Hot Rocks of Venus that are looking intelligent
BradGuth
not being told the whole truth and nothing but the truth about much of
anything these days. Talk about revising history, science and a whole
lot more, whereas those hot rocks of Venus that so happen to look as
though having been arranged so gosh darn unusually intelligent, are
most likely still there to behold, and we've had the technology for
having taken a much closer look-see for better than a good decade.
This observationology of image interpretation isn't the least bit
hocus-pocus phony, nor is it having any ulterior motives or hidden
agenda like our mutually perpetrated cold-war(s), or even hot-war(s)
over fossil and yellowcake energy as of lately, and there's nothing
but an all around win-win for science and humanity if in fact any of
those hot rocks of Venus are actually of those modified and/or having
been put to good use by intelligent other life. At least there's
nothing about Venus that's technically all that insurmountable, that
is unless you're not quite half as smart as a hot rock.
The official NASA/Magellan image of GIF format, as being that of a 36
look per pixel composite as having been given essentially the benefit
of those 36 confirming radar looks per each pixel, is by itself worthy
of our consideration for all kinds of honest reasons besides those
patterns of whatever's interpreting as so AI /(intelligent/
artificial), as opposed to all of the perfectly natural appearing
items that are of equally outstanding planetology, such as the
impressive FLUID ARCH.
The big question of the day is; Does anyone within Google/NOVA's
usenetland of such all-knowing wizards care to discuss/review the long
and growing list of what-ifs? (after all, for all we know those hot-
foot Venusians could even be of a Zion/semitic faith)
For a topic starter, we are obviously not talking about any cool and
wet Earth like environment, or even that of our weird, naked and
somewhat salty moon, nor of any such dead and nearly frozen to the
core likes of Mars or of whatever's so much further away. At times
Venus is actually extremely nearby (a little over 100X the distance of
our moon), and it's absolutely chuck full of its very own geothermal
cache of raw energy that's sharing a surface of 20.5 w/m2 (roughly 256
fold greater than Earth), that which only a born-again dork of a
naysayer like most of our usenet anti-think-tank rusemasters couldn't
possibly appreciate.
Why exclude the unknown simply because it's unknown? In other words,
most likely your whole intellectual mindset worth of whatever's
supposedly wiser and thus greater than most, that's simply faiyjh-
based obligated on behalf of what has to go out of its infomercial
spewing way in order to exclude upon any such off-world intelligent
other life, regardless of whatever's the applied technology, or even
to banish anything that's of off-world intelligent potential
regardless of whatever's the alternative planetology and of its local
evolution, of which you and I know absolutely nothing about is what
seems a bit counter-productive.
If at all possible, please do further explain as to those very
intelligent and/or rational community looking items, as if somehow
those were being purely natural, by way of offering us some other
image examples, as to sharing in where such a rational complex
community looking group of planetology considerations are otherwise to
be found within common/terrestrial planetology w/o AI benefit of
whatever intelligent life accomplished, such as right here on Earth
should offer. For one basic observationology argument example; How
many complex looking tarmacs are there on Earth that had absolutely
nothing whatsoever of AI to do with their having been created or
otherwise crafted/modified for their rational use by intelligent life?
Thanks once again to our once upon a time "tomcat", for once having
posted a link to this updated page of Venus images.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
Some of the most interesting AI information can be found within image
No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite frame of
such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the robust,
rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTH Venus', of
which you should apply your own PhotoShop/resampling enlargement of at
least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter plus other image
cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply. Remember that a
purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster simply can't
accomplish such PhotoShop enlargements without making the image look
worse off than it really is.
"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
If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
- Brad Guth -
Gwyneð Bennetdottir
>
> Some of the most interesting AI information can be found within image
> No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite frame of
> such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the robust,
> rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTH Venus', of
> which you should apply your own PhotoShop/resampling enlargement of at
> least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter plus other image
> cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply. Remember that a
> purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster simply can't
> accomplish such PhotoShop enlargements without making the image look
> worse off than it really is.
>
> If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> - Brad Guth -
That is Kharma!!
BradGuth
wrote:
>
> > If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> > you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> > - Brad Guth -
>
> That is Kharma!!
I'll take that "Kharma!!", and then some. What goes around comes
around, seems perfectly OK by me.
- Brad Guth -
Dr. Gassen Burnham
>
> Some of the most interesting AI information can be found within image
> No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite frame of
> such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the robust,
> rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTH Venus', of
> which you should apply your own PhotoShop/resampling enlargement of at
> least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter plus other image
> cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply. Remember that a
> purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster simply can't
> accomplish such PhotoShop enlargements without making the image look
> worse off than it really is.
>
> If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> - Brad Guth -
My advice is to have a read of "Worlds in Collision" by Emanuel
Veilkovsky, it not easy to get hold of and is regarded by the main
stream as an esoteric text, however it has a ton of interesting
arguments in connection with the formation of the Solar
System.......Google Veilkovski and enjoy.
BradGuth
wrote:
>
> > If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> > you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> > - Brad Guth -
>
> My advice is to have a read of "Worlds in Collision" by Emanuel
> Veilkovsky, it not easy to get hold of and is regarded by the main
> stream as an esoteric text, however it has a ton of interesting
> arguments in connection with the formation of the Solar
> System.......Google Veilkovski and enjoy.
Thanks for the constructive feedback. I agree, but it's still just
another one of many viable alternatives which needs to be taken
seriously, as parts of the Veilkovsky analogy that may seem weird are
potentially doable (though I wouldn't suggest anything surviving a
bounce off Jupiter).
This is actually a perfectly good example of what a physics programmed
supercomputer should be absolutely ideal for running off those 3D
interactive orbital simulations, just to see if there's some other
logic as to the formation of our solar system and the arrival of a few
items like Venus and our moon makes equal or better sense than what
we've always been forced to accept.
Something like an icy proto-moon and a glancing sucker-punch of an
encounter is what I believe got Earth out of it's last icy monoseason,
and Venus is simply a planet that is geologically less old than Earth
(somewhat like having been shot out of or rather released from Sirius
before Sirius-B went white dwarf).
There is technically nothing insurmountable about other intelligent
life existing/coexisting on Venus, and the terrain of Venus is
suggesting that it too once upon a time had a substantial moon of good
mass, and perhaps having been that very same mass of what's orbiting
Earth. There is also some good orbital physics reason or logic as to
why we see the same face of Venus every 19 months.
- Brad Guth -
BradGuth
>
> >> If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> >> you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> >> - Brad Guth -
>
> > My advice is to have a read of "Worlds in Collision" by Emanuel
> > Veilkovsky, it not easy to get hold of and is regarded by the main
> > stream as an esoteric text, however it has a ton of interesting
> > arguments in connection with the formation of the Solar
> > System.......Google Veilkovski and enjoy.
>
> 'out there' was cool! We all look forward to Brad's new book.
>
> The trouble is that people take this stuff far to seriously.
>
> The critics, that is.
Those pesky critics are essentially in charge of our private parts,
thereby in charge of keeping the best available science away from the
public mainstream media, all because it'll only rock their skewed and
otherwise faith-based good ship LOLLIPOP.
Our moon and Venus are well worth a great deal of scientific focus, as
to whatever our best talents and resources can muster, yet instead
those items are each taboo/nondisclosure rated, and for those of us
sticking to our loose cannons are getting officially traumatised and/
or banished at most every possible turn in the road, and you already
know who I think has been in charge of making it so.
- Brad Guth -
robert casey
>>> over fossil and yellowcake energy as of lately, and there's nothing
>>> but an all around win-win for science and humanity if in fact any of
>>> those hot rocks of Venus are actually of those modified and/or having
>>> been put to good use by intelligent other life. At least there's
>>> nothing about Venus that's technically all that insurmountable, that
>>> is unless you're not quite half as smart as a hot rock.
>>>
Sounds like you were watching that episode of "Star Trek" with the
intelligent living hot rock creatures... :-)
BradGuth
Why not, as for all we know there's living rock on Venus, or perhaps
just smart enough ETs that are half as smart as those hot rocks.
Either way, something intelligent made those hot rocks of Venus look
pretty damn interesting, as though intelligent and rational on behalf
of their creating a planned community, as having some really big and
impressive stuff to work with.
- Brad Guth -
robert casey
>>Sounds like you were watching that episode of "Star Trek" with the
>>intelligent living hot rock creatures... :-)
>
>
> Why not, as for all we know there's living rock on Venus, or perhaps
> just smart enough ETs that are half as smart as those hot rocks.
> Either way, something intelligent made those hot rocks of Venus look
> pretty damn interesting, as though intelligent and rational on behalf
> of their creating a planned community, as having some really big and
> impressive stuff to work with.
> - Brad Guth -
>
I suppose it could happen, IIRC silicon is in the same column with
carbon on the periodic table. It may need the solvent equivalent of
carbon life's water, though. I wouldn't bet it being on Venus, but
somewhere elsewhere in the galaxy, maybe.
So far, intelligent life that possesses radio technology seems quite
rare, as SETI hasn't found anything that cannot be anything other than
artificial. Many years ago, when pulsars were first discovered, some
people considered that they might be navigation beacons for spacefaring
ET's, but they turned out to be natural objects. Doesn't mean that some
ET's couldn't use them as nav beacons, but the presence of pulsars
doesn't prove that ET's are out there. Doesn't prove that there are no
ET's either, all we can say is that "we can't tell. But the fact that we
exist, on a planet orbiting an ordinary G star in an ordinary section of
an ordinary galaxy would imply that there have been, or will be, or
currently ETs out there, probably at the level of one or two
civilizations with radio technology per galaxy.
BradGuth
> >>Sounds like you were watching that episode of "Star Trek" with the
> >>intelligent living hot rock creatures... :-)
>
> > Why not, as for all we know there's living rock on Venus, or perhaps
> > just smart enough ETs that are half as smart as those hot rocks.
> > Either way, something intelligent made those hot rocks of Venus look
> > pretty damn interesting, as though intelligent and rational on behalf
> > of their creating a planned community, as having some really big and
> > impressive stuff to work with.
> > - Brad Guth -
>
> I suppose it could happen, IIRC silicon is in the same column with
> carbon on the periodic table. It may need the solvent equivalent of
> carbon life's water, though. I wouldn't bet it being on Venus, but
> somewhere elsewhere in the galaxy, maybe.
The all-inclusive realm of Venus has teratonnes of water (mostly
within those acidic clouds), and there's likely more on the way as
that planet continually get rid of 20.5 W/m2.
Why not allow a little intelligent design assisted evolution on behalf
of carbon based DNA?
What's otherwise so terribly dead wrong with applied physics, as in
the form of applied technology?
With unlimited local energy being the case, where's the insurmountable
problem with having all the frozen pizza, ice cold beer, as well as
artificial indoors snow and ice that you could possibly want?
Isn't Venus having such a nifty local cache of easily accessible
energy, a physics/planetology good news kind of thing?
>
> So far, intelligent life that possesses radio technology seems quite
> rare, as SETI hasn't found anything that cannot be anything other than
> artificial.
That's true, as to include within that argument as to what damn little
time us humans have had any detectable degree of off-world worthy RF/
microwaves of any viable/significant intensity or focus to offer,
really hasn't been for all that much of our sequestered evolution, has
it. Not to mention that so many of us are faith-based snookered and
thus rather easily having dumbfounded ourselves past the point of no
return, which makes for the perfect terrestrial limited faith of
naysayism regardless of the evidence or the consequences of
continually banishing the truth.
> Many years ago, when pulsars were first discovered, some
> people considered that they might be navigation beacons for spacefaring
> ET's, but they turned out to be natural objects. Doesn't mean that some
> ET's couldn't use them as nav beacons, but the presence of pulsars
> doesn't prove that ET's are out there. Doesn't prove that there are no
> ET's either, all we can say is that "we can't tell. But the fact that we
> exist, on a planet orbiting an ordinary G star in an ordinary section of
> an ordinary galaxy would imply that there have been, or will be, or
> currently ETs out there, probably at the level of one or two
> civilizations with radio technology per galaxy.
That's quite true enough, although I'd have to think there'd be
potentially hundreds if not a good thousand+ other intelligent
populated planets out there within our home galaxy, perhaps logically
using those energy efficient green, blue, violet or UV spectrum laser
beams (I'd have to think utilizing quantum/FM photon beams for best
message throughput), as going off in most every which way but lose,
thereby easily excluding our mostly dumbfounded planet, and otherwise
our little Milky Way could be hosting millions of other somewhat less
than human intelligent populated planets and/or of those atmospheric
worthy enough moons of accommodating those weird cosmic plants and
animals (perhaps even including a few of those highly survival smart
hot rocks).
BTW, I'm wondering if you mostly braille astronomy/astrophysics folks
do realize that Venus actually has that highly complex tarmac item,
plus having that entirely rational looking community of an intelligent
infrastructure that's directly associated with that complex tarmac
(along with an impressive nearby bridge and that nifty fluid arch to
boot), don't you? If not some kind of worthy DNA intelligence,
perhaps those are some kind of pretty smart hot rocks, wouldn't you
say?
- Brad Guth -
BradGuth
> >>intelligent living hot rock creatures... :-)
>
> > Why not, as for all we know there's living rock on Venus, or perhaps
> > just smart enough ETs that are half as smart as those hot rocks.
> > Either way, something intelligent made those hot rocks of Venus look
> > pretty damn interesting, as though intelligent and rational on behalf
> > of their creating a planned community, as having some really big and
> > impressive stuff to work with.
