Venus Offers Whatever It Takes For UFOs

That's correct, I make those "Multiple assumptions", as in way outside the box and along with way more than my fair share of errors to boot, like those I'm making about certain individuals that are seemingly not contributing squat, perhaps such as yourself.

I honestly didn't think that part about the flashlight analogy was insulting, as any two year old kid with half a brain should have been amused?

"We don't give off photons to return the message do we?"

Of course we don't give off anything that any decent ET could put to good use, though perhaps Venus ETs might take petty on us, and try to help resolve our greenhouse fiasco, as whom should know better?

Or perhaps they're all heathen ETs, and rather hot and nasty at that (like Osama bin Laden).

Share some of your mistakes, that is if you've ever made any, that'll give some other village idiot as myself a somewhat better understanding of applied laser beam communications. Of course, that means that you'll need to share in specific numbers, which may be restricted due to your nondisclosure agreement with NASA/NSA/DoD.

BTW; the only reason why the likes of GW Bush gets any fair share of my flak is because of his dog-wagging actions having cost humanity perhaps another decade-setback, plus trillions and counting, not to mention a few too many bodies laying about. Thereby our available resources as for accomplishing deep-space anything is seriously in the toilet. What's next?

That's why I thought it might be a reasonably good sort of thing as to staying a wee bit closer to home (moon/Venus). Whereas the fact that you can't see that Venus bridge, much less anything other that looks the least bit out of place, this is not my problem; http://guthvenus.tripod.com/venus-bridge.htm

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I honestly didn't think that part about the flashlight analogy was insulting, as any two year old kid with half a brain should have been amused?

But calling me "dumb and dumber" and emtpy headed is an insult. I have thick skin but you do it to everyone who disagrees with you.

Of course we don't give off anything that any decent ET could put to good use, though perhaps Venus ETs might take petty on us, and try to help resolve our greenhouse fiasco, as whom should know better?

And there is proof for this where? You're good at stories brad...but that's about it.

Or perhaps they're all heathen ETs, and rather hot and nasty at that (like Osama bin Laden).

And he has something to do to it because? Oh that's right you just have to throw your political views in there too.

Share some of your mistakes, that is if you've ever made any, that'll give some other village idiot as myself a somewhat better understanding of applied laser beam communications. Of course, that means that you'll need to share in specific numbers, which may be restricted due to your nondisclosure agreement with NASA/NSA/DoD.

You're ranting about this because you have a wrong view of physics? Hmmm..I guess so.

BTW; the only reason why the likes of GW Bush gets any fair share of my flak is because of his dog-wagging actions having cost humanity perhaps another decade-setback, plus trillions and counting, not to mention a few too many bodies laying about. Thereby our available resources as for accomplishing deep-space anything is seriously in the toilet. What's next?

That's why I thought it might be a reasonably good sort of thing as to staying a wee bit closer to home (moon/Venus). Whereas the fact that you can't see that Venus bridge, much less anything other that looks the least bit out of place, this is not my problem; http://guthvenus.tripod.com/venus-bridge.htm

Only a mental patient would give you money for you to "extend" your theories. Although I'd have to admit that'd you commit suicide when you find out you've wasted your life being wrong.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

blackholesun;
"But calling me "dumb and dumber" and emtpy headed is an insult. I have thick skin but you do it to everyone who disagrees with you."

You already know that I do NOT apply the same analogies upon folks honestly sharing their opinions, and/or expertise as in your case. Since you are so smart as you suggest, thereby your empty head should be much fuller than all of what my head contains.

Wouldn't you assume a differing point of view, than persay one that I uphold to, would kindly offer their background and/or intellectual base of logic as to how that view was supported?

Such as, if you are stipulating that such a good amount of those unusual SAR image patterns are not only most likely natural, but in fact absolutely natural, and exactly as to be expected upon Venus (perhaps because you've been there), then you must have a reasonable stash of such other SAR images for accommodating that sort of conclusion, and as such, I and others would like to have a look-see, so that I too could become as wise and all-knowing.

BTW; If anyone was ever more dumb and dumber, as in thoroughly dumbfounded and thereby snookered as of at least four years ago, it was myself. As proof positive, one of the absolute dumbest dumb-ass things I ever did was to call this observational discovery into NASA, and not once but upon several occasions calling in and discussing matters, which was long before I ever had a single webpage. But then as an official NASA borg/mole that you are, you already knew that, so what's your sorry excuse?

