Significant Other Life on Venus

(In spite of NASA and of all the powers that be, there remains significant other life on Venus)

What can I alone or nearly anyone really have to say on behalf of Venus; other than, in spite of NASA and of all the powers that be, there is significant other life on Venus, or at least there was such life as of 14 years ago. Worst case scenario is seeing the remains of what used to be, though why leave town simply because it's gradually (over thousands of years) getting somewhat toasty hot, when you've got seasons worth of cooler nighttime, good elevation sites as well as unlimited energy in just the composition of atmospheric pressure differential alone, especially when that differential is comprised of such dense CO2 ocean that's not only keeping the planets' mega tonnes of H2SO4 (30+% sulfuric acid) which includes H2O aloft, as in buoyant in them there relatively cool nighttime clouds and only slightly warmer by day, but also effectively shielding everyone from cosmic/solar radiation.

Try to understand, from what I've learned over just the past few years, we're not talking about any pathetic Mars like face, of descovering something that's isolated from any signs of rational community, nor are we being frozen solid or of being demised into a Mars radiated microbe that somehow managed to survive a cataclysmic bombardment, one that thoroughly pulverised half of their world and most likely created their ice age of all times. Not by any long shot, as one of the many benefits of the thick Venus atmosphere (a virtual navigable ocean) is that it offers a rather impenetrable buffer against the bulk of such catastrophic impacts, whereas the atmosphere alone would have greatly absorbed the incoming energy of nearly small moon like objects before eventually impacting their surface. Short of having to encounter and subsequently survive a nearly black-hole density class of object, where much of any incoming object would have been significantly reduced to a mere fraction of it's original size, if not entirely vapourised prior to impact (we should be so lucky, as I wish Earth had that much going for it, especially since our infamous NASA nor of their NSA/DoD boss can't offer us one iota of hope against avoiding let alone surviving such Earth bound disasters). That form of energy release from an incoming object of sufficient mass could have been the corner stone of Venus becoming so greenhouse, or by several other accounts, perhaps this environment was caused by a planetary eruption of sufficient mass, which could also have triggered the onset of global warming, creating a runaway greenhouse that's just lately tapering off if not measurably cooling down.

Even though it has become supposedly so terrifically hot and nasty (at least I'll certainly concur that's humanly so) on Venus, there fortunately was ample opportunity of sufficient timeline and, most likely a good deal of gradual thermal motivation towards making the best of a truly bad situation, as all of that greenhouse didn't just happen overnight. In my certified village idiot opinion, as further backed by reasonable science and the laws of physics, this is where other life, NOT as we may know of it, somehow managed against all odds to survive, as unlike our government and of all it's agencies appointed to officially deal with such issues, those survivors of Venus could have been a whole lot smarter than we're giving them credit for.

Venus survives; as entirely opposed to what our government usually does in belatedly and inappropriately responding to a stimulus like 9/11, where perhaps others being intent upon avoiding their certain death from a relatively gradual environmental change were not about to waste their time, their talents nor resources over social/political nor ideological issues, instead, they were most likely hard at figuring out the best possible way(s) of salvaging their butts before the next unbearable sunrise. Of course, there's no such option for Earth unless all of this could be thought of as pure fiction (what do you think).

Some critics have already suggested and even published upon the conjecture of a million+ years worth of planetary evolution, from once being tropically warm to becoming rather overly toasty, whereas I've considered a somewhat accelerated occurrence of a lesser timeline of perhaps 4200 years, based upon a 0.1ºK shift per year, still offering sufficient time for the cycles of life and thereby advancement of DNA through the laws or at least reasonable expectations of evolution to have made the best of a bad situation, or else.

Since there's been record on Earth of climatic changes of 1K per year and of actually far greater short term shifts have been noted, thus I see no problem with offering my conjecture of 0.1K/year affecting Venus. Of course, if that were of cooling down, as within a thousand years Venus daytime might get itself all the way down to 625K, with the nighttime surface becoming 575K plus subtracting another 10K/km (at that atmospheric pressure, it's damn near snowing in them their Istar Terra mountains of 17+km elevations).

