At more times then I'll care to admit, I find myself correcting the obvious, often I even continue to discover that I'm still incorrect as to proper syntax, worse yet as to carrying out a good story line. However, I've never once been the least bit incorrect about the overall context of what there is to say about the recent Venus discoveries. Unfortunately, due to my unpolished format of documentation encryption being somewhat dyslexic and otherwise reverse logic, by way of answering my own questions before I've staged the entire picture of what the agenda was even about, this is an ongoing personal battle that those working with me seem to have little trouble with and, those working hard against this discovery have for nearly the past two years been utilizing as ammunition (I often refer to such as e-flak) and their form of perverted just cause as to disqualify others and myself at every turn and, that's not just about Venus but, about nearly anything that's the least bit contrary to the NASA moderated and thereby established database of what I'll often refer to as their bible.

Seems that if I'm being attacked on such petty inaccuracy issues, that others opposing my research must be truly having a relatively tough time of their actually disqualifying my discovery as based upon science and physics, as otherwise any competent individual should have been able to point out multiple examples that clearly proves my research as being "incorrect", just as my pro-NASA opponents seem to have all been attempting to accomplish, except without a payer of a real chance because basically, I've been right all along. After all folks, as for being incorrect is a whopping whole lot more so important then of merely being inaccurate. As for making a few thousand unintentional but somewhat inaccurate statements, my basic claims and/or conjectures are hardly of the same merit as merely one intentionally incorrect platitude. Like the assumption that bin Laden would not carry out what he had been expressly conveying to Washington DC for years, this was just about as pathetic as the incorrect assumption on what Japan had been long stipulating prior to their declaration of war (which we also ignored) would not be acted upon, obviously we were literally dead wrong in those two colossal instances, just as with regard to British intelligence informing our government of all those German U-Boat missions and even of specific targets (damn near exact dates and time) of which we blatantly ignored (at the obvious demise of thousands of maritime sailors not to mention the loss of ships and cargo) and, I do believe you and I can go about naming a good number of other individually incorrect actions (actions always speaking many fold more then of mere words) which were each far worse for humanity then of any ten thousand inaccuracies ever attributed.

Being inaccurate means you don't always hit your target, being incorrect means you've shot the wrong guy. I could be wrong but, I think there's a difference.

In my thick book, being a little inaccurate is merely a valid give and take learning curve by those attempting to make a difference and, at least valued for those interested in learning or just towards better understanding what's actually more likely true then not, whereas NASA's hidden agenda format of their controlling/moderating everything to death until it accomplishes as much promise at the least possible internal damage, this has been inflicting more carnage then good. Enforcing some arbitrary rule that somehow there shall be no inaccuracies permitted (at least not published), this effectively represents that others untrained and unskilled or merely unwilling to learn can easily take advantage of such perfected knowledge from others, often without their knowledge nor permission and, subsequently act directly upon that knowledge, along with their intentions of also taking the intellectual rights. In other words, taking what's not theirs as well as assuming the credits for the hard work of others, perhaps feeling sufficiently reassured or confident that such stolen intellectual property was sufficiently correct as to safely act upon without ever involving nor crediting the creator (it's always quite nice when you can profit at the expense of others, subsequently lowering humanities standards and placing some at further risk for doing such, especially when the thief(s) may have every intention of becoming divorced from the program should anything go the least bit wrong, somewhat like what went so terribly wrong in that 6-day war, now Afghanistan is at risk, Iraq being already willing and able but next in line anyway, then perhaps North Korea and China as for our dessert).

I'm not really all that smart about world affairs but, one thing I realize is, America has made a good number of mistakes, perhaps a few more in just the past 200 years then of Rome and those Greeks made throughout their entire history. What's actually holding America together is perhaps a good deal of that "nondisclosure" Duct Tape, rather then truths.