As for the likes of biological illuminations retruning fire; there's any number of species that do such here on Earth, some of them sharing photons at horrific depths that would kill-off any pathetic human in less than a second, that is if it wern't for a good deal of applied technology.

With not hardly an once of intelligence, but merely from the benefit of a reflective surface (mirror), such visual communications can in fact be managed over greater than 100 miles without taking a single mw of expended electron energy, much less of any transistor or any sort of applied EMF/radio technology.

I guess, I'm not sure about your level of intelligence but, if I were on top of mountain-A, while you were situated on top of mountain-B, both of us freezing our butts off, though each of us with that suitable mirror and having the sun roughly at high noon, as such I think that perhaps one of these village moron idiots might actually be smart enough as to figuring out that of distant mountian tops don't normally share off binary code in the form of vast numbers of concentrated photons. Whereas, you're expecting us to believe that indeed the notion of mountains reflecting obnautous amounts of beamed light back and fort is not only entirely natural, but of the expected norm, thereby somehow confirming by your pathetic standards that there's absolutely nothing unusual nor capable of artificially going on, nor the least bit suggestive as to how primitve (pre-radio) heathen folks, stupid enough to being stuck on opposing mountain tops, might have utilized such a free source of focused photons, and of otherwise of such being intirely technology free method (other than the mirror itself) worth of accomplishing relatively long-range communications, as such by way of your standards suggesting that this analogy is being absolutely impossible, unless there's that pre-existing channel of radio assisted technology established first.

And this is the best you can do?
"You're ranting about this because you have a wrong view of physics? Hmmm..I guess so."

I do manage more than my fair share of rant, though I do not have that "wrong view of physics", so much as it seems that I have the need-to-know access only to what views upon physics that certain rusemaster folks like yourself are willing to share, even if you've got absolutely nothing backing it up.

Actually, the thought of my prematurely dying-off (as you've suggested) isn't nearly as bad as for being yet another devout Cathar exterminating or Jew exterminating pro-activist, as such borg like fools that'll follow their corrupt leaders after invisible WMD, or as to accomplishing absolutely anything it takes for sustaining their mainstream "Skull and Bones" status quo, at any price and without remorse.

Of course, you are supposedly not one of the "bad guys", but instead essentially stipulating that others like myself are the ones responsible for all that's gone so terribly wrong. This seems rather odd when every fiber of what I'm driving upon is entirely beneficial for humanity, and not at 1% of what your way has been costing. Which bring me into wondering, exactly what if anything have you given back to humanity?

If we did a SEARCH FOR "blackholesun accomplishments", or of some other key words, would there be anything other than a blackhole, or perhaps a vortex connected into the likes of a GW Bush butt, or don't such vortexes exist in physics?

Of course you must be worth the price, as you're certainly accomplishing far more "damage control" than most borgs, and as such you should be rewarded, or at least applauded for the valent effort.

As usual, I've got those updated files to share.
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-badastronomy.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-apollohoax.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-photo-entro.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm

BTW; I don't need to "extend" my theories because, I have not had to reinvent any stinking laws of physics, nor lie about what I honestly perceive as to what's existing as most likely artificial, upon the elevated surface of Venus. And besides, I'd have no moral dilemma in taking money from a "mental patient", as at least I could offer by far the most BANG/RETURN for the almighty buck/euro, and without roasting another batch of astronauts at that.

And lo and behold, there's lots more (a bit far reaching) to share within my UPDATE page.
Regards, Brad Guth (BBCI h2g2 U206251) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/update-242.htm

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

With not hardly an once of intelligence, but merely from the benefit of a reflective surface (mirror), such visual communications can in fact be managed over greater than 100 miles without taking a single mw of expended electron energy, much less of any transistor or any sort of applied EMF/radio technology.

