> 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."

> 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
> rusty
> : 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
> Mesosphere
>  http://yly-mac.gps.caltech.edu/z_temp/zjunk/4%20press/zhang%20venus%2...

>  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.
>  http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071010130150.htm
>  “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.”

>  http://www.esa.int/esaMI/Venus_Express/SEMF8BV7D7F_0.html
>  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
>  http://www.firmament-chaos.com/papers/fvenuspaper.pdf

>  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.
>  http://syzygyastro.hubpages.com/hub/Venus-Its-Curious-Orbital-Relatio...
> “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
> Earth.”

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

>  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

>  http://groups.google.com/groups/search
>  http://translate.google.com/#
>  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”