go figure how those
continually opposed to anything that isn't insider Oligarch approved,
are also required and/or compelled to topic/author stalk and bash at
this one and at anything else I might have to offer, and for all the
Semitic Oligarch approved hate and disparagement they can muster.
“Guth Venus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
Other thumbnail images, including mgn_c115s095_1.gif (225 m/pixel)
Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1
BTW; there's still no American flags on Venus, but there are USSR/
Russian flags on landers that got there decades before us. So, we
have to accept that Venus and all of its natural resources belongs to
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”
On Jul 29, 10:38 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just because the given surface of a geothermally and geodynamically
> active planet that's extremely nearby, physically hot as hell and
> under a great deal of atmospheric pressure that’s ideally suited for
> using composite rigid airships, doesn't mean it's not an ideal
> candidate for mining.
> The 5e20 kg mass of that Venus atmosphere doesn’t act/react like
> anything we have to compare it to. Therefore new and improved science
> interpretations give us alternatives to consider a much wider range of
> technology that could be applied.
> On Jul 16, 6:52 am, Mike Collins <acridiniumes...@gmail.com> wrote:
> : Actually there are nine different kinds of carbon dioxide by my
> : calculations.
> : 12C, 13C, 14C , 16O, 18O.
> : The different carbon atoms make very little difference to the IR
> : spectrum but the molecule with both 16O and 18O has an extra
> : band in the IR. presumably this is the symmetric stretch which
> : will cause a change in dipole moment of the molecule with mixed
> : oxygen isotopes and hence IR absorption.
> In addition to those odd little amounts of compressed carbon dioxide,
> there’s acids because of the local water vapor that’s continually
> upwelling from within, along with the considerable venting of helium
> which indicates either a great deal of thorium and uranium is inside
> of Venus, and/or that of elements much newer than those of Earth.
> Photolysis of H2SO4 1 as the Source of Sulfur Species in the Venus
> Besides the mostly CO2 atmosphere of Venus, it is also offering loads
> of H2SO4 (which by the way this composite of sulfuric acid has to
> include water) and otherwise there’s H2CO3(carbonic acid) and there’s
> even considerable He(12 ppm helium = 1100 ppm if a given m3 of that
> Venus atmosphere were released here on Earth) that’s escaping through
> those highly reflective and relatively cool acidic clouds of that
> extremely robust Venus atmosphere, plus there’s also a thin but
> heavier S8 layer and below that are compressed forms of H2CO3 and CO2
> adding to the insulative atmosphere that due to the upwelling heat and
> solar wind it has to get continually replenished, that’s otherwise
> blocking the convection escapement or upwelling outflux of its
> geothermal heat in addition to the small amount of solar energy that
> gets absorbed by day and more than fully radiated by night, all
> because Venus hasn’t been getting any hotter, but instead the most
> recent measurements seem too indicate a slightly cooler planet than
> just a couple decades ago.
> “The team saw an unidentified signature at 3.3 micrometres in the mid-
> infrared region of the spectrum. "It was conspicuous and systematic,
> increasing with depth in the atmosphere during the occultation, so we
> knew it was real," says Bertaux.”
> Of course carbonated H2SO4+H2CO3 shouldn’t be all that hard to find,
> which also represents that H2O as water vapor has to be available.
> Naturally you’ll have to obfuscate or exclude this science if you
> wanted to stick with the mainstream status-quo interpretation that
> intelligent other life couldn’t possibly coexist nor otherwise
> function on such a nasty planet.
> Venus is also radiating more surface heat than derived from the solar
> influx, thereby its unbalanced thermodynamics of substantial
> geothermal venting that’s acting like a somewhat newish planet can’t
> be so easily ignored unless you’re content with being continually
> snookered and dumbfounded by those of public-funded authority that get
> to obfuscate or exclude as much science as they like in order to
> support their own theories because that’s what public funded research
> is really all about. Independent research is apparently undesirable
> and untrustworthy.
> An Alternate View of Venus /John Ackerman
> Unlike astronomy and astrophysics that has to apply an educated guess
> at whatever any given point-source of stellar illumination or that of
> any minor reflected itsy bitsy speck of a planet albedo has to offer,
> whereas "Guth Venus" gets seriously nearby and looking big as hell,
> offering us a terrific image of actual physical terrain and multiple
> variations of complex patterns of that physically hot surface
> environment to look at and interpret, that simply can't be so easily
> explained away as any perfectly natural formed geology that we know
> of. So, either those natural laws of geology and the subsequent
> physics of its surface formations and the subsequent erosions have
> been functioning differently on Venus, or perhaps we’re looking at an
> unusually complex surface of what seems as though having been
> artificially modified to suit.