Oddly, when I'm questioned as to my potentially inaccurate statements, I fully expect to share as well as learn. If and when I realise an individual is contemplating upon my research, then I too further contemplate upon what I've been thinking and, I expect to help or being helped by others to refine and/or collaborate our two thoughts into one that's more likely true. If I'm unaware of what others are doing on behalf of anything Venus, then obviously I can't be effectively involved in the give and take by which inaccuracies are resolved. Unlike being intentionally incorrect, there's no intention of my creating nor hiding behind inaccuracies by instilling further inaccuracies that somehow makes or forces the answer or solution into being more correct. Unfortunately I'm only human (not the "all knowing" God nor Saint like individual, as most pro-NASA types seem to be) and as such, I'll try my hardest at foreseeing the positive aspects, by nearly always looking for what seems to work. And as for doing such, I may have unintentionally underestimated essential factors as well as overestimated my formula or reasoning that's being constructed the best way I can (so far, as for having a research budget of zilch, I've done fairly well).

So, if I'm being persistently inaccurate, try giving me a D- for that, then perhaps an A+ for my well intended efforts (overall score "C+"), still not all that bad, dollar per dollar, as I seem to be delivering 100,000% more then all of NASA and their cult club members combined, at least as far as my identifying and then further supporting by sufficient science and physics that life (perhaps NOT as we know it) may have existed and, may still exist on Venus (in spite of NASA). Fortunately, a few members of ESA and that of a growing number of others associated, such as within the University of Oxford, seem intent upon grasping the primary underlying agenda of "GUTH Venus" and, they're still managing to retain a degree of humor, thus Darwin's evolution of humanity may yet evolve, if due only to the persistence of others outside of NASA's avoidance which has only been further reinforced by their very own "nondisclosure" cult (headed by those "three monkeys" again, where that "see no evil" monkey is obviously their image interpretive leader and chief in charge of our Apollo document and photo negative vault).

Naturally, whenever those official NASA and of their not such minor errors subsequently occur, like Apollo 10, CHALLENGER and then for the likes of flight-800, government agencies quickly point fingers at other contributing factors and/or soon resubstitute their own rational form of disinformation instead of truth, exactly like all of the intentional instigated paranoia over the HINDENBURG and of it's safe H2 buoyancy, of which an actual scientist always knew of the truth but, thanks to our dishonest government and of it's intentions of seeing to the disruption and/or destruction of any competition, whether that be at our hand or by any other (like the British/French downing of the Russian SST or of permitting someone other taking out JFK or, how about our not only allowing but further training and outfitting those Taliban as to doing our dirty cold-war work against the USSR), as our cold-war hawks were always right there in the thick of it, as to support and/or take advantage of the situation at hand (if not intentionally brewing at whatever was missing), as to turn upon a few errors or even of twisting mere inaccuracies into useful loads of disinformation of skewed history and subsequent bad policy, thus formulating such blatant lies as representing truth, then expecting subsequent generations to blindly accept those skewed truths as fact, thus insuring the status-quo of history the way our government wants others to see it, as well as for thoroughly channeling our future based upon such lies. If that's not science, physics and a load of history in the toilet, then I don't know what is.

When history becomes so pathetically skewed, as when leaders of mudering tribes are systematically rewarded with the Nobel piece prize, assuredly those same mistakes must happen again and again, as for the very same reasons why Firestone and Ford couldn't admit to wrong doing is also why they could not have made those proper corrections with their cheap-ass tire engineering without clearly indicating that they had been lying all along, just like WorldCom, ENRON/Andersen, the same for those Tobacco Industries and it never seems to end. One lie begets another (like nearly everything said against Cuba) and, if such lies become convincingly converted into a skewed truths, then whom is to ever know what the real truth is. If enough time (4+ generations) gets past, then there's little one can ever do as to making good on what's been said and done, as once all hope has been lost, there's nothing anyone can do to ever bring back, so as to do over the past. The best one can hope for is eventually realizing upon the truths and, subsequently learning from and hopefully never doing what others did, but even that much is not likely to occur from the limited number of truths emerging from our infamous cold-wars, as even Dr. Henry Kissenger wants nothing whatsoever to do with reveling upon such truths (duh!, no kidding, if I was HK, you wouldn't hear a peep out of me because, things may be going exactly according to Israeli plan).