I guess, I'm not sure about your level of intelligence but, if I were on top of mountain-A, while you were situated on top of mountain-B, both of us freezing our butts off, though each of us with that suitable mirror and having the sun roughly at high noon, as such I think that perhaps one of these village moron idiots might actually be smart enough as to figuring out that of distant mountian tops don't normally share off binary code in the form of vast numbers of concentrated photons. Whereas, you're expecting us to believe that indeed the notion of mountains reflecting obnautous amounts of beamed light back and fort is not only entirely natural, but of the expected norm, thereby somehow confirming by your pathetic standards that there's absolutely nothing unusual nor capable of artificially going on, nor the least bit suggestive as to how primitve (pre-radio) heathen folks, stupid enough to being stuck on opposing mountain tops, might have utilized such a free source of focused photons, and of otherwise of such being intirely technology free method (other than the mirror itself) worth of accomplishing relatively long-range communications, as such by way of your standards suggesting that this analogy is being absolutely impossible, unless there's that pre-existing channel of radio assisted technology established first.

So you're saying that reflecting sunlight from mirrors onto a mountain to a village below is a perfect analogy to your Venus "theory" even though the village might not know binary code or Morse code to decode...and even thought these "hot spots" on Venus aren't of alien origin.

If we did a SEARCH FOR "blackholesun accomplishments", or of some other key words, would there be anything other than a blackhole, or perhaps a vortex connected into the likes of a GW Bush butt, or don't such vortexes exist in physics?

No but you'd get a number of sites pointing to the song in which I named my username after. Unlike you I didn't create a useless site of incorrect statements, bad science and political rants. I put my time into work.

Oh and still important; you're the only one that sees "artificiality" in any of those SAR images.

 

Guy's if your going to discuss whether aliens exist on Venus is one thing, but drawing the thread towards personalised commentary is another.

Bradguth,
If your website contains all the information you keep copy/pasteing to the board, could you desist, the consensus decorum here is to Quote a Paragraph within quote blocks and then apply a link if your quoting directly from a site, this is to lower the overall load that mountains of already available text takeup on forums such as these.

It also attempts to keep things SHORT and to the point, rather than looking like a wall of letters/words that tend to swamp people to the point of losing interest in the thread.

 

Stryderunknown,
You're absolutely correct, in that your folks have been imposing their orchestrated agenda against what I've had to offer in requesting their expertise to help, though instead they've insisted that I continually defend myself asainst their entire mainstream status quo, which unfortunately takes those walls of words, unless I create new pages within my website. As such in the future (after this last "wall of letters/words") I'll do just that, post a brief statement and link to the rest of the story.

blackholesun;
"even thought these "hot spots" on Venus aren't of alien origin."

That's certainly an all-out and flat-out absolute statement, as coming from someone that can't otherwise see anything unusual in the SAR image to start with, nor wishes that any laws of Earthly physics be applied elsewhere. I'm assuming that you alone have some viable explanation for that horrific amount of illumination as depicted in the heath4.jpg?

The following statement may be about as good as words ever get, perhaps that's because they are NOT my words, though you can imagine how I find such a well formed statement as being true to what I have observed, and as to the somewhat limited degree of my applied scientific efforts at "assembling evidence, combining that evidence with assumptions, and analyzing the combination in a logical manner to develop a hypothesis", and as per "Empirical evidence is obtained by observation alone" which seems to pretty much sum up if not surpass what I've been expressing all along, though while having to defend my hypothesis from all of the orchestrated flak derived from your Godforsaken mainstream status quo having been nothing but a serious pain in the butt, as well as another perpetrated insult against humanity.

Of course, since you're so freaking smart, once again already knowing all of what's contained within this following statement, and then some. In which case this may be just another one of those GW Bush "high standards and accountability" moral resolutions of "so what's the difference?"

-

http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=33392
coberst;
Science and Truth

The “scientific method” forms the heart of legitimacy for the natural sciences. This method consists in assembling evidence, combining that evidence with assumptions, and analyzing the combination in a logical manner to develop a hypothesis. This hypothesis is the bases for predicting what should happen in certain conditions if this hypothesis is true. Evidence is assembled to test the validity of the hypothesis. If the evidence indicates that the hypothesis has not been proven to be invalid then other predictions based on the hypothesis are used to construct additional experiments to further test its legitimacy.

The validity of a hypothesis can only be determined by empirical evidence. Empirical evidence is obtained by observation alone. Scientific observation can only show that a hypothesis has not yet been proven to be illegitimate. The empirical evidence derived from a test of a hypothesis proves, not that the hypothesis is true, but only that the hypothesis has not been proven to be untrue. Science does not deal in absolute truth but only in probability.