> > - Brad Guth -
>
> I suppose it could happen, IIRC silicon is in the same column with
> carbon on the periodic table. It may need the solvent equivalent of
> carbon life's water, though. I wouldn't bet it being on Venus, but
> somewhere elsewhere in the galaxy, maybe.
For some silly reason, usenet is not having a good day, so I'll repost
this one from another group.
The all-inclusive realm of Venus has teratonnes of water (mostly
within those acidic clouds), and there's likely more on the way as
that planet continually get rid of 20.5 W/m2.
Why not allow a little intelligent design assisted evolution on behalf
of carbon based DNA?
What's otherwise so terribly dead wrong with applied physics, as in
the form of applied technology?
With unlimited local energy being the case, where's the insurmountable
problem with having all the frozen pizza, ice cold beer, as well as
artificial indoors snow and ice that you could possibly want?
Isn't Venus having such a nifty local cache of easily accessible
energy, a physics/planetology good news kind of thing?
>
> So far, intelligent life that possesses radio technology seems quite
> rare, as SETI hasn't found anything that cannot be anything other than
> artificial.
That's true, as to include within that argument as to what damn little
time us humans have had any detectable degree of off-world worthy RF/
microwaves of any viable/significant intensity or focus to offer,
really hasn't been for all that much of our sequestered evolution, has
it. Not to mention that so many of us are faith-based snookered and
thus rather easily having dumbfounded ourselves past the point of no
return, which makes for the perfect terrestrial limited faith of
naysayism regardless of the evidence or the consequences of
continually banishing the truth.
> Many years ago, when pulsars were first discovered, some
> people considered that they might be navigation beacons for spacefaring
> ET's, but they turned out to be natural objects. Doesn't mean that some
> ET's couldn't use them as nav beacons, but the presence of pulsars
> doesn't prove that ET's are out there. Doesn't prove that there are no
> ET's either, all we can say is that "we can't tell. But the fact that we
> exist, on a planet orbiting an ordinary G star in an ordinary section of
> an ordinary galaxy would imply that there have been, or will be, or
> currently ETs out there, probably at the level of one or two
> civilizations with radio technology per galaxy.
That's quite true enough, although I'd have to think there'd be
BradGuth
> >>intelligent living hot rock creatures... :-)
>
> > Why not, as for all we know there's living rock on Venus, or perhaps
> > just smart enough ETs that are half as smart as those hot rocks.
> > Either way, something intelligent made those hot rocks of Venus look
> > pretty damn interesting, as though intelligent and rational on behalf
> > of their creating a planned community, as having some really big and
> > impressive stuff to work with.
> > - Brad Guth -
>
> I suppose it could happen, IIRC silicon is in the same column with
> carbon on the periodic table. It may need the solvent equivalent of
> carbon life's water, though. I wouldn't bet it being on Venus, but
> somewhere elsewhere in the galaxy, maybe.
The all-inclusive realm of Venus has teratonnes of water (mostly
within those acidic clouds), and there's likely more on the way as
that planet continually gives off 20.5 W/m2.
Why not a little intelligent design assisted evolution on behalf of
carbon based DNA?
With unlimited local energy being the case, where's the insurmountable
problem with having all the frozen pizza, ice cold beer, as well as
artificial indoors snow and ice that you could possibly want?
Isn't Venus having such a nifty local cache of energy, a physics/
planetology good news kind of thing?
>
> So far, intelligent life that possesses radio technology seems quite
> rare, as SETI hasn't found anything that cannot be anything other than
> artificial.
That's true, as to include within that argument as to what damn little
time us humans have had any degree of off-world worthy RF/microwaves
of any viable/significant intensity to offer, really hasn't been for
all that much of our sequestered evolution, has it. Not to mention
that so many of us are faith-based snookered and thus rather easily
having dumbfounded ourselves past the point of no return, which makes
for perfect naysayism regardless of the evidence or the consequences
of continually banishing the truth.
> Many years ago, when pulsars were first discovered, some
> people considered that they might be navigation beacons for spacefaring
> ET's, but they turned out to be natural objects. Doesn't mean that some
> ET's couldn't use them as nav beacons, but the presence of pulsars
> doesn't prove that ET's are out there. Doesn't prove that there are no
> ET's either, all we can say is that "we can't tell. But the fact that we
> exist, on a planet orbiting an ordinary G star in an ordinary section of
> an ordinary galaxy would imply that there have been, or will be, or
> currently ETs out there, probably at the level of one or two
> civilizations with radio technology per galaxy.
That's quite true enough, although I'd have to think there'd be
potentially hundreds if not a good thousand+ other intelligent
populated planets out there in our home galaxy, perhaps logically
using those energy efficient green, blue, violet or UV spectrum laser
beams (I'd think utilizing quantum/FM photon beams for best message
throughput), as going off in most every which way but lose, thereby
easily excluding our mostly dumbfounded planet, and otherwise our
little Milky Way could be hosting millions of other somewhat less than
human intelligent populated planets and/or atmospheric worthy enough
moons of accommodating those weird cosmic plants and animals (perhaps
even including a few of those highly survival smart hot rocks).
BTW, you mostly braille folks do realize that Venus actually has that
highly complex tarmac item, plus that entirely rational looking
community of an intelligent infrastructure that's directly assocoated
with that tarmac (along with an impressive nearby bridge to boot),
don't you? Those are some kind of pretty smart hot rocks, wouldn't
BradGuth
Why are folks within this anti-think-tank of usenet naysayland so
deathly afraid of Venus?
Is it because those smart Venusians are actually Muslims or Christ
like Kathars/Cathars, or what?
Why can't those regular laws of physics and best available science
work fine and dandy on Venus?
What's so terribly wrong with the planetology of Venus being somewhat
less old than Earth?
- Brad Guth -
BradGuth
> >>intelligent living hot rock creatures... :-)
>
> > Why not, as for all we know there's living rock on Venus, or perhaps
> > just smart enough ETs that are half as smart as those hot rocks.
> > Either way, something intelligent made those hot rocks of Venus look
> > pretty damn interesting, as though intelligent and rational on behalf
> > of their creating a planned community, as having some really big and
> > impressive stuff to work with.
> > - Brad Guth -
>
> I suppose it could happen, IIRC silicon is in the same column with
> carbon on the periodic table. It may need the solvent equivalent of
> carbon life's water, though. I wouldn't bet it being on Venus, but
> somewhere elsewhere in the galaxy, maybe.
The all-inclusive realm of Venus has teratonnes of water (mostly
within those acidic clouds), and there's likely more on the way as
that planet continually gives off 20.5 W/m2.
Why not a little intelligent design assisted evolution on behalf of
carbon based DNA?
With unlimited local energy being the case, where's the insurmountable
problem with having all the frozen pizza, ice cold beer, as well as
artificial indoors snow and ice that you could possibly want?
Isn't Venus having such a nifty local cache of energy, a physics/
planetology good news kind of thing?
>
> So far, intelligent life that possesses radio technology seems quite
> rare, as SETI hasn't found anything that cannot be anything other than
> artificial.
That's true, as to include within that argument as to what damn little
time us humans have had any degree of off-world worthy RF/microwaves
of any viable/significant intensity to offer, really hasn't been for
all that much of our sequestered evolution, has it. Not to mention
that so many of us are faith-based snookered and thus rather easily
having dumbfounded ourselves past the point of no return, which makes
for perfect naysayism regardless of the evidence or the consequences
of continually banishing the truth.
> Many years ago, when pulsars were first discovered, some
> people considered that they might be navigation beacons for spacefaring
> ET's, but they turned out to be natural objects. Doesn't mean that some
> ET's couldn't use them as nav beacons, but the presence of pulsars
> doesn't prove that ET's are out there. Doesn't prove that there are no
> ET's either, all we can say is that "we can't tell. But the fact that we
> exist, on a planet orbiting an ordinary G star in an ordinary section of
> an ordinary galaxy would imply that there have been, or will be, or
> currently ETs out there, probably at the level of one or two
> civilizations with radio technology per galaxy.
That's quite true enough, although I'd have to think there'd be
potentially hundreds if not a good thousand+ other intelligent
populated planets out there in our home galaxy, perhaps logically
using those energy efficient green, blue, violet or UV spectrum laser
beams (I'd think utilizing quantum/FM photon beams for best message
throughput), as going off in most every which way but lose, thereby
easily excluding our mostly dumbfounded planet, and otherwise our
little Milky Way could be hosting millions of other somewhat less than
human intelligent populated planets and/or atmospheric worthy enough
moons of accommodating those weird cosmic plants and animals (perhaps
even including a few of those highly survival smart hot rocks).
BTW, you mostly braille folks do realize that Venus actually has that
highly complex tarmac item, plus that entirely rational looking
community of an intelligent infrastructure that's directly assocoated
with that tarmac (along with an impressive nearby bridge to boot),
don't you? Those are some kind of pretty smart hot rocks, wouldn't
BradGuth
>
> Some of the most interesting AI information can be found within image
> No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite frame of
> such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the robust,
> rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTH Venus', of
> which you should apply your own PhotoShop/resampling enlargement of at
> least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter plus other image
> cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply. Remember that a
> purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster simply can't
> accomplish such PhotoShop enlargements without making the image look
> worse off than it really is.
>
> If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> - Brad Guth -
Share most any honest bit of observationology, planetology, physics or
science pertaining to Venus, or even about getting POOF City
established at Venus L2, and lo and behold, all the usenet lights go
out. It's as though the newish planet of Venus no longer exist (even
though in plain sight, and looking bright as hell, at least it could
never be NASA/Apollo photographed from our physically dark moon).
- Brad Guth -
BradGuth
> almost exactly as though we're not being told the whole truth and
> nothing but the truth about much of anything these days. Talk
> about revising history, science and a whole lot more, whereas those
> been arranged so gosh darn unusually intelligent, are most likely
> still there to behold, and we've had the technology for having
>
> This observationology of image interpretation isn't the least bit
> hocus-pocus phony, nor is it having any ulterior motives or hidden
> agenda like our mutually perpetrated cold-war(s), or even hot-war(s)
> over fossil and yellowcake energy as of lately, and there's nothing
> but an all around win-win for science and humanity if in fact any
> of those hot rocks of Venus are actually of those modified and/or
> there's nothing about surviving Venus that's technically all that
> insurmountable, that is unless you're not quite half as smart as a
> hot rock.
>
> offers a 36 look per pixel composite as having been given essentially
> the benefit of those 36 confirming radar looks per each pixel, is by
> reasons besides those extremely interesting patterns of whatever's
> interpreting as so AI/(intelligent/artificial), as opposed to all of
> the perfectly natural appearing items that are of equally outstanding
>
> The bigger question of the day is; Does anyone within Google/NOVA's
> usenetland of such all-knowing wizards care to discuss/review the long
> and growing list of what-ifs? (after all, for all we know those hot-
> foot Venusians could even be of a Zion/semitic faith)
>
> and wet Earth like polluted environment, or even as to that of our
> local naked orbiting mascon and somewhat salty moon, nor of any such
> planetology that's dead and nearly frozen to the core likes of Mars,
> or of whatever's so much further away. At times Venus is actually
> and it's absolutely chuck full of its very own geothermal cache of raw
> energy that's sharing a surface of 20.5 w/m2 (roughly 256 fold greater
> than Earth), that which only a born-again dork of a naysayer like most
> of our usenet anti-think-tank rusemasters couldn't possibly appreciate.
>
> Why exclude the unknown simply because it's unknown? In other words,
> most likely your whole intellectual mindset worth of whatever's
> muster, that's simply faith-based obligated on behalf of what has to
> go out of its infomercial spewing way in order to exclude upon any
> such off-world intelligent other life, regardless of whatever's the
> applied technology, or even to banish anything that's of off-world
> planetology and of its local evolution, of which yourself, others and
> even I know absolutely nothing objective about, is what seems a bit
> anti-research or just downright counter-productive.
>
> If at all possible, please do further explain as to those very
> intelligent and/or rational community looking items, as if somehow
> those were being purely natural, by way of offering us some other
> image examples, as to sharing in where such a rational complex
> community looking group of planetology considerations are otherwise
> to be found within common/terrestrial planetology w/o AI benefit of
> whatever intelligent life accomplished, such as right here on Earth
> should offer. For one basic observationology argument example; How
> many complex looking tarmacs are there on Earth that had absolutely
> nothing whatsoever of AI to do with their having been created or
> otherwise crafted/modified for their rational use by intelligent life?
>
> having posted a link to this updated page of Venus images.
> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
>
> within image No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel
> composite frame of such radar obtained pixels that so happens to
> include the robust, rather sizable and somewhat complex community
> resampling enlargement of at least 3X, along with whatever unsharp
> you'd care to apply. Remember that a purely negative or naysay
> mindset of a true rusemaster simply can't accomplish such PhotoShop
> it really is.
> "Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles,Venusfrom 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
>
> If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> - Brad Guth -
Ever take notice how the usenet borg collective backs itself way the
hell off from a given topic, such as whenever we catch them red-handed
and/or brown-=nosed with their phony (pretend atheist) faith-based
pants all the way down?
Apparently their Yiddish nose browning is priority No.1 in usenet
naysayville, and secondly is their infowar/infomercial spewing
regardless of the consequences and without a speck of remorse for
whatever's the collateral damage or carnage of the innocent, and
typically these very same folks never give a tinkers damn as to how
bloody or spendy energy gets. (go figure otherwise)
Meanwhile, we have an extremely interesting and most likely
intelligent and rational looking items of whatever's existing/
coexisting on Venus, that has been recorded by way of radar imaging
and as such is about as good and trustworthy of what such image pixels
can offer, yet it's still being treated as taboo/nondisclosure rated,
as is the ESA Venus Express PFS data being kept in stealth (aka need-
to-know) status.
