Of everything gathered to date (with the ongoing exceptions of my stuff), as under the continual moderation by the lords of NASA, has been a darn good thing. Most of the Venus missions went according to plan, that's including our most complete mapping of any planet except Earth, thanks to the Magellan mission and by all those competent teams of sufficiently qualified wizards, along with many thanks to NSA's spy satellite.
Even the subsequent research data upon geological and atmospherics seems entirely on target, at least worth using as a rational base. Even though the more recent calculations are becoming somewhat varied and certainly not all that conclusive, still that's within my limited field of understanding and, I have sufficient faith that others will soon realize there's other opportunities around the next corner. Of course that means, someone needs to actually look at those fine images, especially at the three areas I've spotted and then to start considering the more positive aspects of what other that nifty atmosphere has to offer.
The only exception I have is not really even an exception, as NASA never actually formally conducted a single program intended as for locating and/or recording anything that's potentially artificial. Even though that seems odd, that's what happened.
Obviously the mounting information (representing the present day status quo) as for the planet Venus, has been in fact looking fairly dim as for life as we know it and, little other was being considered or contemplated because of two very good primary reasons. First of all, the Magellan mission was running seriously long and, that's simply because every aspect was simply outperforming and out-lasting expectations, thereby so much data was being gathered that it seriously overloaded nearly everyone involved. Secondly, funding was a bit over the line as based upon the original mission parameters (certainly nothing all that surprising there), and, soon became way over the line upon everything working so well and for so much longer then expected.
The jobs of exploring through those images (essentially thousands of them) went onto those selected as for their geological and associated scientifically qualified expertise (obviously not a single aerial recon type was ever applied, as "low life's" were not permitted as to being involved with the prestigious ones), so that merely the body of Venus could be best understood and recorded. Equally the atmospherics were being analyzed, not so much from anything Magellan but, as from previous missions and, along with a few Earth based observations and whatever loads of other measurements taken. There simply was no funding for and thereby no mission focus nor subsequent intent as to identifying anything artificial, nor as to considerations for life *NOT* as we might know it.
More then a decade after many of the Venus studies and reports had long been moderated by and subsequently filed or accepted by NASA, then here I came along, having an uncluttered fresh perspective (totally lacking ulterior motives) as well as certain observational and photographic expertise plus an interest in what was at the time our best ever collection of planetary images and, best yet was regarding the imaging technology applied, of which I technically understood a great deal of. Imaging that entirely excluded the need for and/or the affects from natural as well as artificial illuminations, plus no lens distortions and subsequently no refractions and then having multiple looks per pixel at 8 bit depth, plus many of the images were acquired at very good angle of perspective. So far so good, in fact absolutely nothing better, not even of what's coming back from the latest Mars images which are so dependent upon CCD technology and thus having the associated limitations because of that issue (far better resolution yes, but much lessor truth considering the lack of detecting content or substance, then as to having lesser perspective views along with shadows affecting illusions and then totally reliant upon merely one extremely brief look per pixel).
Magellan on the other hand, this imaging as developed from NSA spy technology and, this simply had far more to offer, especially with the understanding of what SAR imaging supports along with the certified advent of digital enlarging, a profound new imaging standard by which NIMI stakes their fame upon as well as do thousands of commercial photographers. The proof being that (unlike photographic film) one can easily reverse the process, step by step, thus proving what, if anything, is being altered beyond acceptable goals. Obviously any fool can seriously distort an image, but that's not only easily detectable it's also easily revealed upon one's noticing that all of the surrounding considerations have been equally affected, thus further "extraordinary" proof positive as to the "truth" factors associated within most any digital enlargement. Obviously a pixel by pixel alteration is also possible, but once again, this process is not only extremely tedious but easily detected and simply could not fly unless the original file is somehow disposed of and/or the viewer is a total idiot.
Apparently a fair number of my opponents were unwilling or perhaps simply unable as to doing their own enlargements, thus have become sort of the reverse idiots as for the exact same reasons as they hold against me. Seems if I were going to prove someone's observations wrong, I would first certainly accomplish my own enlargements and then locate a good number of new images clearly indicating similar artificial looking attributes that have since been proven otherwise. In my defence, I offered those opposing to utilize images from any planet, including Earth. So far "no cigar".
Initially, (as I've previously stated) I simply utilized and then reported upon the 1:1 format (picked up the contrast and then utilized my screen magnifier) and then as for accomplishing the rest of the job of connecting those dots, I obviously plugged my eyes back into what's left of my brain, then I foolishly reported what I perceived as being more likely artificial then not (that was my mistake No.1). Only a month or so later (after several official rejections and still nothing on the table) did I apply anything "PhotoShop" and, now I'm certainly glad that I did, as I can show and allow others less experienced to realize what good SAR imaging has to offer, as depicting what's most likely artificial as opposed to such being surrounded on all sides by what is most likely natural, each factor or contrasting reflective issue becoming just a whole better outlined and as sufficiently enlarged (instead of limited to the postage stamp screen image), plus conveying onto others as to what's most likely reflecting as hard to medium to soft and/or most absorbing (indicating as black), as being valid "extraordinary" information taken from the 8 bit attributes of what SAR imaging essentially represents (photographic truth on steroids)...
Again folks; As so far of what's been emitting from my camp, there's nothing but positive issues arising from NASA's Magellan mission (I'm assuming NASA takes the full credits for anything that works as well as Magellan did).
