What we know for sure about Venus

( by; Brad Guth / IEIS   updated (a few fixes and additions): November 11, 2002 )

In addition to what all is currently supported by a very large and extensive, not to mention prestigious, data base (thoroughly moderated and thereby approved by NASA), that which also includes our most "extraordinary" imaging proof ever (as vastly superior to any CCD imaging, as that provided by NSA classified SAR imaging technology), along with other considerable geological and atmospherics data, that which I find little if any fault with (short of being somewhat inadequate), however, as for the new record, you may need to reconsider upon the following considerations, of those which seem to be associated with and supportive of the recent discovery of all those more likely as artificial structural attributes then not.

Stating the obvious;  It's certainly hot and nasty, as pertaining to that which is considered intolerable for unassisted humans. Similar to whereas just like here on Earth, there are a number of life forms (obviously smarter then man about adapting and thus surviving) quite accustomed to living where humans would instantly perish.

On the plus side of things;  Venus has it's gradient of atmospheric pressure (roughly 4+bar/km at lower elevations) and, a respectable temperature gradient (as for their extended nighttime season; perhaps starting us off at roughly 50K cooler then day, then subtracting another 9+K/km) along with variously thick (thermally conductive) cloud densities offering ratios of at least 20:1 daytime and perhaps as much as 50:1 nighttime (along with even a few possible clearings or at least thinning as to being sufficiently transparent as to permit viewing Earth). There's even a working gradient of O2 (obviously insufficient for you or I).

Venus (unlike Mars) offers loads of natural energy resources (besides accessible surface geothermals), much of which is having to do with that mostly CO2 atmosphere, as for applied kinetics from vertical offsets created by those pressure and temperature gradient differentials, as well as for extracting CO/O2 as fuel.

There is certainly the capability of rather considerable vertical CO2 kinetic energy, as easily derived from that 4+bar and 9+K/km, as being truly substantial (obviously that's 100% renewable, day or night), as obtained from vertical venturi towers or vertical column wind tunnels, those outfitted with power turbines driven by the sheer volumes and mass of those two differential factors.

We know there's an active O2 gradient, where O2/CO2 have been reported as 50/50 at roughly 150 km and, as such O2 is being compressed at lower elevations, it is thereby offering more essential life (though perhaps NOT as we know it) sustaining value per volume (somewhat like as for life at 1000+meters below our ocean surfaces, where there's little O2 and it's either quite deadly cold or of super heated water near those geothermal vents and, btw; you and I can't live there either).

We now should realize that CO2 (as a product of incomplete combustion) can become an effective energy resource of CO/O2 (especially on Venus), once the initial energy for conversion is underway, then the mere existence of such abundant and toasty CO2 is by itself sufficient as for fueling any number of powerful engines.

We know that the bulk of free H2O on Venus (mega tonnes worth) is situated as being contained or saturated as 30% H2SO4 clouds, those situated at typically 50+km but, we also should know something else, or at least realize the capability of H2O retrieval via relatively simple gathering airships and subsequent (nearly free) distillation is just as likely as well as being highly efficient, not to mention logical as hell.

We know that by having such natural energy resources and thereby access to all that H2O means life (even somewhat similar to ours) could certainly coexist (within environmental habitats if need be) and as such, as more likely then not, Darwin's evolution occurred (in spite of what those opposing my efforts have to say).

We should have realized (fairly long ago) by having such an ocean of crystal clear CO2 makes for the nearly ideal environment as for applied rigid airship technology, starting us off at 64 kg/m3, thus capable of sustaining cruising attitudes as for truly massive airships, those easily obtaining 50+km, 75+km if necessary as to be exploring their nearest neighbor (thus, no stinking cross country roads and certainly no difficulty whatsoever in remaining within the season of night). The analogy being; you can not see from space any roads associated with ship traffic as on Earth's oceans and, as on Venus you will not likely see nor detect any airship travel as representing roads through their ocean of CO2, however, you may detect an airship, especially if that's sufficiently massive and as further being associated with it's bigger yet shelter or silo/hanger, along with a cluster of neatly organized nearby spheres (equally massive in terms of volumes) containing something that's certainly not all that surface natural (H2O, H2O2, N2, H2, C12H26).

Just because it's hot and nasty on Venus, that's no valid reason to exclude upon all those open reservoirs, those containing whatever constitutes a valued commodity or energy resource, as the ambient pressure and temperature gradients combined with their less hot season of night would in fact permit such open containments of all sorts (with the likely exclusion of H2O and lesser elements as requiring pressurized spheres, applying a fraction of one additional atmosphere would obviously do the trick, as little as 1.1 atmosphere is safe containment of H2O and, now how hard can that possibly be, otherwise a slight cooling off [heat transfer] by a factor of 10% is yet another viable conclusion, so once again folks, how hard could that be, especially when there's ample energy resources all around you).

We know that for nearly 12 months out of every Venus cycle (in relationship to Earth's orbit), that planet to planet two-way xenon/laser communications is entirely possible and, for two of those months (such as this October/November 2002), such communications efforts are of amateur class requirements and, that only beyond those two months would greater energy levels of somewhat narrower beams need be involved (preferably along with space platform instruments as for detecting incoming packet messages).

