As with respect to NASA verses GUTH Venus;  this is where clearly one exist and the other is entirely bogus, at least morally speaking. In spite of the morally lacking opposition and of all the negative flak received, I've learned and/or uncovered a few other things over the past few months, such as the following;

1) Wherever there's heat there's always been the opportunity of extracting energy.

2) Wherever there's differentials (pressure or thermal) there's opportunity of extracting energy and/or taking advantage of said differentials.

3) Wherever there's a cold bi-metallic junction (warm always being better), there's electrons flowing, especially at temperatures above freezing (the hotter the better).

4) Wherever there's energy there's a greater likelihood of creation and of supporting life, even if that's NOT of any life as we know it.

5) Wherever there's other life, especially surviving with obstacles, there's DNA/RNA having developed stamina as well as an intelligence of survival.

6) Wherever there's ET DNA, there's always NASA/NSA/DoD/CIA and, there's certainly motive, opportunity and all the resources needed as to punt, spin or wag-the-dog, as well as to deliver whatever disinformation it takes to keep those lids on tight.

7) Wherever there's NASA punting, there's always the opportunity to have been cloaking on behalf of NSA/DoD agendas.

8) Wherever there's been NSA/DoD agendas running amuck and of creating subsequent disinformation, there's carnage, then certainly more spin and subsequent damage control.

9) Wherever there's "spin and damage control", there's been serious big-time lying on steroids (essentially; job security of the highest order).

10) Wherever there's lying, there's certain to be dead bodies and the fear of more of the same on the way (try asking the Pope about Cathars).

11) Wherever there's fear, there's more opportunity.

As discovery go, I started this one off nearly three years ago (not that I'm any good at conveying much of this), with an entirely honest and I believed worthy observational consideration, of what merely looked far more likely as artificial then not, of otherwise apparent as highly unusual geological patterns, those seemingly not ever recorded elsewhere (that's including Earth), as existing on an elevated site, situated of all places on Venus.

Stupid me;  as the Village idiot, I actually thought that since we've supposedly been to the moon and all, that our esteemed NASA (Lords of the "all knowing" universe) would become interested in realizing that a simple and easily overlooked opportunity seemed to boldly exist, on a nearby planet that was considerably closer then Mars, that had been systematically visited by a good number of probes, most of which were relatively effective, financially efficient and certainly not risky to astronauts nor of the humanity of Earth. In other words, at the time there was no serious thoughts of acquiring potentially lethal microbes nor the prospect of our having to further research, develop and subsequently deploy life supporting technology for any manned landing. Of course, now there's ESA going after those Venus atmospheric microbes, so all bets are off regarding the future of Earth's humanity (at least as being under the authority and of whatever wisdom of anything NASA).

Seeing how much havoc any small number of local microbes can accomplish towards damaging Earths humanity, this gave me some concern of what on Earth are we going to be doing with those entirely new to our species of evolution by introducing Venus or Mars microbes. Somehow the actual idea of risking even more lives seems a bit testy if not immoral.

Although, I've subsequently learned that at the time of the Magellan image gathering and ever since, those officially charged with the multiple task of deciphering exactly what those terrific SAR images actually contained were not necessarily the least bit qualified as experienced aerial image interpreters, so much as they were damn good scientist and geology experts, as such highly regarded and well compensated for their talents and subsequent analysis of Venus. Unfortunately, according to the NASA Bible, there was never a directive nor focus group intended as for discovering anything that was not necessarily entirely natural, as their hands and over-sized brains were certainly full of just comprehending what was a seriously over heated but entirely natural environment and, apparently they're still hard at it as we speak (just like NASA is still hard at proving or at least defending that we walked on the moon and, that's become a really big job if considering climbing mount Everest would have given more radiation dosage than the daily allotment associated with those Apollo missions).

I can fully understand the heart and soul of any good scientist not ever discovering upon anything the least bit artificial, besides of that focus not being within their job function nor qualification, as all of the environmental indications were certainly hotter then hell and otherwise downright nasty to boot about the planet Venus, at least sufficiently nasty to life and of technology as we knew it or were willing to concede at the time.

What I can't understand nor tolerate is the intentional bashing and the orchestrated delivery of spitefully arrogant disinformation ("negativism"), all intended to exclude upon anything Venus (at any cost), especially after the fact of my delivering such a large number of "positive energy considerations", along with the realization of my identifying such a good number of "more likely then not artificial looking attributes" seemingly being hosted by a community like infrastructure, all of which having yet to be depicted on any other planet, including Earth, as far as representing anything the least bit natural.

My opponents have not managed, but I have located upon a good number of fully NASA certified SAR format images, those containing sufficiently worthy looking geological attributes, of those images including patterns of natural terrain as well as potential bridges, complex structures, reservoirs and causeways that (under similar resolution) looking exactly like those on Venus, however, those certified images that contain what's natural as well as whatever is more likely artificial looking attributes all seem (without any exception) to have been man made, as existing right here on Earth (if you wanted, you can go and touch them). On the other hand, I have not, nor have my opponents as of lately, discovered a worthy SAR image of anything that's offering such complex patterns yet certified as purely natural as coming even remotely close to what's been existing on Venus, at least not as being entirely natural. So silly me, I still believed there was an once of moral talent capable of realizing upon this as a golden opportunity, instead all I've seen and received is a good deal of flak, including "spin" and "damage control", pretty much exactly like what's been going on regarding those Apollo missions and, of more recently NASA divorcing itself from anything NSA/DoD that could tie them into those hidden agendas of our past cold-wars and current Administration's desires, those of essentially ruling this world (that's global domination) as well as whatever is beyond.

Of course, ever sinse my discovery, a number of bad things like 9/11 have been getting in the way and, I (as others) couldn't help but offer my "I told you so's", then as to further ponder regarding the true motives and/or morals of those opposing what my research and subsequent discoveries had to offer. The sorts of flak I had received were all too odd, as unexpectedly to be avoiding the issues at hand, then of somewhat orchestrated bashing so as to intentionally defocus others away from anything Venus. How odd or perverted?

Just because I don't happen to believe in the Easter Bunny, Santa Claws, Pope's God nor of the good intentions of our infamous NSA/DoD, this should only further reinforce the fact that I'm not part of any persuasive cult, nor am I willing to risk the lives of others without their concent, something quite obviously not of any consideration by the vast majority of my opponents.

Why my observations and subsequent discoveries have come to deserve the third degree and subsequent depth of "spin" and "damage control" is certainly not the sort of response any respectable sort of moral scientist would tolerate, or would they?