My decision as to further establish upon the more likelihood of there being life on Venus, this stems from a belief or darn good perception that I was in fact seeing a fair number of artificial attributes, thus someone or something constructed and/or placed them there. From that point on, there's no way in holy hell I'm conceding upon a large number of such artificial worthy considerations as being anything but and, as such those artificial items certainly offer some rational logic and/or functions associated with their existence, at least worthy of the likely nocturnal sorts of whatever may still be living on Venus.
Because NASA and essentially all of the astronomy record clearly states that life on Venus is *NOT* at all likely (I'm assuming far worse odds then of most any state lottery) and, equally their "spin" and "damage control" moles are basically backing that Club NASA record or "status quo", so with little other choice of my seeing nothing materializing from others obviously capable but afraid of something terribly sinister, I simply had to learn more about Venus, physics, biology and of the inner-related sciences that might explain upon the "what if" of life existing, perhaps life *NOT* as we might know it, as existing prior to the Venus greenhouse and then evolving (in spite of NASA) and, as according to good old Uncle Darwin's theories. Seems that I've repeatedly asked of others to pitch in and share in this challenge, it's fame and blame (after all, making mistakes is how most of us normal folk learn). Some folks, mostly of those clearly and/or entirely dissociated from anything NASA and subsequently not receiving nor looking for any government grants or funding, these folks have been helping to teach me more then I thought I ever needed to know.
Because time is always short (as having to work from my massive budget of "zilch"), I thought it was past due for myself to advance upon the issues, to in turn press a few of those buttons just to see what might happen (since no one else was stepping forward), as to impose a little favor returning if need be, especially if that's what it takes as to being considered a club member, as idea bashing seems to be the call of the day, of every day and night until either or both opponents are thoroughly dead. This method seems entirely odd and, somewhat proves my associated theories about astronomy and NASA as being right on target. For the most part, astronomy is a seriously rich and dangerous person's hobby/sport, as so darn little is derived for humanity (sort of like killing your neighbor's cat with an ICBM), yet so much investment and infrastructure is required, thus imposing needless suffering and subsequent losses for everyone that's not an accepted wizard astronomer or rocket scientist type. So, we're talking about the suffering and further degrade upon billions in order to benefit a few hundred astronomer and/or astrophysics types. Any way you care to cut that, that's a hefty price as well as moral burden to pay.
When 75% of NASA's budget is (in one way or another) taken up by their cloaking on behalf of NSA/DoD agendas, that's simply adding further insult to injury.
When those agendas of NSA/DoD inspire reprisals and subsequent carnage, then we're talking "triple damages" and, perhaps decades worth of otherwise good achievements lost forever (sort of like having to stand on your head and then hand over hand walking backwards for two or three generations worth). Eventually, if you're lucky, your hands fall off and you at least stop moving in reverse.
So here we are; I'm stating there has been something worth looking at and hopefully worth communicating with (damn near zero cost as for doing such) and, my opposition is spinning out of control as for dispensing their "disinformation" and accomplishing all the "spin" and "damage control" they can muster, using official avoidance when and wherever possible and, obviously these are mostly individuals receiving either their retirements and/or salaries and considerable benefits from the taxpayers, so we're basically talking about our government spending what ever it takes as to reinforce their ruse (millions, hundreds of millions, even billions would be entirely acceptable if that further hides or sufficiently cloaks the trillions actually involved from pre JFK to today, as it's not their money), rather then as for sharing so very little or perhaps nothing by simply acknowledging the greater possibility that I'm a whole lot more right then not and, unlike so many typical NASA maneuvers, this "GUTH Venus" thing offers absolutely nothing to lose, even if I'm wrong (of which I'm not!), so, there's only everything to gain.
I do believe the potential gains far outweigh the impending Apollo outfall and even of whatever cold-war issues. In other words, Venus is simply so obtainable on a "first come first served" basis and, because that planet is so potentially chuck full of surprises and so freaking nearby, at least as far as establishing a manned and/or robotic VL2 platform, along with another Magellan-II mission and suitable surface deployments, that's representing serious "pay dirt", or perhaps that's "eureka" and it's certainly "truth" on steroids, that which might even soon become "planetary commerce".
When I'm speaking of science and especially NASA's science news as being delivered via info-commercials, most often that's a darn good thing, as how otherwise are we ever going to learn about where and how our latest trillion dollars has been spent. Collaboration on the part of the news program and/or publication is all essential, as even for telling the absolute truth is of no consequence if you can't first attract and then secondly hold the attention of the audience and/or reader. It just so happens that a fair number of such news "info-commercials" have their shady side, as those shades have been essential for cloak and subsequent moderation by partners such as NASA/NSA/DoD, as such can be imposing if not down right intimidating to a point of becoming lethal, at least financially speaking, by their merely pulling away from submitting many other legitimate government "bought and paid for" info-commercials. Such substantial revenue losses to most news programs and news related publications could mean certain death (duh, "you don't bite the hand that feed you", or else!).
Over the decades, we the public have eventually become informed about all sorts of previous "disinformation" as well as upon the deeds of those nifty cold-war agendas (soon to be including those associated with 9/11). So, there should be no surprises about what's been going down with regard to the establishment(s) avoiding (at all cost) any focus upon the planet Venus, especially having anything whatsoever as to do with "GUTH Venus".