This October/November, I believe Venus comes within 105 times the distance of our moon. Folks; that's damn close and, within the near future it's going to become even closer (once again affecting Earth's weather, tides and even plate-tonics).

We should have realized long before now, by establishing a VL2 platform satellite, as for communications relay, would have resolved all sorts of remaining communication issues.

We know that the most universal form and format of communications is via light, as all sighted forms of life respond to such stimulus and, with even somewhat imited capabilities of returning any message, our existing space platforms and even a number of Earth based instruments could have been detecting and thereby receiving those transmissions.

We know for a fact that near-UV as well as other UV spectrums do in fact penetrate those thick clouds, along with a few other limited spectrums getting through. Therefore; a sufficient laser cannon targeting Venus (especially those nighttime clouds) would become surface detected.

We know that most radio waves will not penetrate those thick clouds, thus it's unlikely that any form of direct radio contact (short of beamed S band) is ever going to offer what's needed (obviously with such radio, there has to be an Earth like level of intelligence and technology [how depressing]), whereas visual light stimulus (especially near-UV) could be just the ticket and, about as inter-species universal as it gets.

We should have accepted that natural evolution, especially as being expedited out of necessity, such as by that greenhouse situation being at hand, would have matured (presumably over whatever transitional period) into nocturnal types having a magnitude 5 advantage as for night vision. Then obviously even fewer photons would be necessary as for attracting or perhaps irritating those situated on their (pitch black) nighttime surface, as for arousing individuals (perhaps lizard sorts) associated with those elevated habitats.

We should have realized that a fair number of common planetary compounds, as even of various petrochemical liquids (such as C12H26 and then even processed H2O2), these sorts can safely coexist within the existing nighttime environment of elevated zones on Venus, thereby producing or extracting just plain old H2 can certainly become their bulk of buoyancy as well as for superior insulation medium (with so little free O2 present, I believe even Nitro could be considered as stable).

We know that if CO2 were to be further compressed (as would certainly become a necessary step in extracting those CO/O2 elements), that secondary bleed-off as for refrigeration and thus considerable heat transfer is another done deal. As otherwise derived from some of that vertical CO2 tower of energy conversion into electrons, the utilization of relatively small amounts of contained H2O and/or H2O2 as for an effective heat transfer fluid/gas, thus highly efficient refrigerant (environmentally friendly at that) is simply another done deal.

We should by now have realized that the vast bulk of Earth/space sciences and of those associated are seriously flawed and somewhat intentionally skewed, as any number of such individuals have apparently been residing in the toilet and, they seem to have no intentions of ever coming out.

We should realize that Earth is headed (thanks to less then 10% of mankind) towards it's own greenhouse environment and, we'll not have the atmospheric density advantage that Venus currently holds, so we're getting ourselves in serious big ass trouble, as in "River City" (I just like to throw that one in because it sounds so good).

In case you've missed the punch line, missed the entire point of all these silly words, you're certainly not alone, as all of greater NASA has missed this entire picture for 13 years and counting, totally ignored the greatest of affordable and obtainable opportunities to date and, as for nearly the past 2 years worth they still don't much give a damn (obviously they're too busy spending those hundreds of billions towards gathering those potentially lethal Mars microbes or almost as bad, trekking after ice balls like Pluto but, at least that's not nearly as insidious as Hubble's multi-trillion dollar quest as to breaking the global bank). Good grief folks; are we actually that flush, that surplussed that we can simply afford to basically throw away our best talents and resources upon humanly unobtainable goals?

OK folks; since for some pretty pathetic reasons, we still can not place such lethal microbe laboratories on the moon and/or establish our best ever astronomy installations up there (Earth monitoring and communications support as well), where such capable facilities would not only safely accomplish the most good for humanity by affording the best ever zero energy as well as stable and microbe safe satellite platform (that bio-hazard Mars microbe safe zone obviously being situated on the asphalt lunar surface), in other words, apparently we simply can not take advantage of obtaining the most and safest bang for our buck, that being our moon. Perhaps in place of our not doing that lunar thing, let alone any such robotic Mars microbe gathering in the first place, we should and certainly could have been communicating with Venus. As safely and affordably doing such from our living rooms (like how about 13 years ago) and, at most having to deploy a relatively simple and thereby extremely low cost VL2 relay platform (that's a program perhaps not even 10% the cost of that useless Pluto thing) and, essentially no delay upon the mission nor of any delay upon investment return. I mean, how good does it have to get?.

Duh! onto taxpayers and our really snookered Senate Appropriations.

Am I the only remaining soul on Earth that envisions upon the positive considerations?

Am I the only one that sees more likely artificial attributes existing on Venus then not?

Am I the only researcher that's not tied (moderated) into NASA/NSA/DoD "nondisclosure".

Am I the only remaining honest soul that believes in "life NOT as we know it" (I even checked out SETI and, they certainly do not truly believe in ET, they only believe in money, grants, endowments).

Am I the only one that makes mistakes and doesn't deny and/or blame others?

Are there valid reasons why technically Hubble and TRACE can't image Venus?