BTW, the ongoing rusemaster expertise of usenet robo word tagging with
whatever's before of after a given key word or link isn't going
unnoticed, or under appreciated by those few of us attempting to share
the whole truth and nothing but the truth, as always based upon the
regular laws of physics and otherwise supported from the best
available science that's independently replicated via peers of the
honest kind.
- Brad Guth -
BradGuth
>
> - Show quoted text -
We're obviously having to deal with an ongoing incest mutated and
otherwise born-again cesspool of such pretend atheist liars, of the
worse possible brown-nosed mainstream status quo kind, just like our
resident LLPOF warlord that doesn't honestly give any tinkers damn
about salvaging the greater good of our environment, or protecting and
otherwise advancing the mostly innocent worth of humanity that's
sequested upon this extensively Yiddish puppeteered hell on Earth,
that's about to get even more spendy as it goes WWIII postal, all
because of the actions of a few absolute faith-based bastards that
would just as soon put the likes of Christ right back on that stick
for yet another PR stunt.
Just like we'd worked along with Russia for having mutually
perpetrated our decades old and spendy as hell cold-war(s), that has
long since improved and migrated itself into Iraq on its way to
traumatising Iran (or taking on most any other Muslim nation that
doesn't yield), and thus WWIII is perhaps next on their agenda.
In spite of what most dumbfounded Americans think they know as the
supposed truth, Russia has nearly always been far better at getting
various tonnage safely and affordably into orbit, or even entirely
away from Earth's gravity, and China is simply not sitting back and
taking no for an answer, as China shouldn't have any problems in
passing up the collective fly-by-rocket expertise of Russia, US/NASA
and ESA combined. In fact, the Bigelow Aerospace configured POOF City
as established at Venus L2 should also be deployed by China, at
perhaps not half the cost of anything Russia can accommodate.
BTW, Mars has long been a cold and dead planet of an older than Earth
planetology, as well as oddly w/o salt. (go figure, as if anything by
orbital physics rights it should have had more salt per its orbital
location and smaller volume and of less average density)
On Nov 6, 8:44 pm, "NHttas Mother" <NHetta_moth...@yayahoo.com> wrote:
> Venus is hotter than earth while mars is cool.
> So with the current technology or perhaps future
> advancements would greatly aid in inhabiting
> mars first and venus next. I am not against venus
> but just being pratical.
If "being practical", there's no sign of any viable intelligent other
life or the remains thereof on Mars, but there is on Venus.
If "being practical", Mars is not just a wee bit cool, but rather damn
freaking cold as the opposite of hell (especially CO2 dry-ice worthy
by night, even in the Mars tropics), and it's rather obviously so much
further away from us than Venus that gets to within 100 fold as far as
our moon.
If "being practical", Mars as no apparent local energy of most any
kind that could assist even by way of advanced applied technology on
behalf of sustaining us frail humans, whereas Venus offers unlimited
local energy of the 100% local and renewable kind, plus having an
active geothermal planetology as to do whatever with.
If "being practical", Mars at the near vacuum of just 8 mb is perhaps
a forth as gamma and X-ray bad off as our humanly lethal moon, and at
most any time of a given frosty day or sub-frozen to death nighttime
is when your naked spacesuit enclosed butt could easily be summarily
nailed to death by an extremely fast arriving meteorite, whereas the
surrounding acidic upper atmosphere of Venus is rather nicely
protecting our frail DNA as well as our thermal/Ovgolve suit protected
butts by way of it's thick and robust atmosphere.
If "being practical", is clearly where the Venus L2 POOF City could
have been accomplished, as a relatively safe home away from home,
that's just cool enough to being entirely POOF City viable as is.
If "being practical", since we still do not have a viable fly-by-
rocket lander as would be required of our safely doing Mars, or
especially on behalf of our naked moon related missions, whereas Venus
is not only aerodynamically flyable as is, but it's also fully rigid
composite airship worthy, and to think there's even an existing tarmac
to utilize.
If "being practical" about any of this, you'd have to be an absolute
certified moron of a village idiot in order to have not realized the
other 100+ valid reasons of our doing Venus instead of Mars.
BTW, what part or portion of those complex crop circles is
terrestrial, instead of being duh-101 ET?
What part of observationology (the science of honest image
interpreting) do you not quite get?
What laws of physics are you having to distort or outright exclude,
and/or infowar/infomercial imposing of your own kind of evidence
skewing/excluding so that Mars is even remotely favorable over Venus?
What laws of physics and/or from the best available worth of
scientific evidence about our moon is suggesting that it has ever been
walked upon by us humans, as supposedly having "the right stuff"?
We need to ask, as to why are so many of you folks are into hiding and/
or pretending as to who and/or whom you really are or otherwise
represenmt?
- Brad Guth -
BradGuth
>
> Some of the most interesting AI information can be found within image
> No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite frame of
> such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the robust,
> rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTH Venus', of
> which you should apply your own PhotoShop/resampling enlargement of at
> least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter plus other image
> cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply. Remember that a
> purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster simply can't
> accomplish such PhotoShop enlargements without making the image look
> worse off than it really is.
>
> If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> - Brad Guth -
Why is the geothermally toasty planet of Venus so unusually mainstream
taboo/nondisclosure rated?
Why are the Zion Gods of usenet's infowar/infomercial collective
spewing butts into acting as borg like unhappy canpers?
What would or could you do on Venus if you had a spare/surplus cache
of a locally renewable teraWatt in clean energy at your disposal?
--
Brad Guth
BradGuth
>
> > If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> > you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> > - Brad Guth -
>
> Why is the geothermally toasty planet of Venus so unusually mainstream
> taboo/nondisclosure rated?
>
> Why are the Zion Gods of usenet's infowar/infomercial collective
> spewing butts into acting as borg like unhappy canpers?
>
> What would or could you do on Venus if you had a spare/surplus cache
> of a locally renewable teraWatt in clean energy at your disposal?
> --
>
> - Show quoted text -
Just because the naked eye can't see whatever a good radar equipped
eye can see, doesn't mean that such nifty artificial and/or perfectly
intelligent and otherwise rational stuff about Venus doesn't exist,
nor can the dumbfounded eye of naysayism represent that those regular
laws of physics do not apply, or that the best available science
should be continually excluded/banished for all it's worth.
Usenet is not a peer review qualified collective, nor worthy of
anything except used toilet paper sharing, because that's pretty much
exactly what these brown-nosed minions of their mainstream status quo
and of such cultivated naysayism happen to do best.
--
Brad Guth
BradGuth
>
> Some of the most interesting AI information can be found within image
> No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite frame of
> such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the robust,
> rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTH Venus', of
> which you should apply your own PhotoShop/resampling enlargement of at
> least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter plus other image
> cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply. Remember that a
> purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster simply can't
> accomplish such PhotoShop enlargements without making the image look
> worse off than it really is.
>
> If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> - Brad Guth -
Why are the supposed smart folks of Usenet so gosh darn deathly afraid
of Venus, or even that of Venus L2?
What's so terribly wrong with having a 36 look per pixel of a nifty
radar obtained image to start off with?
--
Brad Guth
BradGuth
>
> Some of the most interesting AI information can be found within image
> No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite frame of
> such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the robust,
> rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTH Venus', of
> which you should apply your own PhotoShop/resampling enlargement of at
> least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter plus other image
> cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply. Remember that a
> purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster simply can't
> accomplish such PhotoShop enlargements without making the image look
> worse off than it really is.
>
> If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> - Brad Guth -
Seems the ESA Venus Express/VIRTIS mission has either fallen off the
edge of Earth or at least out of favor within their very own ESA home
webpage.
ESA is still not sharing any byte worth of anything as getting
released from their robust PFS instrument, of which they claim has
been faulty/broken from nearly the very get go. (I rather doubt this
is entirely true, because they can't share as to the internal workings
of that PFS instrument, in that there's absolutely no technical
accounting or any other measure on behalf of those internal mechanics
other than going by their word, which simply doesn't make any sense)
http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?mission=Venus+Express&type=I
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/area/index.cfm?fareaid=64
In spite of the Venus EXPRESS having supposedly lost all use of their
robust PFS, as representing nearly 90% worth of their mission's
science capability, whereas in spite of that handicap or intentional
banishment it's still offering darn good though much lower resolution
results of the IR mapping:
http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?b=b&type=I&mission=Venus%20Express&single=y&start=4
http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?b=b&type=I&mission=Venus%20Express&single=y&start=4&size=b
Notice how there's never one scientific word as to the specific
thermal temperatures of those IR obtained images, but instead a whole
lot of careful wordings that manage to divert as much attention as
possible away from the matter of fact that Venus has been losing
roughly 20.5 w/m2 (256 fold greater than Earth) away from its
geothermally toasty surface. Further notice how the all-knowing
wizards of Usenet or even those rusemasters of NASA's very own
uplink.space.com are entirely without an honest thought, clue or much
less having been asking any questions as to why there's still no
public information getting shared as to the wide differentials of
those surface and atmospheric temperatures of Venus. Even though the
remaining IR instruments of ESA's Venus Express are of extremely poor
resolution doesn't exclude those kinds of low resolution IR readings
from providing a sufficient degree of thermal mapping, as to the best
available extent that's possible, and yet we've seen almost nothing of
their supposed science in sharing IR specifics of such thermal issues
other than IR ratios which can be without a basic reference to a given
spectrum of temperature interpreted as to mean damn near anything.
Of course from the long shot of Venus L2 is where a modern day radar
and IR imaging pair of instruments as of the last decade could have
accomplished a whole lot better results, and if from within that nifty
and relatively cool halo station-keeping location sending in probes of
the rigid airship kind, that which would obviously cruise below those
thick acidic clouds and subsequently get those absolutely terrific
closeup look-see mappings of the Venus surface down to less than 0.1
meter/pixel, and of visual spectrum imaging down to as tight as a few
mm, which technically could have by now been doable.
There are still those extremely interesting pixels of previous radar
mapping of what looks entirely intelligent and/or artificially
rational, as though representing a community of substantial structures
and otherwise of extremely interesting natural terrain/geology
features (including an active fluid arch and of multiple reservoirs)
like none other. For those with an honestly serious mindset of
considering all such options, I have had exactly what you're looking
for as of nearly the past 8 years, and I also have the other proof
positive as to how those in charge have been doing all they can in
order to disqualify, exclude or rather banish any such notions that
Venus has been technically a viable planet for accommodating
intelligent other life.
This doesn't require that such be of an intelligent other life as
having locally evolved within that newish planetology of such a
geothermally forced environment, although technically even that's a
remote possibility for those of us residing outside of the mainstream
status quo of naysayville's bigots-R-us mindset.
--
Brad Guth
BradGuth
Thanks again to our once upon a time "tomcat", for having posted
another link to this updated page of Venus images.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
Some of the most interesting of AI information can be found within
image No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite
frame of such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the
robust, rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTH Venus',
of which you folks should apply your own PhotoShop resampling/
enlargement of at least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter
plus other image cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply.
Remember that a purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster
simply can not accomplish such enlargements without making whatever
image look worse off than it really is. (go figure)
"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
If you still can not find this rational community worth of extremely
interesting pixels, then you are not nearly as good at
observationology as you think you are.
Digital photo resampling or enlarging with various pixel interpolation
algorithms are not new nor unused by our NIMA and multiple other spy
and commercial photo agencies. The sorts of freeware or trialware
such as PhotoCleaner, PhotoZoom and CleanerZoomer are just examples
that'll perform as well or better than ADOBE PhotoShop, are each
sufficiently user friendly and as always allows for user options in
order to suit the kinds of results that'll yield the best possible
enlargement without introducing weird distortions or artifacts out of
thin air(sort of speak).
http://www.photocleaner.com
PhotoCleaner w/multiple resize algorithms and automatic unsharp
http://www.benvista.com/main/content/content.php?page=ourproducts§ion=photozoompro_1
http://www.benvista.com/main/content/content.php?page=downloads
PhotoZoom Pro w/S-Spline XL interpolation algorithm enlarging
CleanerZoomer
http://www.stratopoint.com/czoomer.htm
Of course the digital radar image of 36 looks per pixel is somewhat
better to begin with, as nearly 3D worthy and each raw pixel being
about as real or as truth worthy of pixel as we're going to get, which
sort of makes up for the 225 meter per pixel resolution that's being
enlarged for a better look-see at whatever's most likely associated
with those raw pixels.
http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedetail/image-restoration1/
"Red Fox, image from Figure 3 after photoshop unsharp mask, radius =
4.0, 75%, threshold = 3, then another unsharp mask with radius = 2.0,
66%, threshold = 3. This is a about the best I can do with the unsharp
mask tool"
As you can see for yourself, between ADOBE PhotoShop and Adaptive
Richardson-Lucy Iteration there's nothing getting artificially
generated via enlarge/resampling and unsharp applications that created
weird pixels out of nowhere. As long as the raw pixel patterns were
there to behold in the first place, there's nothing that gets software
AI or otherwise created weird in the enlarged images that's
indifferent to whatever those original pixels represent. Of course
with the likes of PhotoShop is where any damn village idiot fool can
just as easily force the original image into distorting everything in
sight, which only proves that such a result can be accomplished if
that's the intended objective.