The reality of natural science is matter. When the scientific method is applied to the social sciences the test for validity is society. The reality for social science is society.

Matter, the reality studied by the natural sciences is essentially stable and non-changing. The truth of natural science discovered a hundred years ago is unchanged today. Such is not the case for the social sciences.

The social scientist is attempting to build a theory about a moving target and the social scientist is riding on this moving target while constructing the theory.

Truth is that which conforms to reality. The above provides evidence why the truth of natural science is stable and the truth of social science—the science of human affairs—is unstable.

Humans and not nature construct social conditions. The society in which the social theorist lives and of which she derives her present understanding of truth is a recent construct. It was constructed by those with prejudices, false assumptions, biases etc. that permeate her consciousness.

Truth in matters of human affairs is very slippery. The student of Critical Thinking is better able to deal with such a situation than is an individual who thinks he is a critical thinker. The Big Leaguer is a Critical Thinker the sandlot player is a critical thinker.

Does this mean that truth, in matters of human affairs, is subjective without any objective content?

Does social reality make truth and the theorist only brings theory and truth into harmony?

It seems that theory creates reality and is shaped by reality. Does social theory have any claim on logical truth

coberst

-

Whatever I or yourself can possibly have to add or substract from this "Science and Truth" statement is absolutely beyond my expertise, though I'm fairly certain that you'll find some ulterior interpretation as motive or agenda that'll justify and/or prove that only your interpretation of whatever evidence and facts are what matters, and as such humanity can just go suck another rotten egg before the likes of you'll concede to even assist upon anything that wasn't your idea to begin with.

You already know what my interpretation of the existing "social reality" is all about, that it is specifically situated within that proverbial intellectual space toilet, the same one that's emptying into that intellectual mainstream status quo cesspool that you call the truth and nothing but the truth. When in fact, that space toilet has been badly overflowing for decades (especially ever since the NASA/Apollo ruse), thus we're all having to stand around in our own, plus the estimations of others, as though it's the norm as opposed to flushing that stinking incest mess before it absolutely explodes and we all must die.

BTW; I've also looked at nearly every viable NSA/CIA spy image of Iraq and, guess what, I can't seem to identify upon one damn WMD, only a few tens of thousands of perfectly innocent folks that are no more, surrounded by a great deal of community infrastructure that's also no longer there to be seen, and all thanks to your mainstream less than moral ideals that seem to see absolutely nothing worng within that picture.

Warmest regards, Brad Guth (BBCI h2g2 U206251) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/update-242.htm

 

That's certainly an all-out and flat-out absolute statement, as coming from someone that can't otherwise see anything unusual in the SAR image, nor wishes any laws of Earthly physics to be applied elsewhere. I'm assuming that you alone have some viable explanation for that horrific amount of illumination as depicted in the heath4.jpg?

And reverse is even more true. Claiming, with no evidence (sorry but just because you SAY you see artificiality in your SAR images doesn't make it true) that there is life on Venus, and intelligent at that, is an even bolder statement given the planet's thorough by Russian and the US. And given that "earth" physics works just as well in putting spacecraft in orbit around other planets as well as on planets I'd have to say I don't know where you're coming from with that statement. You're the one that seems confused about topics in physics and biology so condemning MY knowledge of such is outright silly....especially since I'm the one that being agreed with.

BTW; I've also looked at every viable NSA/CIA spy image of Iraq

yeah...suuuuuuuure you have. Keep your political crap out of the thread because I could care less about how WMD correlate with life on Venus or that you think Al-qaeda are aliens. It just makes you sound like even more of a nut to everyone else here. Wait....keep it up!

 

Something I've been looking at is using a Render engine (something like Renderman but far cheaper) to take some of the pictures and dice them up into less that 200px x 200px images. The program I was using "terraforms" based upon the shading of a colour, where a deep depression is Black and White is the peak (The peak being defined to be a particular size)

The outcome provided a "potential" landscape of a very small preportion of Venus, it looked as if the surface had been rocked by multiple venusquakes and potentially lava channels, not bridges and hamlets/city sprawls.

I would suggest getting hold of such software to pull the surface apart a bit more, you might be suprised by the findings but it's not going to suggest life, just barreness and hostility.

 

Now you've got lava spanning a huge rille or canyon, with little if any arch at that.