I certainly can't say things all that well, as to what truly I feel is so terribly wrong with the situation we have today. Basically what I'm saying this; we have thoroughly screwed up extremely bad upon several occasions and, have so far managed a good deal of "spin" and "damage control". However, now that the metric tonnes of hose pucky is about to hit the biggest fan you've ever seen, perhaps NOW would be a good time as to fess up to what's truth and of what's been a lie. In case you haven't checked lately, Earth's humanity is sort of running out of time and out of affordable resources. As lucky for us, at least so far there's been no Earth killer space rock to deal with, as even if there were, we couldn't do much of a damn thing anyway and, that's only because we've wasted nearly all of our talents and Earthly resources upon greed and the need to be controlling what every other person can or can not do and, that takes a great deal of effort and resources away from our doing far better things that might, one day soon, actually salvage our butts. Having ties to neighbors with the talents and obvious resources as for surviving on such a toasty hot planet seems to myself like a reasonable consideration and, if we can possibly thaw out any numbers of whatever is intelligent on Mars, that too could be an improvement over what we now have, which is basically squat, as we apparently can't even truthfully document how to safely land and survive on the moon.

Unfortunately, skewed truths pertaining to science and physics has been a ticking timeline of others eventually having to uncover such as bogus wisdom, as for what those lies truly afforded at best was disinformation (somewhat like cold-fusion was basically a pack of lies, fortunately no one had to die because of that). Over time, the eventual advancements of other science and physics not being moderated nor constrained by the status-quo of what America wishes the world to believe in, such as this inevitable advancement upon Venus, is going to cause the truth to emerge along with the demise of agencies such as NASA and of those associated to crumble and burn like Rome or perhaps a little faster and more dramatic such as the eruption at Pompey (I understand that in that instance there wasn't time to spit, let alone save anyone's butt).

In the process of our taking from so many others and not giving credit where credit was due and, the rather obvious results of our not being sufficiently self reliant and thereby thoroughly incapable of making our own valued judgments based upon a good number of logical as well as truthful comparisons, such as from any self reliance by our own expertise of learning from our mistakes, from this premise I'll guarantee that such an individual or government agency will continue to make a good number of incorrect assumptions and thereby incorrect decisions and, that such incorrectness will eventually involve losses for any number of those associated with the program and/or upon those external to any program (unintentional victims, such as from our cold-wars, the USS LIBERTY, those thousands of Muslim prisoners of the 6-day war that simply vanished, flight-107, 9/11, flight-800 and so on, and actually we may need to be best starting all of this "tit for tat" as going all the way from the US Mexican wars, as I seem to foresee no beginning nor end in sight for American disinformation (spin and damage control on steroids), especially with warlord Bush at the helm.

For the record:

It would be a whole lot more incorrect as to stipulate that life could not possibly have existed on Venus.

It would be merely inaccurate for me to have stipulated that Islamic lizard folk have managed to survive.

After all, being Islamic or of whatever faith has relatively little if anything to do with being a lizard sort of person. If being more cold-blooded and "lizard like" somehow benefits one's surviving on a truly hot and nasty planet, then perhaps my inaccuracies as to the associated faith needs to be corrected upon.

If the elevated territories of Venus are in fact somewhat cooler, more so by their extended season of nighttime and, as such being darker then pitch black, then my assertion that a species of nocturnals having a magnitude 5 advantage in light sensitivity may be just another inaccuracy, which again is certainly not the same as being incorrect.

Being that recorded evolution (life as we know it) seems to have surpassed just about every conceivable barrier to life here on Earth, with the exception of mankind either destroying their environment or outright consuming them faster then even assisted nature can replenish, in spite of nearly all such odds, life has evolved and, I would like to believe that Darwin's theories could be at play on Venus, possibly a whole lot more so accelerated then many of us are willing to concede to.