However, most folks within Usenet's anti-think-tank of naysayland
should as IggyZiggy says, have that word "obfuscate" tattooed to their
forehead, as they quite often intend to live, breathe, eat, and
worship that mostly semitic God of obfuscation by using word games,
something their Third Reich and the likes of our very own resident
LLPOF warlord(GW Bush) and of his puppeteer Dick Cheney are really
good at obfuscating the hell out of most everything.
So, when I've asked of others to share and share alike, as to
providing their own best effort examples of the image pertaining to
Venus that I'd pointed out as of nearly 8 years ago, lo and behold the
brown-nosed obfuscation clowns of Usenet's naysayland kicked into full
topic/author stalking, bashing and banishment action, whit all of
their usual gauntlet of evidence exclusion so as to not rock their
mainstream good ship LOLLIPOP status quo that's clearly more semitic
faith based than not.
We need to take a very close look at Venus, as for giving this
extremely nearby planet proper consideration on behalf of other
intelligent life that once upon a time having been and by rights may
even still be existing/coexisting within that geothermally forced
environment, of their having survived within such a newish worth of
active planetology that not exactly user friendly to the likes of us
naked humans. I'm certainly not speaking of the dumbfounded sorts of
naked humans without a clue other than their terrestrial limited faith-
based analogy towards everything, but rather of either locally evolved
and/or new and improved species as having been imported intelligent
life, that's simply utilizing applied physics and obviously good
technology that's taking the fullest advantage of their applied
physics and local cache of such vast amounts of renewable energy.
There's no argument that Venus in most surface locations is nearly hot
as hell, however, if you can constructively contribute a little
something of image processing, or otherwise on behalf of explaining
the sorts of physics and applied technology that'll function within
such a thermal dynamic worth of planetology, that'll actually survive
within the regular laws of physics (such as the process of the local
makings and sustaining ice), is exactly what I'd appreciate and give
the fullest of credit for whatever talent or expertise you'd care to
share.
--
Brad Guth
BradGuth
is no good reason as to why those future rad-hard and physically
robust robotics of Japan and China can't manage.
Perhaps this is best being shared with other Usenet groups:
rec.photo.digital, uk.rec.photo.misc, alt.journalism.newspapers,
alt.revisionism, sci.geo.satellite-nav, sci.geo.geology, talk.atheism
In addition of our getting access to those new and greatly improved
images of our moon that's will worth further enlarging, plus future
loads of other new and improved science that'll begin telling us what
that naked and somewhat salty moon surface has to offer, there's still
good old and at times extremely nearby Venus that's looking as though
having been lived upon.
Thanks again to our once upon a time "tomcat", for having posted
another public link to this somewhat updated page of Venus images.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
Some of the most interesting of AI pixel worthy information can be
found within image No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel
composite frame of such radar obtained pixels that so happens to
include the robust, rather sizable and somewhat complex community of
'GUTH Venus', of which you folks should apply your own PhotoShop
resampling/enlargement of at least 3X, along with whatever unsharp
mask filter plus other image cleaning or treatment options you'd care
to apply. Remember that a purely negative or naysay mindset of a true
rusemaster simply can not accomplish such enlargements without making
whatever image look worse off than it really is. (go figure)
"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
If you still can not find this rational community worth of extremely
interesting pixels, then you are not nearly as good at
observationology as you think you are. Usually this only happens with
the sorts of pretend atheists that are forever stuck or sequestered
within their own faith-based naysay mode, regardless of whatever
physics or the best available science has to offer.
BradGuth
that's getting itself geothermally forced from the bottom up, although
having a POOF City as our interplanetary depot/gateway at Venus L2 is
more than a touch on the cool side. However, if we can't even manage
a mostly robotic Clarke Station within our moon's interactive L1, much
less of anything moon tethered, then even the extremely nearby worth
of the halo orbital energy efficient and much lower gamma radiation
location of our utilizing Venus L2 is never going to happen.
From what's officially offered to us as purely in-house or via
minionship endorsed evidence, I still do not believe that we've
returned safely from having walked on that moon, as there's just way
too many easy enough methods of proof-positive that could and should
have been employed, that would have 100+% nailed that question as an
easily replicated matter of fact, as well as easily accommodated via
computer simulated orbital 3D interactive physics, that is if we in
fact had ever down-range soft landed and having walked on that dusty
moon 6 times w/o so much as a DNA scratch.
So, we'll need that new and improved fleet of Barack Obama shuttles,
along with those fully reusable LRBs, that which at most becomes a
50/50 kind of public/private investment, and that's going to happen w/
o our infamous NASA because, like so much of our old guard cold-war
government that's intent upon global energy domination, it seems they
and of their semitic puppeteers simply can not be trusted with our
hard earned loot or our private parts. So, it's past due for a fresh
start, that is if we can somehow manage to avoid WWIII.
Ponder your way through this one:
A few of us outsiders have been and/or become sufficiently correct
about our naked moon that seems somewhat hollow or at least light
headed (as possibly having a mostly sodium core), in that much of our
terrestrial physics and replicated science that relates to those
spendy fly-by-rocket Apollo missions, and about our reactive/
anticathode moon that's so physically dark, that simply doesn't add up
according to that holy grail of our NASA/Apollo Old Testament.
If we'd landed upon and collectively (US+USSR) having left 171 tonnes
of our mostly metallic crap on that moon, much of it physically
sizable or having become unavoidably impact scattered over a km+
radius (unless that surface debris and dust at impact was simply too
damn thick), whereas you'd think most any GB-SAR obtained image is
unavoidably going to look in places as somewhat like a seriously lit
up Christmas tree parked in the center of an open pit coal mine.
I believe that somewhat old radar imaging resolution via Arecibo is
actually worthy of 20 meters/pixel, and having so much as an empty
beer can within any one of those 20 by 20 meter pixels is in fact
going to light up that given GB-SAR pixel by pixel observation quite
nicely, especially when all of that crystal dry cosmic debris as moon
dust that's surrounding that empty beer can is hardly anything but
radar signal reflective.
Sadly, not even God or those of his/her minion wizards can help the
likes of our MI5/NSA/CIA~NASA's Usenet cesspool of infowar/infomercial
spewing spooks and moles, or so many brown-nosed others of their
pretend atheist kind. Of course otherwise those terrestrial smart
brown-nosed folks of the all-knowing mainstream status quo or bust
(aka Skull and Bones semitic Third Reich) could have always used any
one of those true to life virtual simulations via any number of public
owned supercomputers in order to easily prove myself wrong, though
they've all had nearly 8 years and counting with less than zero/zilch
worth of favorable results so far.
I guess it's still going Usenet 0, Guth 1.
BTW, remote PC/mouse tampering is a federal offence (pretty hard to
miss the per cession "Error Console" reporting and such loss of mouse/
cursor control as so often happening), and yet in spite of this
mainstream of damage-control gauntlet, I've just posted another topic
"To Tell the Truth" for all the warm and fuzzy enjoyment of those
diehard naysayers and brown-nosed minions of the mainstream status
quo, not unlike most others within Usenet.
- Brad Guth
On Nov 24, 11:24 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Usenet: rec.photo.digital
> Thanks again to our once upon a time "tomcat", for having posted
> another link to this updated page ofVenusimages.http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
>
> Some of the most interesting of AI information can be found within
> image No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite
> frame of such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the
> robust, rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTHVenus',
> of which you folks should apply your own PhotoShop resampling/
> enlargement of at least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter
> plus other image cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply.
> Remember that a purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster
> simply can not accomplish such enlargements without making whatever
> image look worse off than it really is. (go figure)
> "Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles,Venusfrom Magellan Cycle 1"http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.htmlhttp://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
> If you still can not find this rational community worth of extremely
> interesting pixels, then you are not nearly as good at
> observationology as you think you are.
>
> Digital photo resampling or enlarging with various pixel interpolation
> algorithms are not new nor unused by our NIMA and multiple other spy
> and commercial photo agencies. The sorts of freeware or trialware
> such as PhotoCleaner, PhotoZoom and CleanerZoomer are just examples
> that'll perform as well or better than ADOBE PhotoShop, are each
> sufficiently user friendly and as always allows for user options in
> order to suit the kinds of results that'll yield the best possible
> enlargement without introducing weird distortions or artifacts out of
> thin air(sort of speak).
>
> http://www.photocleaner.com
> PhotoCleaner w/multiple resize algorithms and automatic unsharp
>
> PhotoZoom Pro w/S-Spline XL interpolation algorithm enlarging
>
> CleanerZoomerhttp://www.stratopoint.com/czoomer.htm
> providing their own best effort examples of the image pertaining toVenusthat I'd pointed out as of nearly 8 years ago, lo and behold the
> brown-nosed obfuscation clowns of Usenet's naysayland kicked into full
> topic/author stalking, bashing and banishment action, whit all of
> their usual gauntlet of evidence exclusion so as to not rock their
> mainstream good ship LOLLIPOP status quo that's clearly more semitic
> faith based than not.
>
> We need to take a very close look atVenus, as for giving this
> extremely nearby planet proper consideration on behalf of other
> intelligent life that once upon a time having been and by rights may
> even still be existing/coexisting within that geothermally forced
> environment, of their having survived within such a newish worth of
> active planetology that not exactly user friendly to the likes of us
> naked humans. I'm certainly not speaking of the dumbfounded sorts of
> naked humans without a clue other than their terrestrial limited faith-
> based analogy towards everything, but rather of either locally evolved
> and/or new and improved species as having been imported intelligent
> life, that's simply utilizing applied physics and obviously good
> technology that's taking the fullest advantage of their applied
> physics and local cache of such vast amounts of renewable energy.
>
> There's no argument thatVenusin most surface locations is nearly hot
BradGuth
> Your title just shows that you aren't, Brad. And the content is just
> DRIVEL! I see that you're using frootbat's scorecard! lol
>
> Saul Levy
My "title"?
I aren't what?
And you are posting this off-topic infowar crapolla of yours from
which failsafe off-world location?
We take it that you have absolutely nothing pertaining to our moon,
Venus or even on behalf of Earth to offer. Or did I miss a little
something?
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
> nightbat wrote
>
> Saul Levy wrote:
>
> Silly Desert Saul
>
> > Your title just shows that you aren't, Brad. And the content is just
> > DRIVEL! I see that you're using frootbat's scorecard! lol
>
> > Saul Levy
>
>
> Stop it Saul, now you're upsetting profound science posters with
> more of your catch up drivel and mal accusations, so unbecoming of a
> good researcher. Science Officers are too busy to baby-sit and hold your
> hand just tell the nursing home attendants you need attending. That
> desert air must be drying out your brain oh doubting one, oh mercy!
> Coffeeboys a fresh cup of hot coffee for our Saul, heaven knows he needs
> one.
Saul Levy thinks the regular laws of physics are "DRIVEL" worthy, that
is unless they are fully conditional in order to suit his brown--nosed
kind of NASA/Apollo "DRIVEL".
Saul Levy doesn't even believe in SAR obtained images, especially if
they are of the 36 look per pixel kind. Apparently the more SAR looks
per pixel the less truth worthy such pixels become, and only worse yet
if getting taken at 43 degrees instead of using a 2D limited plan
view.
- Brad Guth
Steve Thompson
Yes. You forgot to take a class in basic civility, and they won't even
consider you for the advanced class in civics as a result. Buh-bye.
Regards,
Steve
--
( I've got to hold my train of thought, here, and not get off on some sick,
twisted tangent that will blow any hope of a book deal with a publisher
that doesn't sell off of the back of a pickup truck in the sleazy part of
town )
Steve Thompson
> Venus is simply an Earth like toasty poptart of a newish planet,
> I guess it's still going Usenet 0, Guth 1.
Sorry, Brad. You lose no matter what the score may appear to be.
BradGuth
> On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 12:02:55PM -0800, BradGuth wrote:
> > On Dec 4, 11:48 am, Saul Levy <saulle...@cox.net> wrote:
> > > Your title just shows that you aren't, Brad. And the content is just
> > > DRIVEL! I see that you're using frootbat's scorecard! lol
>
> > > Saul Levy
>
> > My "title"?
>
> > I aren't what?
>
> > And you are posting this off-topic infowar crapolla of yours from
> > which failsafe off-world location?
>
> > We take it that you have absolutely nothing pertaining to our moon,
> > Venus or even on behalf of Earth to offer. Or did I miss a little
> > something?
>
> Yes. You forgot to take a class in basic civility, and they won't even
> consider you for the advanced class in civics as a result. Buh-bye.
>
> Regards,
>
> Steve
If that's what makes you a happy though snookered and fully
dumbfounded camper.
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
> > Venus is simply an Earth like toasty poptart of a newish planet,
> [snip]
> > I guess it's still going Usenet 0, Guth 1.
>
> Sorry, Brad. You lose no matter what the score may appear to be.
>
> Regards,
>
> Steve
Wow, are you knocking our socks off today, with such all-knowing
physics and science expertise. Can't you even try to hold something
back?
- Brad Guth
Steve Thompson
Won't you get lost and darken my doorknob no longer?
Rand Simberg
Thompson"<steve...@yahoo.ca.ca> made the phosphor on my monitor glow
in such a way as to indicate that:
>On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 02:43:00PM -0800, BradGuth wrote:
>> On Dec 5, 2:32 pm, "Steve Thompson"<steve49...@yahoo.ca.ca> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 10:31:57AM -0800, BradGuth wrote:
>> > > Venus is simply an Earth like toasty poptart of a newish planet,
>> > [snip]
>> > > I guess it's still going Usenet 0, Guth 1.
>> >
>> > Sorry, Brad. You lose no matter what the score may appear to be.