I realize that Venus offers 90.5% gravity of Earth, but the likes of any lava or mud flow making that sort of leap, and of sustaining itself at that, is by itself a masterful event worth visiting in person, in spite of it being so hot and nasty.

And still, no credits for the unlimited amounts of easily available energy, much easier than anything here on Earth, and by a factor of many terawatts per square kilometer at that.

Brother, it's as though you've really got those lizard folk as absolute heathens.

Any chance you can process something on that potential tarmac, and share your results?

 

I realize that Venus offers 90.5% gravity of Earth, but the likes of any lava or mud flow making that sort of leap, and of sustaining itself at that, is by itself a masterful event worth visiting in person, in spite of it being so hot and nasty.

Here's his link: http://guthvenus.tripod.com/180-A.htm

Can anyone here truly believe he can depict a three dimensional object like a bridge and distingush it from an old lava flow that takes a bend from this two dimensional SAR image with a resolution equivalent to optical imaging of 1 km per line pair?

And still, no credits for the unlimited amounts of easily available energy, much easier than anything here on Earth, and by a factor of many terawatts per square kilometer at that.

Who cares? Jupiter and Saturn output much much more energy themselves then Venus could ever hope of doing. Hell the sun beats everything hands down in respect to energy output available. Just because there is available energy to use doesn't mean something living is using it. Energy is not a indicator of life.

Brother, it's as though you've really got those lizard folk as absolute heathens.

Well hell, they only exist in your mind, so its hard to make that distinction.

 

Because "blackholesun" has been pretending all along as to being other than he is, I'm not going to always bother answering such absolutely pathetic questions, as it's almost as though I'm having to communicate over great distances with a blind man, or perhaps with his dog, using laser/photon communications or perhaps via those nearly free-energy mirrors none the less.

This is only a wee bit off topic, although directly related because it clearly demonstrates the premeditated extent of what the "mainstream status quo" of "http://scifourms.com" is willing to go through, in order to keep folks snookered as well as tight lids upon those badly plugged and otherwise overflowing intellectual space toilets. Whereas there was going to be another relatively short context on radiation added into my original http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=38195 as recently locked down specifically because of the truth and nothing but the truth topic of "NASA uses LLPOF anti-flak to protect Apollo butts", that now has its external follow-up "wall of words" page; http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-scifourms.htm

In closing (if need be); you folks (specifically the likes of blackholesun and his personal "pro-everything NASA/Apollo" cloning partner Persol) simply don't hold a candle to the rusemaster likes of apollohoax.com, badastronomy.com, GOOGLE or even uplink.space.com, whereas most of which have purged my postings as soon as they could, and why is that?

All of this tit-for-tat as directed against myself would not have become an issue if there were a few interactive instruments reporting from the moon, as to exactly what the thermal and radiation as well as seismic issues are all about. Perhaps within the next decade we'll obtain the ability as to actually deploying such instruments, such as my javelin probes (http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-javelin-probes.htm) that'll offer a much better science bang for the buck than of the proposed "Polar Night" mission.

Instead of proving that something honestly different and new is possible, instead the likes of blackholesun and his personal cloning partners focus upon their "damage-control" duties, while never actually contributing squat worth of any specifics, although tossing out as much warm and fuzzy flak as possible is just fine and dandy by way of the standards being enforced by Lord Stryderunknown.

Instead of my having to return the favor, I'd rather be looking for viable alternatives that are in fact "outside the box" but within the existing laws of physics, in spite of others in this obviously skewed forum are intent upon protecting their mainstream status quo, regardless of the consequences, and without remorse, and best of all is that Lord Stryderunknown seems to approve of this.

blackholesun;
"Can anyone here truly believe he can depict a three dimensional object like a bridge and distingush it from an old lava flow that takes a bend from this two dimensional SAR image with a resolution equivalent to optical imaging of 1 km per line pair?"

and

"Who cares? Jupiter and Saturn output much much more energy themselves then Venus could ever hope of doing. Hell the sun beats everything hands down in respect to energy output available. Just because there is available energy to use doesn't mean something living is using it. Energy is not a indicator of life."

Firstly, I'm not going to argue about the composite of what's been illuminated (12 looks per pixel at the terrific perspective of 43° of perhaps 225 meters/pixel) via SAR imaging, or even of color or contrast issues, as to that of what a visually impaired soul sees, as what's the point?