At least Venus has an abundance of energy, perhaps only a wee bit of free O2, however, that O2 is under considerable pressure as well as there being an altitude related gradient of ever increasing O2 percentage so, thereby more of that O2 exist by the same factor that makes most humans cringe at the very thought of having to survive at 92+ bar and, damn hot as well. Fortunately those cool nighttime clouds are somewhat lower in altitude during their long season of nighttime and, the available buoyancy of what a rigid airship could utilize is simply a win-win as for extracting tonnes of pure H2O from those nifty thick clouds, by utilizing extremely little energy and nearly free vacuum distillation can afford a rather substantial solution as for obtaining not only pure H2O but, also for production of H2O2 and then just volumes of plain old H2 that could so easily be created. On the actual Venus surface are a number of energy producing alternatives, one of the more intense considerations is that derived via the vertical CO2 pressure differential of 4+bar/km, along with as much a 9+K/km as for their nighttime thermal differentials, that which could easily be associated with mountainous terrain. If I keep going on about energy solutions, I'll likely be putting you to sleep, as there are many other alternatives, some of which are not even relevant for Earth and, absolutely out of the question as for anything Mars.

Speaking about Mars; that pathetic 0.006 Bar of mostly CO2 as for a truly cold atmosphere needs serious loads of imported energy (presumably nuclear) for a couple or more years before any significant/appreciable amounts of CO/O2 can be accumulated and, that's simply not such a good thing, certainly it's not efficient, not per dollar, nor per time allotment and it's certainly not of any sure bet, especially if the eventual outcome of all this investment is to expose our manned Mars mission to such solar flare radiation over-exposure, then as for doing all of this at a cost of hundreds of billions, along with absolutely no assurances that what's to be learned and/or retrieved from Mars will even cure the common cold, yet might otherwise infect what's left of Earth's population with a Mars microbe that simply doesn't take NO for an answer. I hate being the rain-man but, we already have a good number of hyper microbes right here on Earth that no longer takes NO for an answer, in other words, our battery of antibiotics has been shooting blanks at those Darwin succeeding bugs and, some of our own modern technology is directly responsible for creating some and otherwise Frankenstein assisted evolution by inappropriate antibiotics has just about done us in, as many thousands are dying from the very same microbe bugs we've created but can no longer control, at least not without serializing entire populations of animals as well as mankind. So, exactly why we need to further tempt fate and, doing so as with such an enormous cost has totally slipped past my limited brain cells, especially when we could have been communicating with Venus for just dollars per day and, at no chance whatsoever of introducing any infectious inter-planetary microbes exchanges.

I have a number of pages just devoted to the topics of how much Venus has to offer, compared to what little Mars can deliver and, of the rather enormous cost differentials between each planet, as that being not even a fair contest, as Venus wins on every count, by a wide margin at that. Besides such financial considerations, there's still all of those large structural attributes that remain as most likely artificial and thereby constructed by some considerable intelligence. That intelligence seems to becoming greater then what's existing right here on Earth, as NASA and their army of "spin" and "damage control" moles are either idiots or they're blind as a bat, remaining so pathetically stupid that they can't even read the braille of what I have to say. In return for such utter incompetence standing in the way of honest research, I have returned the favor by having to explore into the ulterior motives of NASA and of their cloaking associations with the likes of NSA/DoD. As ulterior motives go, NASA has lots, while I seem to be entirely lacking in the cloak and dagger department, without even a hidden agenda to boot.

If you truly wanted to explore the possibilities of Venus, then one needs to understand why all the official avoidance and/or opposition, why all the spin from those supposedly capable of doing a great deal more towards exploiting upon what such a close planet that's most likely still inhabited has to offer.

If you have a following and can go it alone, deliver whatever expertise on Venus or upon any number of worthy considerations, then others of ESA and/or by any number of NASA excluded nations can easily and affordably become involved as partners, especially as for inter planetary communications, as that opportunity is nearly a zero cost impact and even lesser risk, yet having by far the greatest degree of payback, as there's simply no need of any manned landing once we establish and maintain such communications. Such visible and/or near UV communications opportunity is apparently totally beyond what NASA can comprehend and, even though our infamous NASA already owns all of the necessary technology and otherwise has access to virtually anything NSA/DoD (like that Boeing/TRW flying laser cannon), there's apparently none of the folks remaining that actually knows how to use any of it for anything but war, so they're entirely dead in the water, left with accommodating their long and perverted associations with NSA/DoD, which obviously excludes anything the least bit humanitarian worthy and, I believe that's having to include others wasting their talents, time and hundreds of billions upon looking at hundreds to thousands of light year distant targets, of places which obviously can't possibly hold anything of humanitarian worth, except for further lining the pockets of those already involved with such frivolous usage of our limited resources.