>> >
>> > Regards,
>> >
>> > Steve
>>
>> Wow, are you knocking our socks off today, with such all-knowing
>> physics and science expertise. Can't you even try to hold something
>> back?
>> - Brad Guth
>
>Won't you get lost and darken my doorknob no longer?
No, he won't. Killfile him, or we'll killfile you, since you seem to
add no value to the group(s) otherwise.
BradGuth
> On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 02:43:00PM -0800,BradGuthwrote:
> > On Dec 5, 2:32 pm, "Steve Thompson"<steve49...@yahoo.ca.ca> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 10:31:57AM -0800,BradGuthwrote:
> > > > Venus is simply an Earth like toasty poptart of a newish planet,
> > > [snip]
> > > > I guess it's still going Usenet 0, Guth 1.
>
> > > Sorry, Brad. You lose no matter what the score may appear to be.
>
> > > Regards,
>
> > > Steve
>
> > Wow, are you knocking our socks off today, with such all-knowing
> > physics and science expertise. Can't you even try to hold something
> > back?
> > - Brad Guth
>
> Won't you get lost and darken my doorknob no longer?
>
> Regards,
>
> Steve
You have a doorknob that I darken?
Perhaps you could have a little something nice to say (other than doom
and gloom) about the planet Venus, or is that asking too much?
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
> What a total loon you are, Brad. I'll never say another word to you.
>
> Saul Levy
Is that a matter of fact, or is it just another pretend worthy kind of
banishment?
Why are you folks so deathly afraid of Venus? (Venus Muslims?)
- Brad Guth
nightbat
BradGuth wrote:
nightbat
Never mind silly desert Saul he has joined the ranks of the
clueless coffeeboys in the Captain's stowfile.
ponder on,
the nightbat
BradGuth
If "Saul Levy" is such a lost cause that we believe he is, but then
where's your all knowing expertise or best swag that'll get us to
Venus, or at least to Venus L2 POOF City?
- Brad Guth
nightbat
BradGuth wrote:
> On Dec 5, 9:23 pm, nightbat <night...@home.ffni.com> wrote:
>
>>nightbat wrote
>>
>>BradGuth wrote:
>>
>>>On Dec 5, 5:00 pm, Saul Levy <saulle...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>>>What a total loon you are, Brad. I'll never say another word to you.
>>
>>>>Saul Levy
>>
>>>Is that a matter of fact, or is it just another pretend worthy kind of
>>>banishment?
>>
>>>Why are you folks so deathly afraid of Venus? (Venus Muslims?)
>>>- Brad Guth
>>
>>nightbat
>>
>> Never mind silly desert Saul he has joined the ranks of the
>>clueless coffeeboys in the Captain's stowfile.
>>
>> ponder on,
>> the nightbat
> BradGuth
>
> If "Saul Levy" is such a lost cause that we believe he is, but then
> where's your all knowing expertise or best swag that'll get us to
> Venus, or at least to Venus L2 POOF City?
> - Brad Guth
nightbat
Top Secret: Code word authenticated
POOF City: Advanced protocol exercised
Advanced directive code name Darla for Venus and beyond.
Do you want to play a game?
checkers
chess
poker
tic-tac-toe
spades
total universe conquest
BradGuth
No wonder your importance within this world has had no past, present
or future worth.
I thought you folks claim as knowing a little something about physics
and science. My mistake.
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
touch, but of nothing our applied physics and well proven science
can't deal with, including the co2-->co/o2 process that'll allow us
mere humans to breath, along with enough Reverse Stirling as a local
habitat cooling process for the task of keeping our beer icy cold and
our private parts just right.
I have few doubts that as of once upon a time those sufficiently smart
ET's (as possibly from that mostly fresh water little swamp of Mars)
did manage to accomplish a real number on us, as they pillaged and
raped mother Earth for all she's worth, leaving us with the mere dregs
and tailings of whatever remained that they didn't wish to bother
with.
Though instead of their arriving from that somewhat iffy Mars
environment, I'm thinking along the what-if lines of their having
arrived out of the red giant phase era of that nearby Sirius star/
solar system, that might have unavoidably donated one of their icy
Oort cloud protomoons and perhaps even having donated the likes of
Venus from otherwise getting itself summarily nailed into Sirius A or
B.
Perhaps after these god like ETs having sucked Earth dry(sort of
speak) they'd moved on to Venus where there were much fewer if any
locals to enslave, but otherwise having nearly unlimited natural
mineral resources as well as for having unlimited local energy for the
task of processing whatever on behalf of creating most anything they'd
care to do.
Would you folks like to see for yourself, as to what a really big and
impressive Venus style tarmac and adjoining community of rational
infrastructure looks like?
Are you folks still with me?
- Brad Guth
> Thanks once again to our once upon a time "tomcat", for once having
> posted a link to this updated page of Venus images.http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
>
> Some of the most interesting AI information can be found within image
> No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite frame of
> such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the robust,
> rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTH Venus', of
> which you should apply your own PhotoShop/resampling enlargement of at
> least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter plus other image
> cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply. Remember that a
> purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster simply can't
> accomplish such PhotoShop enlargements without making the image look
> worse off than it really is.
> "Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1"http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.htmlhttp://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
>
> If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> - Brad Guth -
BradGuth
> On 6 Dec 2007 00:39:01 GMT, in a place far, far away, "Steve
Where's all of that warm and fuzzy Rand Simberg affection for sharing
the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
Is "killfile him" the best your semitic brown-nosed minions of the
Third Reich can muster?
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
NASA/Apollo team of such semitic wizards as having pulled off that
grand ruse/sting of such a nifty perpetrated cold-war and moon hoax
landing, as such doesn't mean that we should forget about our
extremely massive and nearby moon, or that we should ignore Venus
simply because other intelligent life has already accomplished their
using of that somewhat newish and thus toasty planet.
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
If you have a working eye and so much as half a brain (unless it's
snookered and dumbfounded past the point of no return), you can see
for yourself.
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
> On Oct 22, 6:09 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Whenever sharing about our moon or Venus, it's exactly as though we're
> > not being told the whole truth and nothing but the truth about much of
> > anything these days. Talk about revising history, science and a whole
> > lot more, whereas those hot rocks of Venus that so happen to look as
> > though having been arranged so gosh darn unusually intelligent, are
> > most likely still there to behold, and we've had the technology for
> > having taken a much closer look-see for better than a good decade.
>
> > This observationology of image interpretation isn't the least bit
> > hocus-pocus phony, nor is it having any ulterior motives or hidden
> > agenda like our mutually perpetrated cold-war(s), or even hot-war(s)
> > over fossil and yellowcake energy as of lately, and there's nothing
> > but an all around win-win for science and humanity if in fact any of
> > those hot rocks of Venus are actually of those modified and/or having
> > been put to good use by intelligent other life. At least there's
> > nothing about Venus that's technically all that insurmountable, that
> > is unless you're not quite half as smart as a hot rock.
>
> > The official NASA/Magellan image of GIF format, as being that of a 36
> > look per pixel composite as having been given essentially the benefit
> > of those 36 confirming radar looks per each pixel, is by itself worthy
> > of our consideration for all kinds of honest reasons besides those
>
> > Some of the most interesting AI information can be found within image
> > No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite frame of
> > such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the robust,
> > rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTH Venus', of
> > which you should apply your own PhotoShop/resampling enlargement of at
> > least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter plus other image
> > cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply. Remember that a
> > purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster simply can't
> > accomplish such PhotoShop enlargements without making the image look
> > worse off than it really is.
>
> > If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> > you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> > - Brad Guth -
>
> If you have a working eye and so much as half a brain (unless it's
> snookered and dumbfounded past the point of no return), you can see
Apparently, besides your being as smart as a 5th grader, you'll also
need at least half a working brain in order to perceive upon what's so
entirely obvious about Venus that's so unusually intelligent looking,
exactly as though smart ETs or possibly locals had managed in a very
substantial way to modify more than their fair share of those hot
rocks.
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
>
> > If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> > you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> > - Brad Guth -
>
> If you have a working eye and so much as half a brain (unless it's
> snookered and dumbfounded past the point of no return), you can see
> for yourself.
> - Brad Guth
Apparently those regular laws of physics simply do not function off-
world. Perhaps that's yet another one of those pesky Zionist things
about terrestrial physics and the best available science that doesn't
count if such rocks their Semitic good ship LOLLIPOP.
Perhaps seeing is simply not believing in whatever the pretend atheist
eye interprets, because there's no attached brain, whereas only their
Borg like swarm mindset prevails, regardless of the consequences.
- Brad Guth -
BradGuth
grader, you'll also need at least half a working brain in order to
that's so unusually intelligent looking, exactly as though a group,
team or village of smart ETs or possibly even as locals having managed
in a very substantial and sizable way to modify more than their fair
share of those hot rocks.
Of course, if you simply do not believe in those regular laws of
physics, or in the best available science, all bets are off.
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
That's odd, in that whenever going for using those regular laws of
physics that apparently do not function off-world, whereas it seems
that our NASA/Apollo conditional laws of physics work just perfectly
fine and dandy as long as they have the last and only published say.
Is it just me, or does any of that seem a wee bit fishy.
- Brad Guth
Stephen Malbon
Yes.
BradGuth
In other words, your laws of physics not only do not function off-
world, but are entirely faith-based conditional in order to suit
whatever given ulterior motives or hidden agenda, exactly like Hitler
or Bush.
Apparently the best available science that's easily peer replicated
doesn't count and can always be excluded unless it 100% backs up your
all-knowing buttology that disregards the past as though it never
happened.
Can I join that nifty faith-based group of yours?
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
Can anyone of sufficient expertise help explain the physics of
pressure differentials, such as to whatever a nearly 100 bar
environment of mostly CO2, plus hosting a good amount of toasty
geothermal contributed S8 vapor, has to offer at an atmospheric
differential of 4+ bar/km, that which is also capable of including a
thermal differential value of 10 K/km.
Can anyone further explain as to why that kind of nifty pressure and
thermal differential dynamics of physics doesn't function off-world
(meaning for other than Earth)?
Without ever involving a geothermal gas vent, of which there are many
on Venus at the very least worth an extra hundred K in thermal
differential that's accessible right at the surface, whereas just the
10 K/km of vertical thermal offset alone seems rather worth while of
extracting renewable energy from, not to mention the 4+ bar/km that's
easily obtained in almost any desired location and of nearly any give
volume, as well as at the vertical exit velocity of perhaps as great
as 16 m/s, even though 4 m/s would seriously knock our socks off(sort
of speak). Can anyone offer us those most likely answers, as to
whatever the per cubic meter worth of such a dense atmospheric vapor
has to deliver in the way of such easily accessible raw energy?
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
having become so unusually tarmac, bridge and complex community worthy
of such large structures and of all that rational infrastructure
stuff, of which would most likely need a good resource of energy,
especially if there's any of that ice cold beer to behold.
Energy In = Energy Out x Eff.
On Venus, by day we have the solar energy influx of 2630 w/m2. By day
and night we also have the 20.5 w/m2 of its planetology core energy
that's continually leaving its somewhat newish and thus toasty
surface. Together, on average that's at least a thermal dynamic worth
of 1325 watts/m2 to work with (perhaps worth 1350 w/m2 because a few
percent more than half of Venus and of its robust atmosphere is
getting illuminated at any one time). But then we also have the
locally built up pressure dynamics of extracting from the stored
energy of 4+ bar/km (from the first vertical km), and that's not to
mention upon whatever local geothermal gas vent of fast moving and
mostly hot S8(sulphur) plus receiving more of that terrific CO2 has to
offer.
Can anyone of sufficient physics and/or scientific expertise help
better explain the logic of pressure differentials, such as to
whatever a nearly 100 bar environment of mostly CO2 that's also
hosting a good amount of whatever toasty geothermal contributed S8
vapor has to offer, at an atmospheric differential of 4+ bar/km, that
which is also capable of including a vertical thermal differential
value of 10 K/km.
Can you or those you might know of further help to explain as to why
that kind of absolutely nifty pressure and thermal differential worth
of raw energy dynamics via good old physics-101 would not function off-
world (meaning for other than Earth)?
Without ever involving a geothermal gas vent, of which there are many
such gas vents on Venus, you'd think at the very least worth an extra
couple hundred K in thermal differential that's accessible right at
the surface, whereas just going by the 10 K/km of the first vertical
atmospheric thermal offset alone seems rather worth while of
extracting renewable energy from, not to mention the 4+ bar/km that's
easily obtained in almost any desired location and of nearly any given
volume that you'd care to utilize, as well as at the vertical km exit
velocity of perhaps as great as 16 m/s, even though 4 m/s should
seriously knock our kinetic energy socks off(sort of speak). Can
anyone offer those most likely answers, as to whatever the per cubic
meter worth of such a dense atmospheric vapor as pressure and thermal
differential has to deliver, in the way of what most any 5th grader
taking advantage of such easily accessible raw energy might expect to
get.
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
I see that MI5 is back in town, doing his/her usual brown-nosed clown
thing of roboposting into just about every group in sight.
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
upset about the truth?
- Brad Guth
Steve Thompson
Sorry.
Regards,
Steve
--
I submit you should have invested in real-estate as opposed to picturesque
yet impractical castles in the sky.