Or how about, was Darwin totally dead wrong and, is skewed science as well as skewed history the only recourse for what's left of Earth's humanity?

In addition to the "GUTH Venus" discoveries, a good many others and I've certainly discovered that we can't trust big business, can't trust our own government as to simply doing it's job, can't even trust the church in more ways then you can shake a stick at and, as it turns out that our recent history is basically in the toilet. So, how is the public, those few remaining honest and hard working folks, going to perceive what our government has failed for so many years to do, as towards what's right with respect to humanity and of the planet Venus?

If we're going to be so intent upon Mars hosting life and, with what pathetically little that planet has to offer and even lesser yet for being humanly obtainable, especially as towards regarding those pathetic moons of Jupiter, then why are we even bothering (other then cloaking for NSA/DoD agendas), since we have damn near run Earth out of it's viable energy resources (wars are being fought over such and we certainly can't retrieve any such energy as from another planet) and, as from all of that turmoil having been multiplying upon our trapped CO2 content as well (from those additional tens of thousands of petroleum gallons per minute being consumed), so what's the point?

How can we possibly afford to keep ignoring such facts, ignoring our place in this solar system (as likely being hundreds to thousands of light years from any other habitable solar system) and, doing such by our blatant disregard of the very existence of others (our closest neighbors)?

Obviously we can not truly afford to sustain the "status quo" of skewed history, skewed science and of all the applied "spin" and subsequent "damage control".

If our infamous president (war lord) Bush is going to "take" Iraq, then perhaps we should "take" whatever other we'll be needing, as the remaining world turns against our arrogance, greed and utter stupidity, we'll be needing a lot more of just about everything.

btw; Other nations, I'm suggesting Russia, China, Cuba, India and perhaps a few of those associated with ESA, those can proceed with whatever Venus has to offer and likely benefit far beyond any possible retroactive recourse by our crack NASA slackers. It's obviously too bad that our past (in addition to events such as 9/11) is going to cost us far more then anyone can imagine, even though I happen to believe, what Venus has to offer could have afforded and/or salvaged whatever restitution with profits to spare.

If our Boeing/TRW laser cannon is capable of making planetary contact (I'm certain that's true, at least as for transmitting whatever packets towards Venus, even though it's a wee bit overkill), then other nations can do the very same however, with much lesser technology. Obviously the mutual planetary knowledge exchange is by itself worth far more then all of the US astronomy and space exploration put together. Too bad we (NASA) can't seem to even share in this next vital step and, nearly two years worth of my "I told you so" is not going to make any difference. This one is "first come, first served".

Of course, I could simply focus myself upon all those purely "negative" aspects of Venus (just like my opposition), as it's certainly got lots of that to spare, rather then upon anything "positive" whatsoever, entirely disregarding all those most likely artificial attributes without offering a single comparative SAR image that upholds my negative stance. For another interesting example; Venus (especially October/November 2002) because it's so freaking close and it's damn near as big as Earth, has been affecting our global weather, as well as tectonics and/or platetonics and then obviously our tides (guess what folks; those are all very negative things), yet oddly Venus is not only NOT been in the news, it seems to be altogether entirely missing from the charts. As long as we're being so thoroughly negative about everything, perhaps I should also concentrate on all sorts of really negative other issues affecting how NASA functions or disfunctions, like all of those Apollo mishaps (you know; like those not so capable 1/6th gravity lunar landers that never flew without utter disaster and, as to regarding all those team members that died under peculiar circumstances) and, naturally upon all those now highly questionable lunar missions and, how about some of those other lost/destroyed satellite issues. I might even have to further reconsider a few historical topics, such as the "USS LIBERTY", "flight 800" and "9/11" (those are each really negative and, obviously if one goes back a ways and side to side, there's lots more) and so on, back and forth, tit for tat.

So, if you want negative, I'll certainly oblige. Or, how about I could forget about all that negative stuff and, with a little help, concentrate myself on what's positive and, of what's within our obtainable futures and, best of all folks, all that's at something under 10% of NASA's current and future budgets, merely 1% of those Mars microbes alone would have accomplished that VL2 platform as well as Magellan-II as a done deal and, as to my further supporting this "positive" motivated goal, I'll bet I can start things off by dispensing 1000 pink slips and/or the equivalent in contract cuts in just one lousy day (if that isn't thinking positive, I don't know what is).

It's not that NASA can't be involved as the all knowing master of everything that's good, at least not without taking their fair share of whats bad, this is more about what such an agency such as NASA should have been doing and otherwise needs to get doing instead of providing a cloak for other hidden agendas, as that's not only expensive and unproductive but obviously dangerous as hell.

Regards, Brad Guth / IEIS

Onto the INDEX page: GUTH Venus (with loads of updates)
alternate URL's: http://guthvenus.tripod.com  and  http://geocities.com/bradguth
Copyright © 2000/2002 - Brad E. Guth
GUTH Venus: All Rights Reserved
Webmaster: Brad Guth - Brad Guth / IEIS   ~  1-253-8576061
created: November 08, 2002

Brad Guth / IEIS IEIS-Brad@Juno.com