Remember folks;  if it's to be of humanitarian worth, the intended recipients need to still be alive and kicking, not dead by generations worth, certainly not dead by thousands of years worth, as that sort of delayed benefit simply doesn't count.

Besides Earth sciences (which most certainly includes the Sun, our moon and that should obviously involve at least our closest planets affecting our climate and gravity issues and, of what ever space science and exploration is necessary for attending to such), I'm open for new ideas and for those othersopposing my discovery to please inform the world and myself what good there is in our looking at those ever further distant targets, as for better understanding their existence and of what if anything of all that relates to Earth sciences. As we still can't seem to sufficiently detect (until it's too late) nor protect ourselves from any of those Earth killer space rocks. Apparently our gravity formulas have been off base, as they don't sufficiently account for our deep space probe travels, nor according to many as not even that of our tides, nor accounting for the elliptical orbits of certain objects and, we can't even seem to properly document our ability of walking on the moon, yet all toll, especially for such far reaching astronomy endeavors, all this has devoted thousands of trillions of dollars over the centuries, wasted the time and the countless lives of millions trying their best to make sense out of what's entirely beyond our reach and, most recently of such deep space efforts, all of which has yet to have grown a damn thing nor extended the life of any living creature, in fact, it's done just the opposite and, in more ways then you can count.

Unlike the vast majority of my opponents, I'm all for effective (Earth related) space research and exploration, although it seems, if truly intelligent life wanted to isolate their genetic mistakes and the hopeless to another solar system and, onto a life supporting planet, then perhaps Earth was about as remote and as good of place as any. As such dumping grounds go, Earth was a fairly good initial choice for an isolation penal or sanitarium colony, as without a great deal of imported technology and an obvious level of intelligence which our damaged DNA has fully excluded, there's little if any chance we'll be getting our inferior selves back into the mainstream of what's capable of living on other worlds beyond our reach. Like the separation of Israeli and Muslims, the two worlds of Earth and Venus could have been the only viable solution for differing species being isolated for our own pathetic good (perhaps Mercury is a rare third species habitat colony), as that's exactly how we've been going about isolating various Earth species in order to preserve what's left. If we actually had a means by which to deliver such defective souls to our moon and sustain their minimal existence, then that's exactly what we would have been doing as of decades ago (obviously we do not have that capability).

As I've stipulated at least a hundred times previously;  we likely do not require a Venus landing (at least not manned), thereby we do not need to be sufficiently protected from all that pressure and heat, as the Venus L2 (VL2) platform will do quite nicely and, VL2 could even be manned somewhat like our ISS or remain as purely a robotic signal relay platform. Even though I believe a sufficient rigid airship could navigate just below those nighttime clouds with relatively little difficulty, with inter planetary communications established (that may require specialized robotic transceiver deployments to the surface) there's absolutely no essential need of our physically going to Venus, unless there's something the two of us must share that simply can't be accomplished via communications (I personally do know what that could be, unless biological organ/fluid exchanges are required and, that might only further depend upon how pathetically desperate your sex life is).

As far as I'm concerned, there's nothing UN, ESA, NASA, NSA/DoD or whatever other internationality about this Venus opportunity, as communications is a "first come first served" event, where there's even a good chance those of Venus already know more then they ever wanted to know about Earth and, are prepared to defend their world, even if that means crashing seriously big rigid airships into our tall buildings. I would also have to believe that merely dropping off a few thousand tonnes of pure acidic ballast dust could become a relatively effective method at corrosively damping our enthusiasm towards Venus (on their world, acid crystal dust is entirely harmless, on Earth it's a serious consideration once our abundant H2O gets involved).