BradGuth
> On Thu, Dec 06, 2007 at 12:54:38AM +0000, Rand Simberg wrote:
> > On 6 Dec 2007 00:39:01 GMT, in a place far, far away, "Steve
> > in such a way as to indicate that:
>
> > >On Wed, Dec 05, 2007 at 02:43:00PM -0800, BradGuth wrote:
> > >> On Dec 5, 2:32 pm, "Steve Thompson"<steve49...@yahoo.ca.ca> wrote:
> > >> > On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 10:31:57AM -0800, BradGuth wrote:
> > >> > > Venus is simply an Earth like toasty poptart of a newish planet,
> > >> > [snip]
> > >> > > I guess it's still going Usenet 0, Guth 1.
>
> > >> > Sorry, Brad. You lose no matter what the score may appear to be.
>
> > >> > Regards,
>
> > >> > Steve
>
> > >> Wow, are you knocking our socks off today, with such all-knowing
> > >> physics and science expertise. Can't you even try to hold something
> > >> back?
> > >> - Brad Guth
>
> > >Won't you get lost and darken my doorknob no longer?
>
> > No, he won't. Killfile him, or we'll killfile you, since you seem to
> > add no value to the group(s) otherwise.
>
> Sorry.
>
> Regards,
>
> Steve
Intimidated by the mainstream status quo?
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
energy?
It seems only entirely logical that the local energy of Venus is
nearly unlimited, and as such what can't be accomplished (with or w/o
The Ove Glove)?
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
> Why doesn't Venus have more than its fair share of local/renewable
> energy?
>
> nearly unlimited, and as such what can't be accomplished (with or w/o
> The Ove Glove)?
>
> - Brad Guth
OOPS! there's that Ove Glove thing again.
Obviously any honest physics talk is still officially taboo/
nondisclosure rated, just like radar images of 36 confirming looks.per
pixel and of nearly a 3D format don't count.
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
>
> > If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> > you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> > - Brad Guth -
>
> If you have a working eye and so much as half a brain (unless it's
> snookered and dumbfounded past the point of no return), you can see
> for yourself.
OOPS! apparently seeing for yourself means having an actual brain
that's a little different than what's brown and leaking from between
your butt-cheeks.
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
Folks of Usenet are for the most part nothing but liars and deniers,
continually doing their pretend atheists brown-nosed thing regardless
of the consequences.
MI5/CIA and of all the puppeteered agencies they master over are at
the black heart of it all, as though their global dominating Hitler
warlord puppet never actually died.
The planet Venus is very much alive and kicking in more than just a
newish geothermal kind of way. Even the ESA Venus Express mission has
been touting upon the extreme thermal differentials, especially of
those existing between the extremes of the Venusian daytime/nighttime
atmospheric environments, of which the mostly CO2 atmosphere sustains
those 25+ km thick and robust worth of such terrific acidic clouds of
S8 and good old h2o.
The toasty geothermal forced surface environment in many elevated
locations is not outside of what's technically doable for even the
pathetic likes of us dumbfounded humans, as long as doing such in the
buff is not what you had in mind.
The ongoing topic/author stalking, bashings and/or banishment is
simply the kind of proof positive of what Venus has to offer, as being
so extremely invaluable and otherwise much like our nearby moon and of
its absolutely nifty L1 zone, that's actually worth far more than all
the tea in China(sort of speak).
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
What the hell gives?
This nifty topic needs a few more of those Google/NOVA gold stars. If
you have nothing much to constructively contribute, at least vote on
my behalf by simply giving this one all the gold stars you can
manage. The more of them stars the better, especially good if they
were Jewish stars, since I have nothing bad to say or rant about the
vast majority of faith-based souls that would never so much as hurt a
Muslim fly.
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
Venus, as though having become so unusually tarmac, bridge and complex
structures, plus having all that surrounding rational infrastructure
appearing stuff, of which would most likely need a fairly good
resource of energy, especially if there's any of that ice cold
In physics-101: Energy In = Energy Out x Eff if looking for the
usable work potential of said energy. So, how many mega, giga or even
terawatts of energy for applied work would you need?
On Venus, by day we have the considerable solar energy influx of 2630
w/m2 (the vast majority of which going into those relatively cool
acidic clouds by day. However, by day and night we also have the 20.5
w/m2 of its planetology core energy that's continually leaving via
radiating away from its somewhat newish and thus unavoidably toasty
surface. Together, on average that's at least a thermal dynamic worth
of 1325 watts/m2 to work with (perhaps worth as much as 1350 w/m2
because a few percent more than half of Venus and of its robust
atmosphere is getting illuminated at any one time). But then we also
have the locally buid-up of pressure dynamics by extracting from the
stored energy of 4+ bar/km (from the first vertical km), and that's
not to mention upon whatever local geothermal gas vent of fast moving
and mostly hot S8(sulphur) plus receiving more of that terrific CO2
has to offer.
Can anyone of sufficient physics and/or scientific expertise help, as
to better explain the logic of pressure differentials, such as to
whatever a nearly 100 bar environment of mostly CO2 that's also
hosting a good amount of what its toasty geothermal contributed S8
vapor has to offer, at an atmospheric differential of 4+ bar/km that's
greatest at or below the average elevation, of which is also capable
of including an impressive vertical thermal differential value of 10 K/
km.
Can you or by those you might know of further help, as to explain why
that kind of absolutely nifty pressure and thermal differential worth
of raw energy dynamics via good old physics-101 would not function off-
world (meaning for other than Earth) as a perfectly good resource of
such a highly accessible form of stored energy?
Without ever involving a geothermal gas vent, of which there are many
such active vents on Venus that you'd think at the very least worth an
extra couple hundred K in thermal differential as fully accessible
right at the surface, whereas otherwise just going by way of the 10 K/
km of the first vertical atmospheric thermal offset alone seems rather
worth while of extracting renewable energy from that sort of
environment, not to mention the 4.1+ bar/km that's easily obtained in
almost any desired location and of nearly any given volume that you'd
care to utilize, as well as the vertical km exit velocity potential of
a column of such a thick density worth of atmosphere offering perhaps
as great as 16 m/s, though even 4 m/s of exit velocity should
seriously knock our kinetic wind energy socks off(sort of speak). Can
anyone in Usenet's all-knowing expertise offer those most likely
answers, as to their best swag on whatever the per cubic meter worth
of such a dense atmospheric vapor of thermal, pressure and velocity
differentials has to offer, as to what a given unit of such handy
pressure, thermal and velocity differential has to deliver in the way
of whatever most any Venusian 5th grader could rather easily take
advantage of their surrounding raw energy.
BTW, I can't but help notice the ongoing gauntlet of Usenet's
spermware/fuckware trying to trash and/or terminate my poor old PC.
Is there a little something warm and fuzzy that insiders of Usenet or
of those Google/NOVA servers are trying to say?
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
intelligent looking hot rock formations of Venus, as though having
become so unusually tarmac, bridge and complex community worthy of
having all that surrounding rational infrastructure appearing stuff,
energy, especially if there's any of that ice cold Venusian beer to
behold.
In physics-101: Energy In = Energy Out x Eff if looking for the
usable work potential of said energy. So, how many mega, giga or even
terawatts of energy for applied work would you actually need?
On Venus, by day we have the considerable solar energy influx of 2630
w/m2 (the vast majority of which going into those relatively cool
acidic clouds by day. However, by day and night we also have the 20.5
w/m2 of its planetology core energy that's continually leaving via
radiating away from its somewhat newish and thus unavoidably toasty
surface. Together, on average that's at least a thermal dynamic worth
of 1325 watts/m2 to work with (perhaps worth as much as 1350 w/m2
because a few percent more than half of Venus and of its robust
atmosphere is getting illuminated at any one time). But then we also
have the locally buid-up of pressure dynamics by extracting from the
stored energy of 4+ bar/km (from the first vertical km), and that's
not to mention upon whatever local geothermal gas vent of fast moving
and mostly hot S8(sulphur) plus receiving more of that terrific CO2
has to offer.
Can anyone of sufficient physics and/or scientific expertise help, as
to better explain the logic of utilizing pressure differentials, such
as to whatever a nearly 100 bar environment of mostly CO2 that's also
hosting a good amount of what its toasty geothermal contributed S8
vapor has to offer, at an atmospheric vertical differential of 4+ bar/
km that's certainly of greatest potential at or below the average
spermware/fuckware that's trying to trash and/or terminate my poor old
PC. Is there a little something warm and fuzzy that our resident MI5/
CIA spooks and moles as insiders of Usenet or of those Google/NOVA
BradGuth
(planetology)
Even though the planet of Venus is geothermally hot from the bottom or
core on up, it seems that the toasty and crystal dry Venus surface
(especially of elevated portions) is not too hot to touch with the Ove-
glove, that is unless you're dealing with an active lava/mud/gas vent.
The topographic range of roughly 16 km for Venus also represents an
extra atmospheric range or scope of at least 64 bar(<68 bar by season
of nighttime), meaning that the maximum surface pressure of nearly 120
bar shouldn't be unexpected.
That 16 km range (+11 > -5 km) is also a rather impressive worth of
geothermal dynamics for such a robust atmosphere that's nearly fluid,
especially of a planet that's currently w/o moon and substantially
smaller than Earth, and having been rotating so slow as w/o hardly any
significant geophysical tidal issues. Imagine on a Venus sunny day, of
boiling off a km column of water, whereas the upper surface water
(fully illuminated by day) is oddly 10 K cooler than the bottom of
that column, and the upper surface pressure has 4.1 bar less pressure
than the column bottom.
Venus has more than its fair share of impressive impact craters
(tricky to accomplish getting such impressive impactors through that
thick soup of such a robust atmosphere), as well as that terrain
offering offset considerations as having fairly newish and/or active
resources of various geothermal muds, lava and gas venting issues that
do not look very old.
http://pds.jpl.nasa.gov/planets/captions/venus/saca.htm
http://pds.jpl.nasa.gov/planets/images/full/venus/saca.jpg
Other images worth having a look-see at, especially if planning a trip
to Venus, of mostly places not to land, and of a few rather
interesting sites worth landing at:
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/mission_page/VN_Magellan_page1.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
When Venus gives you a serious hot foot:
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_p40698.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_p40698.gif
Venus as imaged from Earth, showing rather nicely within the very same
FOV, using the very same exposure that has the sunlit moon and the
little but otherwise brighter than moon item of Venus to behold.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/14/Moon_18-Jun-2007_8-05-13_PM.JPG
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Moon_18-Jun-2007_8-05-13_PM.JPG
Considering the good density of the CO2+S8 robust Venus atmosphere,
whereas a few thermal degrees difference per km of elevation is
actually rather remarkable, even when limited as to the 50 km
resolution of what the ESA Venus Express mission has to work with
isn't taking those day/night differentials into account.
http://www.spacenewsfeed.co.uk/2007/11November2007_56.html
"Highlands and mountains with elevations of up to 5 km above the
Venusian 'sea level' are about 40°C colder and appear blue in the
mosaic."
422°C(695 K) for the 5 km elevation is actually a good sign of the
geothermally forced nature of what the Venus planetology is doing, as
for keeping its environment rather toasty hot from the inside or
bottom up, and to think there's 10+ km elevations that should yield
yet another drop of 40°C for creating 382°C(655 K) that's still too
hot for naked humans that are not quite smart enough to even wear
their Ove-Glove suits.
For lots more information, just ask.
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
There is no question as to the orchestrated efforts towards sustaining
the official gauntlet of topic/author stalking, bashings and/or
imposing as much banishment as possible against those of us sharing
the best available truths. There is also no question as to the
orchestrated conspiracy of those in charge of keeping various lids on
tight, such as their having been rejecting everything outside of their
NASA Quran about Venus, and especially tough with any regard to our
moon as being 100% taboo/nondisclosure rated, and it's only getting
worse yet for merely contemplating the usage of our moon's L1, and
otherwise forbid Venus L2.
NASA's swarm like borg collective mindset via uplink.space.com and of
most all the essential Usenet and media worthy groups are included
within the scope of this often faith-based conspiracy to defraud upon
physics and science integrity, often by way of excluding evidence, as
to insure only their side of any given argument/rant gets any credits
for all the good stuff and thereby receives public attention. We also
have to include an honorable mention as to those folks of pretend
atheism, mostly because of their actions being so unusually Old
Testament or otherwise Zionist faith-based cult like imposed upon
blocking and/or diverting such change or revisions of most any kind,
especially if there's any remote chance of outsiders suggesting their
God, creator or puppet warlord had anything whatsoever to do with any
other planet or moon..
This officially imposed gauntlet of infowar and disinformation tactic
is certainly not new or exclusive to the likes of our NASA or of their
Skull and Bones cult, but it's certainly having been put to the full
test each and every time I've shared an honestly deductive thought, of
any subjective interpretation as to whatever's existing/coexisting on
Venus, as only intelligent other life could represent is automatically
rejected because such would make their supposed expertise seem
inadequate if not fraudulent.
In order for this other intelligent life to have survived Venus, it is
not required of any such intelligent life being interplanetary
capable, or even into having radio/microwave technology, whereas the
lack of either or both of those capabilities would have no direct
impact upon others as most likely unlike us humans having managed to
survive upon Venus. This is also not imposing any requirement of
purely natural evolution being the one and only option, as fully
complex species via panspermia, and even by way of intelligent design
is doable and even within the scope by way of our somewhat primitive
Earth standards of getting our stuff to other off-world places. So,
we don't have to insist upon there having been Venusian locals of
purely the natural evolutionary kind, although the ability of complex
DNA/RNA to adapt in order to survive is well known to exist, as even
here on Earth where such highly complex life has been surviving for
millions of years longer than humanity, and within the most dreadful
of places impossible for us humans to survive in the buff.