BTW; I'm not insisting that folks agree that there's a suspension bridge like issue, although none others have offered any alternative conjecture that's worth a hoot, and especially since the bridge issue is rather minor compared to everything other.

I'll not agree with your "who cares?", as obviously NASA/NSA/DoD(DHS) couldn't honestly care less about anything of Earthly humanitarian values unless there's oil, or some other energy resource involved or another cold-war hidden agenda that needs doing, though I'll agree with your "Jupiter and Saturn output much much more energy themselves then Venus could ever hope of doing", as being quite true in terms of them laws of physics, even if Venus offers a hundred fold more easily accessible and perhaps a thousand fold more natural/green energy potential than Earth. Although, as for getting any expedition off to the likes of either Jupiter or Saturn is at least ten fold more time consuming for Jupiter and another ten fold on top of that for the likes of Saturn, not to mention the 100+ fold greater price tag to boot, and still absolutely no affordable way of launching sufficient mass (at least not without gassing Earth with thousands of tonnes of additional CO2) as to keeping either crew from being TBI to death, or otherwise impacted beyond recovery, but other than all of that, their horrifically spendy one-way missions should go along as planned.

I'll have to stop now, because of the "wall of words" criteria has been reached, if not breached.
Regards, Brad Guth (BBCI h2g2 U206251) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/update-242.htm

 

There is actually a method to "Ignore/Filter" who's posts you want to read, therefore you can in fact completely ignore anything that you feel upset by. In fact I incourage the use of that tactic because it doesn't cause the communication of others to continue if no arguements are being insued because of being ignored, in fact I'll add this to the Rule notes just incase people point this problem out in the future.

My personal understanding is simple, I know what it's like to have an independant view and want to generate a report that is contrary to the consensus, I also know that no matter if Blackholesun and Persol were to be halted in attempting to gain answers (in no matter what frame of context they enquire) there will always be someone else there trying to get a rise out of you.

It pretty much leaves two options, realise that the world see's your theory as a complete failure in logic, or realise the world has a complete failure in logic not seeing your theory. However if you are/were to be proven wrong about your theory in any form could you knowing accept that you were/are?

As for your "suspension bridge", from my 3D scan which I can't go one hundred percent upon it actually looks like a clever shadow trick from two mounds being close to one another and a shadow being cast and the revine that you suggest a bridge stretched looks like an old lava channel with a crevis at it's centre.

Also there is the point that you tend to "Merge" alot of your arguements and statements, which you should try not to do. Doing so creates a problem in discussing an overall topic, it's as if your attempting to create a "String theory" in logic but to most, they don't compute the vectors of information tibits that you've ensnared over your self education on the subject.

(Namely they can't see how you leap from Energy concerns on this planet to Reptilians on Venus)

As I mentioned before if you do write down the logical progression you came to step by step, make sure it is STEP BY STEP, not a wall of worlds that clutters all the keywords together or most people will ignore/disrespute it.

There is also the other aspect of Crawl before you can walk, walk before you can run, Currently your insistant on something thats beyond running and we've rarely crawled further than our own orbit. It's not like we can store energy Efficiently and drag it back to the planet, and the current methods of using any Wireless method of transfering energy would potentially cause alsorts of problems to communication equipment and anyone caught in the crossfire.

 

But that's the problem.... he can push his theory all he wants, but he needs to back it up with SOMETHING. Anytime someone poses a technical question to him he blows it off and calls them borg.

 

I'm suggesting you guys occasionally ask for information with a sarcastic frame of mind, from the number of times you've asked for information on a number of subjects that people don't supply the answers to.

Perhaps Persol you should come up with a Specification for Post submission and what amount of evidence is deemed acceptable before submission.

 

The only think you can do with crazy people is try to show them that their beliefs are baseless. If they are actually right, they should be able to explain why.

This isn't a subject of ethics or religion where the answer is largely due to opinion. This is a claim made proporting to have backing, but showing none.

 

after reading this thread..
I have an assumption that bradguth is a venusian.

 

I'll not agree with your "who cares?", as obviously NASA/NSA/DoD(DHS) couldn't honestly care less about anything of Earthly humanitarian values unless there's oil, or some other energy resource involved or another cold-war hidden agenda that needs doing, though I'll agree with your "Jupiter and Saturn output much much more energy themselves then Venus could ever hope of doing", as being quite true in terms of them laws of physics, even if Venus offers a hundred fold more easily accessible and perhaps a thousand fold more natural/green energy potential than Earth.