> The ongoing science of astronomy is nearly all/100% subjective, and
> it’s so often socially/politically moderated and/or that of a faith-
> based biased form of intellectually skewed observationology that gets
> to apply as much obfuscation and denial as they like, leaving the rest
> of us as mainstream outsiders with only at best our individual
> deductive interpretations to guide us onto the next step. Funny how
> any quality radar image of Venus that seems perfectly weird and/or
> unusual enough doesn't mainstream qualify as anything except that of
> depicting a naturally formed terrain of hot rocks, even though not one
> other image of any other planet (including Earth) or moon has anything
> of remotely similar pixels to offer that’s offering us such a large
> collective scale of geometric complexity, as well as seemingly
> offering us such an artificial or rational like infrastructure of an
> off-world community likeness at the same time.
> I tend to doubt the qualification of astrology, but it’s hard to
> automatically banish or exclude all of their interpretations of
> science. Phase locking to Earth is yet another one of an astronomical
> kind, and perhaps there’s even some of those astrology issues worth
> taking into account.
> “The Earth and Venus are engaged in a phase locking of their two
> orbits as described by chaotic dynamics. The two are orbiting in an
> almost exact 13:8 resonance, which has consequences for both planets.
> This phase locking has the consequence of driving the long ages of the
> Apparently those natural geology rules of bedrock formation and
> erosion for the extremely nearby planet Venus are functioning entirely
> different than any other planet or moon. Go figure how those
> continually opposed to anything that isn't insider Oligarch approved,
> are also required and/or compelled to topic/author stalk and bash at
> this one and at anything else I might have to offer, for all the
> Semitic Oligarch approved hate and disparagement they can muster.
> “Guth Venus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> Other thumbnail images, including mgn_c115s095_1.gif (225 m/pixel)
> Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1
> Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”
> On Jun 29, 5:58 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:> Venus is anything but an inert planet, and its geology is still
> > extremely active at producing atmosphere. Of course setting up a
> > surface camp on Venus is not a good option at this time, although
> > using a composite rigid airship is quite another option that is
> > technically doable for us and especially for telerobotic missions that
> > could be nicely commanded from the cool oasis outpost/gateway of Venus
> > L2, or even from Earth.
> > Actually, the ESA versions of Kodak moments is also one of stacking
> > monochromatic image frames that are given artificially assigned color,
> > so that their derivative image offers us a good idea or representation
> > as to what them natural cloud colors might seem to the naked human
> > eye. Radar imaging is of course 100% colorblind (much like NASA and
> > DARPA) and has to be artificially colored, because radar imaging can
> > never represent any true or saturated colors on its own to begin with.
> > “Guth Venus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
> > question:https://picasaweb.google.com/102736204560337818634/BradGuth#slideshow...
> > 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
> > Our naked moon under the natural raw solar illumination that's always
> > going to be extremely contrasty as hell and otherwise loaded with UV
> > plus local IR saturation, is also by itself problematic even for Kodak
> > color film that's unavoidably going to record all of those UV
> > secondary/recoil photons as well as picking up the vibrant amount of
> > bluish earthshine (can be up to fifty times more illuminating than
> > moonlight here on Earth). However with narrow bandpass filters is
> > where it's possible to reconstruct by way of image stacking a
> > reasonably good color saturated image of our moon which has numerous
> > surface minerals that’ll also unavoidably react to the raw solar UV
> > (aka black-light) producing those typically bluish/purple hues and a
> > few other unexpected colors.
> > Frame stacking and extra color saturated images are never going to be
> > 100% natural as per the naked eye, nor much less satisfy every critic,
> > but they can be easily adjusted to suit our visual interpretations
> > without ever having to artificially assign any color saturations per
> > stacked image layer. Our NASA and especially their Apollo colorblind
> > era of brown-nosed minions and FUD-master clowns would always call it
> > "false color", even though all of the colors are those represented as
> > entirely generated by the natural metallicity of our naked and
> > physically dark moon to begin with.https://www.google.com/search?q=moon+color&num=100&hl=en&client=firef...
> > Modern digital color camera imaging has some essential optical
> > bandpass coatings and is otherwise firmware compensated in order to
> > give us a normal looking and only somewhat extra color saturated
> > image, which can be further manipulated via PhotoShop to suit whatever
> > you'd like to decrease or increase for affect. Though once again,
> > such digital camera obtained images are not artificially nor false
> > colorizing a damn thing that wasn't within the original image data to
> > begin with.
> > Just like resampling an image in order to enlarge or zoom-in for a
> > somewhat better look-see, whereas there's nothing artificially being
> > done to add or subtract from the original image data that would make
> > something square seem round or something round turn out as looking
> > square. In other words, a perfectly straight pixel alignment when
> > enlarged is still going to be a perfectly straight line, and any
> > potentially curved alignment of pixels is still going to become a
> > curved representation upon enlargement without anyone artificially
> > doing a damn thing in order to fool anyone.
> > However, even the naked eye can be fooled by way of distance (too
> > close or too far away), weird or unexpected illumination angles,
> > secondary reflected light, dynamic range issues and those pesky
> > reflections or shadows, into interpreting something that’s not
> > actually there to begin with. That’s why humans need to use 3D and
> > many comparisons in order to interpret everything that’s visually
> > implied.