So, don't even kid yourself by whatever's being said and/or imposed
against those of us thinking and openly sharing outside the mostly
faith-based mainstream status quo box, because we're not the bad guys
here.
. - Brad Guth
BradGuth
efforts by those in charge of our private parts, towards sustaining
their official gauntlet of topic/author stalking, bashings and/or
imposing as much banishment as possible against those of us sharing
the best available truths. There is also no question as to the
various lids on tight, such as their having been rejecting everything
with any regard to our moon as being 100% taboo/nondisclosure rated,
and it's only getting worse yet for merely contemplating the usage of
NASA's swarm like borg collective mindset, such as via
uplink.space.com and of most all the essential Usenet and media worthy
groups, are very much included within the scope of this often faith-
based conspiracy to defraud upon physics and science integrity, often
by way of merely banishing those they elect to black-ball or by way of
excluding evidence, with the clear intent of their focus as to insure
only their side of any given argument/rant gets any official credits
for all the good stuff and thereby receives whatever public attention
and funding. We also have to include an honorable mention as to those
folks of pretend atheism, mostly because of their swarm like actions
being so unusually Old Testament or otherwise Zionist faith-based cult
like imposed upon blocking and/or diverting such change or revisions
of most any kind, especially if there's any remote chance of outsiders
suggesting their God, creator or puppet warlord had anything
whatsoever to do with any other planet or moon..
This officially imposed gauntlet of such a brown-nosed clownism
infested infowar and disinformation tactic is certainly not new or
exclusive to the likes of our NASA or of their Skull and Bones cult of
peers, but it's certainly having been put to the full test each and
every time I've shared an honestly deductive thought, of any
subjective interpretation as to whatever's existing/coexisting on
Venus, as only intelligent other life could represent is automatically
rejected because such notions would make their supposed expertise seem
inadequate if not fraudulent.
In order for this other intelligent life to have survived Venus, it is
not required of any such intelligent life being interplanetary
capable, or even into having radio/microwave technology, whereas the
lack of either or both of those capabilities would have no direct
impact upon others as most likely unlike us humans, as having managed
to survive upon Venus. This is also not imposing any requirement of
purely natural evolution being the one and only option, as fully
complex species via panspermia, and even by way of intelligent design
is perfectly doable and even within the scope by way of our somewhat
primitive Earth standards of getting our stuff to other off-world
places. So, we don't have to insist upon there having been Venusian
locals of purely the natural evolutionary kind, although the ability
of complex DNA/RNA to adapt in order to survive is well known to
exist, as even here on Earth where such highly complex life has been
surviving for millions of years longer than humanity, and within the
most dreadful of places impossible for us humans to survive in the
buff is the well accepted norm.
BTW, I'd started ranting about the use of a CO2 HVAC/refrigeration
system within the Venus toasty environment as of 8 years ago and
counting (except w/o the "H" because only cooling is required), and to
think that it wasn't even my idea to start with since CO2
refrigeration had been well established by others as of a good century
before. Essentially a Stirling thermal conversion process of such CO2
refrigeration is all it takes, and otherwise via conventional
compressor there's obviously no shortage of dry CO2 or the local
energy that's fully renewable while on Venus.
So, don't even bother to kid yourself by whatever's being said and/or
imposed against those of us thinking and openly sharing outside the
mostly faith-based mainstream status quo box, because we are not the
bad guys here.
. - Brad Guth
> > "Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1"http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.htm...
BradGuth
expertise to behold, no other science and apparently even their off-
world laws of physics simply do not work on behalf of Venus.
Here's an extremely nearby planet that's physically Earth terrain like
(exactly as though it once had a substantial moon), hosting some very
large artificial looking features that only so happen to seem as
though of perfectly intelligent, rational and along with their having
a community like infrastructure, and lo and behold the entire swarm of
all-knowing Usenet wizards are without a clue as to how little old me
came into discovering all of this, and having since uncovered so much
other perfectly good information about Venus that makes perfect
physics and science sense.
Of course for the past 8 years and counting it has taken most
everything they've got just for sustaining their cloak and dagger
focus of topic/author stalking, bashing and banishment, especially
applied upon anyone having figured out their pretend atheism (aka
Third Reich) Old Testament code of their systematic suckology and
brown-nosism.
- Brad Guth
BradGuth
CIA spooks, moles and official mainstream rusemasters doing all they
can to damage and/or to traumatize those of us sharing in the best
available truths. Of course that is faith-based business as per Skull
and Bones usual, as well as why their having created 9/11 and we are
at war, headed towards WWIII because of their global fossil fuel
domination plan (especially that part about or taking of or
elimination of Muslim oil) hasn't been going as well as hoped.
Too bad we can't even focus upon getting POOF City established at
Venus L2, much less of any Clarke Station or LSE-CM/ISS within our
Moon's L1. Perhaps China and India will help us out of this mess as
having been created by those Old Testament thumping puppeteers in
charge of our resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush).
At least as far as we know, Venus isn't Islamic/Muslim, but of course
that notion could change if we actually took a closer look-see, much
the same as those ETs with their extremely big and flashy UFOs are
looking at us, except for merely a good laugh (must be why Texas is
getting the most recent ET attention, because Texas is funny).
- Brad Guth
On Jan 11, 7:13 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
BradGuth
everything under the sun, such as whenever it comes down to whatever
the planet Venus has to offer?
Why are supposedly smart folks (especially pretend-atheists) so
deathly afraid of Venus?
Why are radar images of 36 confirming looks per pixel and of that
nearly 3D format so unusually taboo? (is it a Muslim thing?)
Why is other intelligent life as having been existing/coexisting on
Venus such a problem?
Why is POOF City as established at Venus L2 such a testy topic? (if
anything that's unlike our moon's L1, VL2 is somewhat cold and w/o
gamma)
. - Brad Guth
On Jan 11, 7:13 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> There is no question as to the orchestrated efforts towards sustaining
> the official gauntlet of topic/author stalking, bashings and/or
> imposing as much banishment as possible against those of us sharing
> the best available truths. There is also no question as to the
> orchestrated conspiracy of those in charge of keeping various lids on
> tight, such as their having been rejecting everything outside of their
> NASA Quran aboutVenus, and especially tough with any regard to our
> moon as being 100% taboo/nondisclosure rated, and it's only getting
> worse yet for merely contemplating the usage of our moon's L1, and
> otherwise forbidVenusL2.
>
> NASA's swarm like borg collective mindset via uplink.space.com and of
> most all the essential Usenet and media worthy groups are included
> within the scope of this often faith-based conspiracy to defraud upon
> physics and science integrity, often by way of excluding evidence, as
> to insure only their side of any given argument/rant gets any credits
> for all the good stuff and thereby receives public attention. We also
> have to include an honorable mention as to those folks of pretend
> atheism, mostly because of their actions being so unusually Old
> Testament or otherwise Zionist faith-based cult like imposed upon
> blocking and/or diverting such change or revisions of most any kind,
> especially if there's any remote chance of outsiders suggesting their
> God, creator or puppet warlord had anything whatsoever to do with any
> other planet or moon..
>
> This officially imposed gauntlet of infowar and disinformation tactic
> is certainly not new or exclusive to the likes of our NASA or of their
> Skull and Bones cult, but it's certainly having been put to the full
> test each and every time I've shared an honestly deductive thought, of
> any subjective interpretation as to whatever's existing/coexisting onVenus, as only intelligent other life could represent is automatically
> rejected because such would make their supposed expertise seem
> inadequate if not fraudulent.
>
> In order for this other intelligent life to have survivedVenus, it is
> not required of any such intelligent life being interplanetary
> capable, or even into having radio/microwave technology, whereas the
> lack of either or both of those capabilities would have no direct
> impact upon others as most likely unlike us humans having managed to
> survive uponVenus. This is also not imposing any requirement of
eyeball
Venus:
http://www.newsgroper.com/w/wp-content/uploads/marvin_link4_image1.jpg
BradGuth
> On Feb 7, 7:20 am, BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> warned us about
> Venus:http://www.newsgroper.com/w/wp-content/uploads/marvin_link4_image1.jpg
Interesting total lack of topic input, much less constructive or in
any way informative.
Did you learn this Semitic tactic in Third Reich boot camp, or was it
entirely brown-nose self taught?
BTW, got a real name? (didn't think so)
. - Brad Guth
eyeball
> BTW, got a real name? (didn't think so)
> . - Brad Guth
yup I do
Got a clue? (didn't think so)
BradGuth
"eyeball2002...@aol.com
This person has not created a profile."
At least I'd asked. Too bad you're the one that's having yet another
bad day.
Doesn't MI5/CIA have anything better for you and others of your incest
mutated kind to be doing?
BTW, rabbi Art Deco doesn't count, so you can't even claim being that
pretend atheist, even though you sleep and wet the same bed together.
. - Brad Guth
eyeball
BradGuth
> Brad...get help...really.They have wonderful anti-psychotic meds now.
That's it? That's the best you and others of your incest cloned kind
of brown-nosed clowns can come up with?
What does sharing the truth have to do with "anti-psychotic meds"?
Are "meds" your answer to everything that rocks your mainstream status
quo boat?
Why are you and others of your kind so deathly afraid to share and
share alike, on honest matters of physics and science related to the
planet Venus?
. - Brad Guth
BradGuth
the basic math of 225 meters per pixel, then perhaps you should go
back to bed and stay there until you die.
Unlike most others here in this mindset anti-think-tank of such a
Usenet of denial from hell, whereas I and most anyone with so much as
half a brain and at least one good eye can deductively put these
extremely artificial looking pixels together, every bit as easily as
putting 2 plus 2 always becomes four, or in the case of those
composite SAR image pixels is where two of those becomes worth 450
meters of what's more than large enough to count as being artificial
worthy, especially when giving us such interesting patterns of large
scaled items that simply do not otherwise exist in nature.
If you can't even honestly count those most obvious of pixels, much
less deductively connect any of those odd looking patterns as long as
there's any slim chance that I'm actually right about there having
been intelligent other life existing/coexisting on Venus, then what
can I or anyone possibly have to say about all the other fancy eye
candy that's hyped as supposedly so important about matters that are
typically hundreds, thousands and even millions of light years away,
especially when we still can't safely walk on our own physically dark
moon or much less include the planet Venus within any number of FOVs
that should have existed.
eyeball wrote:
> Yes Brad you're right, and we're wrong. You convinced us of the
> coverup. Now what can we ever do about it?
Coverup, oversight or just plain old systematic banishment by the
mainstream status quo, as imposed upon all outsiders doesn't matter,
since either or all of the above has clearly been applied.
Of what we can do is what I'd suggested as of 8 years ago, starting
off by focusing our best talents and limited resources upon Venus.
This doesn't mean that we need to go there in person, even though with
a sufficient degree of applied technology would make the geothermally
toasty environment of Venus humanly doable as long at that effort
included a composite insulated and thermally compensated rigid
airship, as their interplanetary shuttle and planetary exploration
platform, that if need be never has to set down onto that toasty
surface unless invited.
In the mean time, I'd like to see a Magellan-II as having roughly a 10
fold improved resolution, or better yet is just to send our existing
shuttle bay SAR imaging capability on its way, along with a few of
those robotic rigid airship probes that could cruise efficiently for
months on end, operating well enough below those acidic clouds and
reporting back to the orbiting mothership, or perhaps even of
something placed within Venus L2 might be worth doing.
. - Brad Guth
> > posted a link to this updated page of Venus images. http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
BradGuth
>
> > > Some of the most interesting AI information can be found within image
> > > No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite frame of
> > > such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the robust,
> > > rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTH Venus', of
> > > which you should apply your own PhotoShop/resampling enlargement of at
> > > least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter plus other image
> > > cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply. Remember that a
> > > purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster simply can't
> > > accomplish such PhotoShop enlargements without making the image look
> > > worse off than it really is.
> > > "Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1"
>
> http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.htm
Have no idea why I'd previously left off the L from the HTM. Since no
one of this Usenet anti-think-tank bothered to mention it, is perhaps
why others that can only manage to mouse point and click haven't
noticed the amount of detail that's available.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
Just using your screen magnifier set to as little as 4X is sufficient
to count those raw pixels of roughly 225 meters each, although a
PhotoShop of increased contrast helps.
BTW, a new and improved Magellan-II mission of better than one meter/
pixel of DoD or MI5/CIA spy technically via SAR imaging has been
doable within existing technology. However, that good of resolution
simply isn't required for identifying those much larger items that
look perfectly intelligent and thus artificial or as community
infrastructure rational as is.
I have my thoughts as to what the next phase of robotic missions could
be, and of what those efforts might better accomplish without ever
intentionally landing on Venus until the end of their global mapping
and geology surveying has been completed to the best we can
accomplish. Perhaps you'd like to share another thing or two on
behalf of our extracting better science before we plan anything of a
manned mission to/from Venus.
. - Brad Guth
BradGuth
>
> > If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
> > you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
> > - Brad Guth -
>
> snookered and dumbfounded past the point of no return), you can see
> for yourself.
If you folks still can't manage to count those SAR composite pixels,
or much less do the basic math of 225 meters per pixel, then perhaps
you should go back to bed and stay there until you die.
Unlike most others here in this mindset anti-think-tank of such a
Usenet of denial from hell, whereas I and most anyone with so much as
half a brain and at least one good eye can deductively put these
extremely artificial looking pixels together, every bit as easily as
putting 2 plus 2 always becomes four, or in the case of those
composite SAR image pixels is where two of those becomes worth 450
meters of what's more than large enough to count as being artificial
worthy, especially when giving us such interesting patterns of large
scaled items that simply do not otherwise exist in nature.
