According to "Sci.Bio.Evolution" moderation rules:
"while evidence for or against life on Venus is problematic, let us suppose that life DOES exist on Venus; what form might we expect it to take, given the planetary conditions now and in the past?"
On the other hand, the phrase "life NOT as we know it", that you would think opens all the doors, which it does as long as those moderated doors relate to humans and/or of life AS we know it. I may have misunderstood this supposedly open policy avoids any unfortunate confusions with the sort of skewed science and/or physics that's clearly associated with your typical moderated site.
Excuse my bad form and horrific syntax challenge but; it may seem a wee bit sarcastic if not entirely impudent to even bother with such moderation games, especially when it comes to life NOT as we know it, as it certainly seems somewhat childish if not incredibly narrow minded having to cater to such delicate soles that can't admit how snookered they've all been, as well as how skewed science and physics has been tailored by those we trusted with our lives, some a whole lot more so than others.
When I stipulate "life NOT as we know it" and subsequently receive boorish insistence of "why bother because no life could possibly exist on Venus", that tells me I'm not dealing with idiots but, rather with either complete fools or ruse masters intent upon upholding NASA's plan of "disinformation" at all cost, as in implementing whatever "spin" and "damage control" on behalf of sustaining the status quo, as why otherwise take such a problematic stance in face of such visual evidence that clearly indicates otherwise.
Sounds great, just super terrific, I may have to try out the impudent scientific back door of "life on Venus is problematic" approach, especially tailored as for problematic humans I suppose. However, clearly not so necessarily for acclimated and long term evolved nocturnal lizard folk or whatever. Of course that's merely my elective preference upon thinking "positively" outside the box or perhaps I'm thinking "anti-American" because everyone else has been so afraid to see, let alone speak the truth. On the other hand, if Venus had itself tens of thousands of years to gradually evolve into being greenhouse (many stipulating millions), there seems no end in sight as to life's solutions, work arounds and of just plain old fortitude and stubbornness. On the opposit hand, if Venus had itself a terrific warlord and anti-environmental ghoul like Bush, chances are we're talking in terms of at best one thousand years of having everything going to hell in a hand basket, minus a few too many of those life spans worth zip if you happen to work in tall buildings or of the adjoining airliner. Even so, one thousands years at roughly 25 years per generation is still 40 genetic opportunities plus whatever witchcraft and/or technology can pitch in and, along with all of that being expedited by the motivational spirit of having a fire breathing greenhouse dragon on everyone's tail, all of which just might have done the trick, as it certainly would have for myself.
BTW; before you automatically exclude any possibility of "life on Venus", you may have to accomplish your own enlargements, but first spend a thousand or so hours pouring over the other surface terrain images of Venus, as I did. Learn what you can and can't do with photo enlarging, as I did, then focus your new found expertise and whatever talents upon "GUTH Venus". Next, you must try as you may, to discover anything remotely similar existing on Earth (same applied SAR imaging technology, having thousands of images to select from) that's looks anything like what GUTH Venus offers but remains entirely natural. Good luck.
The enlargements I've accomplished are not fake (no reason for that) and, they're not distortions. SAR imaging is "extraordinary proof", far superior to anything "Apollo" and, everyone has access to the raw original data file (also unlike anything Apollo). Photo software can not arbitrarily exclude upon certain pixels while artificially manipulating upon others and, even if you tried to allude the intent of what photo software has to offer, you've got that original as well as most software variations permit reversing everything to the very original pixels, thus "no lie". If you wish to accuse someone of intentionally distorting and/or manipulating pixels, accuse Adobe or almost any other, as they'll sue your socks off.
The page following is a somewhat lesser (simplistic) involved page of just the main township and, the second page deals with just the suspension bridge:
Even though my photo software is not nearly as good as your's, I do not wish to being continually informed those are merely volcanic crystals or hybrid microbes hard at work (anti-gravity and all I suppose). Lava elements of crystals nor of microbes do not go about constructing massively horizontal suspension bridges (unless they utilized some of that anti-gravity), nor achieved multiple complex reservoirs as being interconnected, nor devised complex tarmacs w/sub service bay attributes, along with a bloody host of community like structures and infrastructure issues all over the freaking place and, I don't know about you but, I haven't seen a microbe engineered and constructed rigid airship in years, and so on.
Don't forget about that airship buoyancy issue of 65+kg/m3 nor of the other two lesser sites situated at nearly exactly 180 degrees. Good grief folks, I'm sorry those pictures are not in crisp raving 3D technicolor along with custom surround sound tracks but, how obvious is this game going to have to get. I've posted thousands of words, dozens of photos and darn good ideas as to what's contained, further researched into the science and physics and I've learned only of what's possible. Where my esteemed opposition seems focused as being solely intent and pleased with what's entirely negative as for us humans, how pathetic and how obviously ulterior for all the right butt saving reasons.
Obviously there's some sort of big time "life on Venus" and, obviously it's NOT as you nor I know it. What ever it is has grown accustomed to heat, needs little O2, recycles nearly every drop of H2O and most likely has evolved a magnitude 5 nightvision better performance than anything human.
Evolution and technology go along hand and hand (you do not have one without the other, unless you consider upon what the powers that be have recently done as to skew science and physics into the nearest toilet, along with a few too many astronauts, civilians and all). Ants display intelligence as well as darn good technology, termites of South Africa withstand 100 times the radiation and each has nearly 100 times human strength and, I'll just bet they and/or other exoskeletal types could survive nicely (as is) upon 1% O2, especially at 75 bar. That greenhouse environment certainly did not just happen overnight and, unlike anything Mars, there's been more then sufficient energy resources at hand, along with mega tonnes of H2O stored in them there cool nighttime clouds. With a little such energy, you can do almost anything about improving upon your personal environment and, Venus certainly has lots of natural energy just about anywhere you care to look.
btw (again); there's been absolutely nothing indicating radio about anything I've discovered but, there's certainly the strong possibility of what a little near UV has to offer:
I'm thinking, perhaps the first thing my loyal critics and a whole lot of other Borgs need to do, is to gather up and take everything published by and/or moderated by anything NASA, running all of that through your SEC approved ENRON/Andersen shredders and then burn it. At least you'll get the BTU value from all that shredded stuff which is a whole lot more worth than the moderated words of disinformation contained within. The second task is having those Borg implants either removed or at least bypassed.
So, as for sake of an open argument; what sort of capable evolution is happening on Venus and, perhaps why not consider their plight as a worthwhile challenge. Heaven only knows, they might actually know a thing or two about pollution and of creating too much CO2, which oddly we'll soon need to know something about, preferably before Bush blows up half of our planet and pollutes and/or manages to gas the other half.