> > Usually those Apollo era diehards are retired but none the less still
> > fully public-funded, as well as remaining colorblind and as visually
> > bipolar dyslexics or simply dysfunctionals to begin with, because as
> > FUD-masters and brown-nosed clowns tend to go, they have no viable
> > option but to 100% accept and promote everything their Semitic and
> > Oligarch gods of that Apollo cold-war era ever had to say about our
> > physically dark and naked moon that’s supposedly inert and thus
> > worthless of any mineral or raw element values.
> > http://groups.google.com/groups/search
> > http://translate.google.com/#
> > Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/Guth Venus
> > On May 17, 11:02 am, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Unlike our overpopulated and resource depleted planet, Venus has more
> > > than its fair share of helium/4He, at 12 ppm is truly diffusing a
> > > considerable amount of its 4He, especially significant considering its
> > > thick and dense column of atmosphere, 90% gravity and its way hotter
> > > environment with hardly any protective magnetosphere to fend off those
> > > solar winds from easily extracting its 4He.
> > > “How best to get rid of ozone/O3: (you fluff and lubricate it with a
> > > bunch of lofty little atoms of 4He)”http://groups.google.com/group/alt.astronomy/browse_frm/thread/e49406...
> > > Our own 4He reserves are about to run out, and the natural geology
> > > diffusion rate of 4He isn’t going to cover 1% of our future
> > > terrestrial needs. This is fast becoming a serious problem
> > > (especially as India and China get with their own advancing technology
> > > that needs 4He) that’ll have future generations asking; what the hell
> > > were their parents and grandparents thinking?
> > > http://groups.google.com/groups/search
> > > http://translate.google.com/#
> > > Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”
> > > On Mar 24, 4:39 pm, Brad Guth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > What should the natural terrain and whatever 3D plan-view site of any
> > > > significant off-world logistics on behalf of depicting a large scale
> > > > mining operation look like from the air, or better yet from that
> > > > perspective of a spendy spy satellite using SAR (Synthetic Aperture
> > > > Radar) imaging, that’s peering downward at 43 degrees and compiling a
> > > > derivative composite image from 36 confirming scans per pixel, tend to
> > > > look like?
> > > > Shouldn’t there be any number of large scale structures, possibly
> > > > including a nearby airstrip or some sort of relatively flat surface
> > > > for shuttles or even for accommodating extremely large industrial
> > > > airships to utilize?
> > > > If there’s any nearby deeply eroded or lava-flow created ravine or
> > > > natural formed canyon, shouldn’t that sort of vertically offset
> > > > terrain be logical as to our detecting some kind of bridge?
> > > > For their local construction purposes, shouldn’t there logically be a
> > > > nearby geometric reformed area of a bedrock quarry site, or two or
> > > > three?
> > > > If having an atmospheric density worth 65+ kg/m3 buoyancy and only
> > > > 90.5% gravity was the norm; what might a suitably commercial or
> > > > industrial class of large airship look like?
> > > > How and/or where upon such a toasty planet would that sort of large
> > > > airship be parked or safely stored until use? (in other words, what
> > > > sort of local infrastructure would be necessary for accommodating such
> > > > an industrial mining ore/cargo hauling airship?)
> > > > If the planet were geologically active and obviously science
> > > > quantified as venting new atmospheric elements like crazy; shouldn’t
> > > > there be a few natural and possibly artificial reservoirs of fluids?
> > > > If this were to be an actual ET or indigenous mining operation;
> > > > wouldn’t the assortment and arrangement of such infrastructure have to
> > > > further suggest a rational community like layout or city/town like
> > > > configuration?
> > > > If this were all situated within a highly mountainous terrain;
> > > > wouldn’t this community of large geometric structures and their
> > > > infrastructure need to look very much out of place from the random
> > > > geology happenstance of nature, or at the very least way out of
> > > > ordinary from anything mother or father nature could have
> > > > accomplished?
> > > > If the local terrain indicated as having been geologically active, and
> > > > if there were multiple signs of substantial ongoing heavy and/or dense
> > > > gas/vapor venting of any sort of hot and potential metallicity
> > > > content; as such shouldn’t a pattern of that vented outflow also be
> > > > detected by the same SAR imaging methods?
> > > > I’m certain if we start exploiting the full metallicity worth of our
> > > > moon, that when viewed from Earth, amateur astronomers will be capable
> > > > of imaging sufficient resolution to see our surface structures and
> > > > identify their rational community like infrastructure. Of course,
> > > > mining the naked moon would be a very difficult and risky
> > > > consideration (unless mostly accomplished via TBMs operating entirely
> > > > inside of the moon), than doing Venus that’s probably considerably
> > > > hotter inside than on the surface.
> > > > Perhaps yourself and others can add a little something else to this
> > > > list of what an actively thriving community of an intelligent mining
> > > > operation should look like from an advanced spy satellite perspective,
> > > > keeping in mind that the scale of such items has to be worth at least
> > > > 75 meters/pixel or larger in order to count.
> > > > 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” 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
> > > > 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
> > > > http://translate.google.com/#
> > > > Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”