If you folks can't even honestly count those most obvious of pixels,
much less deductively connect any of those odd looking patterns as
long as there's any slim chance that I'm actually right about there
having been intelligent other life existing/coexisting on Venus, then
what can I or anyone possibly have to say about all the other fancy
eye candy that's hyped as supposedly so important about matters that
are typically hundreds, thousands and even millions of light years
away, especially when we still can't safely walk on our own physically
dark moon or much less include the planet Venus within any number of
FOVs that should have existed.
eyeball wrote:
> Yes Brad you're right, and we're wrong. You convinced us of the
> coverup. Now what can we ever do about it?
Coverup, oversight or just plain old systematic banishment by the
mainstream status quo, as imposed upon all outsiders doesn't matter,
since either or all of the above has clearly been applied. Of what we
can do is what I'd suggested as of 8 years ago, starting off by
focusing our best talents and limited resources upon Venus.
This doesn't mean that we need to go there in person, even though with
a sufficient degree of applied technology would make the geothermally
toasty environment of Venus is humanly doable as long at that effort
included a composite insulated and thermally compensated rigid
airship, as their interplanetary shuttle and planetary exploration
platform, that if need be never has to set down onto that toasty
surface unless invited.
In the mean time, I'd like to see a Magellan-II mission, as having
roughly a 10 fold improved resolution, or better yet is just to send
our existing shuttle bay SAR imaging capability on its way, along with
a few of those robotic rigid airship probes that could cruise
efficiently for months on end, operating well enough below those
acidic clouds and reporting back to the orbiting mothership, or
perhaps even of having something placed within Venus L2 might be worth
our doing for a multitude of scientific reasons.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
I still have no idea why whatever moderator bot or perhaps I'd
previously left off the L from the HTM. Since no one of this warm and
fuzzy Usenet anti-think-tank bothered to mention it, is perhaps why
others that can only barely manage to mouse point and click haven't
noticed the amount of sufficient detail that's available.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
Just using your screen magnifier set to as little as 4X is sufficient
to count those raw pixels of roughly 225 meters each, although a
PhotoShop of increased contrast helps. It also helps to ask for a
little extra instructions if you can't manage to find these large and
highly intelligent looking items of interest.
BradGuth
If you folks still can't manage to count those SAR composite pixels,
or much less do the basic math of 225 meters per pixel, then perhaps
you should go back to bed and stay there until you die., because this
one of an existing tarmac is absurdly obvious, very complex looking
and more than large enough for a fifth grader to count.
Unlike most others here in this mindset anti-think-tank of such a
Usenet of denial from hell, whereas I and most anyone with so much as
half a brain and at least one good eye can deductively put these
extremely artificial looking pixels together, every bit as easily as
putting 2 plus 2 always becomes four, or in the case of those
composite SAR image pixels is where two of those becomes worth 450
meters of what's more than large enough to count as being artificial
worthy, especially when giving us such interesting patterns of large
scaled items that simply do not otherwise exist in nature.
If you folks can't even honestly count those most extremely obvious of
pixels, much less deductively connect any of those oddly artificial/
intelligent looking patterns as long as there's any slim chance that
I'm actually right about there having been intelligent other life
existing/coexisting on Venus, then what can I or anyone possibly have
to say about all the other fancy eye candy that's hyped as supposedly
so important about matters that are typically hundreds, thousands and
even millions of light years away, especially when we still can't
safely walk on our own physically dark moon or much less ever include
the absolutely vibrant planet Venus within any number of FOVs that
should have existed.
eyeball wrote:
> Yes Brad you're right, and we're wrong. You convinced us of the
> coverup. Now what can we ever do about it?
Coverup, oversight or just plain old systematic banishment by those in
charge of our mainstream status quo, as having been imposed upon all
outsiders doesn't matter, since either or all of the above has clearly
been applied. Of what we most certainly can do is what I'd suggested
as of 8 years ago, starting off by focusing our best talents and
limited resources upon Venus.
This doesn't mean that we need to go there in person, even though with
a sufficient degree of applied technology would make the geothermally
toasty environment of Venus is humanly doable as long at that effort
included a composite insulated and thermally compensated rigid
airship, as their interplanetary shuttle and planetary exploration
platform, that if need be never has to set down onto that toasty
surface unless invited.
In the mean time, I'd like to see a Magellan-II mission, as having
roughly a 10 fold improved resolution, or better yet is just to send
our existing shuttle bay SAR imaging capability on its way, along with
a few of those robotic rigid airship probes that could cruise
efficiently for months on end, operating well enough below those
acidic clouds and reporting back to the orbiting mothership, or
perhaps even of having something placed within Venus L2 might be worth
our doing for a multitude of scientific reasons.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
I still have no idea why whatever moderator bot or perhaps that I'd
previously left off the L from the HTM. Since no one of this warm and
fuzzy Usenet anti-think-tank bothered to mention it is perhaps why
others that can only barely manage to mouse point and click haven't
noticed the amount of sufficient detail that's available.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
Just a zoom in and using your screen magnifier set to as little as 4X
BradGuth
Venus wasn't always as cloudy and solar heated to death, for the same
reason that once upon a time our proto-Earth w/o moon and having that
same less glowing sun was that of a nearly monoseason ball covered
extensively by a mostly fresh water layer of snow and ice. Therefore,
in the planetology beginning, Venus would likely have been a more
geothermally active but otherwise situated within the best orbit for
accommodating complex life and possibly even hosting its own species
of intelligent life as we might or might not know it.
The obvious tarmac and large scale infrastructure of a perfectly
rational community that's existing on Venus may not be all that new,
and it may no longer be currently utilized by intelligent other
life. However, if you were but half as smart as a geothermal hot
rock and had such a downright nifty amount of local energy potential,
along with a gravity of merely 0.905, plus an atmospheric buoyancy
worth 65 kg/m3, as such it would be pretty hard if not unlikely for a
few pockets of intelligent other life not to have survived, especially
if given any ET imported technology assistance.
If you folks still can't manage to count those SAR composite pixels,
or much less do the basic math of 225 meters per pixel, then perhaps
you should go back to bed and stay there until you die, because this
one of an existing tarmac is rather absurdly obvious, very complex
looking and clearly more than large enough scale for a fifth grader to
count.
Unlike most others here in this mindset anti-think-tank of such a
Usenet of denial from hell, whereas I and most anyone with so much as
half a brain and at least one good eye can deductively put these
extremely artificial looking pixels together, every bit as easily as
putting 2 plus 2 always becomes four, or in the case of those
composite SAR image pixels is where two of those becomes worth 450
meters of whatever's more than large enough to count as being
artificial worthy, especially when giving us such interesting patterns
of these sorts of large scaled items that simply do not otherwise
exist in nature.
If you can't even honestly count those most extremely obvious of
pixels, much less deductively connect any of those oddly artificial/
intelligent looking patterns as long as there's any slim chance that
I'm actually right about there having been intelligent other life
existing/coexisting on Venus, then what can I or anyone possibly have
to say about all the other fancy eye candy that's hyped as supposedly
so important about matters that are typically hundreds, thousands and
even millions of light years away, especially when we still can't
safely walk on our own physically dark moon or much less ever include
the absolutely vibrant planet Venus within any number of FOVs that
should have existed.
eyeball wrote:
> Yes Brad you're right, and we're wrong. You convinced us of the
> coverup. Now what can we ever do about it?
Coverup, oversight or just plain old systematic banishment by those in
charge of our mainstream status quo, as having been imposed upon all
outsiders doesn't matter, since either or all of the above has clearly
been applied. Of what we most certainly can do is what I'd suggested
as of 8 years ago, starting off by focusing our best talents and
limited resources upon Venus.
This doesn't mean that we'll need to go there in person, even though
with a sufficient degree of applied technology would make the
geothermally toasty environment of Venus as humanly doable, as long at
that effort included Ove Glove jumpsuits and a composite insulated and
thermally compensated rigid airship as their interplanetary shuttle
and planetary exploration platform, that if need be never has to set
any landing pad down onto that toasty surface unless invited.
In the mean time, I'd like to see a new and greatly improved Magellan-
II mission, as having roughly a 10 fold improved resolution, or better
yet is just to send our existing shuttle bay SAR imaging capability on
its way, along with a few of those robotic rigid airship probes that
could cruise efficiently for months on end, operating well enough
below those acidic clouds and reporting back to the orbiting
mothership, or perhaps even of having something placed within Venus L2
might be worth our doing for a multitude of scientific reasons.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
I still have no idea why whatever moderator bot or perhaps why I'd
previously left off the L from the HTM. Since not one soul of this
warm and fuzzy Usenet anti-think-tank bothered to mention it is
perhaps why others that can only barely manage to mouse point and
click haven't noticed the amount of sufficient detail that's easily
available.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
Just a zoom in and using your screen magnifier set to as little as 4X
is sufficient to count those raw pixels of roughly 225 meters each,
although a PhotoShop of increased contrast helps without ever
distorting one damn thing. It also helps to ask for a little extra
instructions if you can't manage to find these large and highly
intelligent looking items of interest.
BTW, a new and improved Magellan-II mission of better than one meter/
pixel of DoD or MI5/CIA spy technically via SAR or X-ray imaging has
been doable within existing technology. However, that good of
resolution simply isn't required for identifying those much larger
items that look perfectly much intelligent and thus artificial or as
community infrastructure rational as is.
I have my honest thoughts as to what the next phase of robotic
missions could be, and of what those efforts might better accomplish
without ever intentionally landing on Venus until the end of their
global mapping and geology surveying has been completed to the best we
can accomplish. Perhaps you'd like to share another thing or two on
behalf of our extracting far better science before we plan towards
anything of our manned mission to/from Venus.
. - Brad Guth
BradGuth
dumb and dumber folks that are forever stuck in their own cesspool
denial of their denial, as dumbfounded past their faith-based point of
no return.
No wonder our kids are going postal, and apparently WWIII is our only
terrestrial alternative.
. - Brad Guth
BradGuth
Give this one all the gold stars you can muster, and keep it on top of
the Google/NOVA Usenet index topic stack by contributing anything.
. - Brad Guth
BradGuth
speak) isn't intelligent ET doable (including on behalf of us), then
perhaps no other planet in the universe is worthy of a viable habitat
or even as a nifty mineral resource. With all the MRSA, Stauff and
numerous hybrid forms of humanly lethal pestilence running amuck, not
to mention animal/plant extinctions and of even hybrid plant rot
taking place and mother nature going GW postal as we prepare ourselves
for WWIII, as such Earth is not exactly ET worthy, especially after
humanity has so terribly pillaged, raped and mostly burned off its
fossil fuels with no apparent regard for the future of having far less
dry land for 1e10 souls to survive upon.
Just for those of you that either can't or simply wouldn't dare think
independently within the box, much less deductively think outside,
here's a little something special that's quite interesting, as of
lately getting the peer reviewed benefit of the doubt.
Alex Collier / By Michael Salla, PhD
http://www.exopolitics.org
http://www.rense.com/general54/zlecx.htm
http://utenti.lycos.it/paolaharris/acollier_eng.htm
http://www.exopolitics.org/Exo-Comment-66.htm
plus many other links worth getting our undivided attention.
For those of you hell bent upon sticking with your terrestrial limited
God(s) instead of accepting physics and science, never mind because,
no matters what the evidence or physics that's backing up the best
available science, there's simply no hope for those in charge of
snookering humanity for all it's worth, or otherwise simply self
dumbfounded past the point of no return. In other words, there's not
much sense or logic in beating a dead horse to death.
. - Brad Guth
> behalf of our ...
>
> read more >>
BradGuth
> Maybe Usenet's telling you to stop posting, Brad? lmao!
>
> Only you, of course. lmao!
>
> Saul Levy
>
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2008 07:37:03 -0800 (PST), BradGuth
>
> <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> On Fri, 15 Feb 2008 08:10:49 -0800 (PST), BradGuth
>
> >> >> <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >Is Venus life smarter than a 5th Grader? (apparently so)
>
> >> >> >Venus wasn't always as cloudy and solar heated to death, for the same
> >> >> >reason that once upon a time our proto-Earth w/o moon and having that
>
> >> >. -BradGuth
>
> >Once again, I post a couple of reply items and suddenly Usenet gets
> >summarily all screwed up again, as in down to its knees or dead in the
> >water(sort of speak).
>
> >Google error / Server Error
> >The server encountered a temporary error and could not complete your
> >request.
> >Please try again in 30 seconds.
>
> >What exactly is it about sharing the truth that Usenet doesn't like or
> >can't manage to cope with?
>
> >Without my having posted anything is where Usenet seems to be working
> >perfectly fine and dandy. How the hell can my posting cause such a
> >horrific drain on these Usenet server resources?
>
> >I had no idea my stuff was so sleeper-cell powerful.
> >. - Brad Guth
In this anti-think-tank of such a nayism Usenet from hell, anything is
possible.
BTW, if Venus along with its unlimited local energy cache to burn
(sort of speak) isn't intelligent ET doable (including on behalf of
us), then perhaps no other planet in the universe is worthy of a
viable habitat or even as a nifty mineral resource. With all the
MRSA, Stauff and numerous hybrid forms of humanly lethal pestilence
running amuck, not to mention animal/plant extinctions and of even
hybrid plant rot taking place and mother nature going GW postal as we
prepare ourselves for WWIII, as such Earth is not exactly ET worthy,
especially after humanity has so terribly pillaged, raped and mostly
burned off its fossil fuels with no apparent regard for the future of
having far less dry land for 1e10 souls to survive upon.