First off, I don't see how energy capture could be "green". The planet is an environmental disaster. You couldn't do anything to hurt the planet even more. Natural energy? yes; but oil is natural too...and so is natural gas.

Although, as for getting any expedition off to the likes of either Jupiter or Saturn is at least ten fold more time consuming for Jupiter and another ten fold on top of that for the likes of Saturn, not to mention the 100+ fold greater price tag to bootand still absolutely no affordable way of launching sufficient mass (at least not without gassing Earth with thousands of tonnes of additional CO2) as to keeping either crew from being TBI to death, or otherwise impacted beyond recovery, but other than all of that, their horrifically spendy one-way missions should go along as planned.

How is that any different from launching to Venus? You still need a powerful rocket, you still get a dosage of solar radiation and cosmic rays (which according to you kills any astronaut anyway), you'd still be pelted with material (this would happen anywhere but according to you this would happen catastrophically going away from the sun and not toward it?) And where would it get you? You'd still be on an inhospitable planet (or I guess floating in its atmosphere) trying to survive.

Persol is right. Why not listen to a little criticism guthie? You don't answer questions with knowledge you answer them with insults. And you wonder why no one takes you seriously?

 

And then there are those that you can try to explain something to them, and yet they will never be able to see, or understand.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

There is a reason for that.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

:m:

 

Brad can't explain anything without insults and just plain wrong statements. But then again...you can't, Can you Norval.

 

blackholesun;
"The planet is an environmental disaster"

NO FREAKING KIDDING; I couldn't agree with you any more, even if I said it myself, which I do believe I've done just that a few hundred or so times.

Besides my observations of what looks like fairly recent erosion patterns, and even that possible "fluid arch" attribute that I've pointed out for nearly the past four years and counting, though apparently only that I can see, I'm also going by the analysis of a few others that seem to believe that Venus wasn't always so darn hot and nasty. Although, if Earth had the sorts of easily available energy to being taken on demand, as from a 4+bar/km atmospheric differential of mostly dense CO2, along with what little we already know about CO2-->CO/O2 being possible, that plus the rather terrific buoyancy aspects would certainly offer us a darn good run for our money, that is if anyone gave a tinkers damn about surviving the greenhouse onset, of which in a century or so we might actually have that opportunity.

I too believe there's a perfectly good chance of sufficiently deep underground gas and oil deposits, that is unless some warlord fool hadn't already utilized every last m3 and kg worth of such, thus inflicting another insult to injury upon an already bad situation that's going to hell in that proverbial hand-basket (sound like anyone we know?).

"How is that any different from launching to Venus?"
Firstly, instead of going for the likes of Jupiter or Saturn, you'd need far less of a interplanetary craft, that plus lesser of a powerful rocket as for going towards the sun beats anything leaving town as in the opposit direction, although stopping or slowing down for the reentry is a wee bit nasty, still considerably less energy intensive than for anything Jupiter/Saturn, though perhaps even nastier yet if that were having to park any sizable craft at Venus-L2, thus I've only seriously suggested (other than in jest) that a TRACE-II be deployed to Venus-L2, plus a robotic interactive communications kiosk or two as deployed to the nighttime surface. A robotic rigid airship with all the SAR and CCD (night-vision) imaging would offer another nice addition, though not essential.

"Brad can't explain anything without insults and just plain wrong statements."

I believe I've answered at least two for one of the questions I've imposed upon the "all-knowing" wizard sorts such as yourself, so don't keep making me out as the "bad guy", as the "messenger from hell" well do just fine and dandy. And since I've been locked out of the "NASA uses LLPOF anti-flak to protect Apollo butts" (http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=38195) topic, I've answered upon a good number of other questions as having been updated into my http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-photo-entro.htm and http://guthvenus.tripod.com/earth-venus.htm

BTW; here's another one of those wrong statements. blackholesun is a nice guy.

or perhaps how about this following wrong statement;

Sciforums is not another official dog-wagging spin and damage-control portion of the mainstream status quo.
-

I'm afraid, if there were anymore DNA signs of intellectual incest borg cloning, that would have to be of "uplink.space.com".