My conclusions and subsequent motivations are those stimulated as based in part by what can be seen, as observed existing on the surface, of that which is far more likely artificial qualified than not, especially of the prime GUTH Venus site No.1 and, secondly has been focused along by what's further motivated this research from the unexpectedly testy (flak tossing) opposition to the very idea, thus giving myself cause to wonder and believe others may know of far more than being spoken or written of. In other words, it's been the unusual degree of opposition as well as the disinformation and/or the voids of information where there shouldn't have been such voids nor any need of providing disinformation (such as upon space radiation issues), that which is clearly pointing towards a number of suspiciously forced closed doors, intentionally obscuring the path to truth in favor of reinforcing skewed history and of subsequently skewed science as well as for creating the sorts of toilet physics in order to substantiate and subsequently uphold the ruse/sting, all of which has been oddly imposing the greater likelihood that we're all being to some extent snookered by those "having the right stuff".

Besides my discovering that our world may soon if not already have a rigid airship gap, we also seem to have a rather limited CO2-->CO/O2 technology gap, at least physiologically speaking and, we're also morally ill equipped to deal with the required insight and subsequent intelligence as to survive elsewhere, especially if that's having to include any pretext of our competing against there being other life as well as most likely other ideology NOT as we know it, as all of this is in stark contrast to understanding what all those "having the right stuff" have been telling the world for the last four decades, that space travel is sufficiently safe (Apollo proven), even though that's become another certified bald faced lie, such as learning by way of the new guard at NASA that solar minimums actually impose 2.5 times as much lethal TBI radiation behind spacecraft shielding as do solar maximum events.

Of all things obtainable, we can't even seem to properly utilize the moon for anything except upholding a perpetrated cold-war ruse/sting, not even for the benefit of any deep space SAR imaging and, the only method of our getting even relatively small packages down onto surfaces like the moon and Mars is by utilizing a sort of controlled crash, with absolutely no present day method existing by which to launch anything of size from the Mars surface nor possibly the lunar surface as far as the truthful record of such late 60s "fly-by-wire" seems to boldly indicate, let alone retrieving such items to Earth. Until we further invent and/or expand our capabilities, such as figuring out how to create and deliver parachutes that are each a mile across, there's no viable way nor alternative proven method of our delivering substantial technology and/or delivering man onto Mars, that's even if there's no plan of ever returning home because the delivered astronaut had been exposed to a lethal dose of radiation. Too bad those Apollo lunar lander technologies aren't worth squat, at least not in a nearly atmospheric free and relatively high TBI dosage environment that's representing slightly more than twice the gravity of the moon. Of course, such a revised lander with capable rocket engines and configured for the tonnes of CO/O2 fuel would also have to provide considerable shielding for its passengers (not the near aluminum foil of those Apollo landings), unless remaining positioned on the nighttime side of or under a rather substantial Mars rock during the majority of operations.

Of all the planets, Venus is not only the most accessible but seriously alive with all sorts of natural energy opportunities, offering by far the easiest of conversion for obtaining CO/O2, where literally mega tonnes of that conversion could be extracted by utilizing an entirely renewable energy resources and even sustained if need be on the fly, in other words, offering an airship or even the initial spaceship launch phase as having nearly unlimited ISP potential as long as one remains within the atmosphere of the first 100 km (I believe that's the worst energy consuming part of any launch). Below 25 km, the nighttime weather is relatively calm and absolutely clear as a bell for as far as you can see, capped by dense clouds containing a great deal of sulphur but mostly megatonnes of just plain old H2O, where obviously some distillation via vacuum processing is all that's required for obtaining just the H2O portion, then processing that into H2O2 for safe keeping seems like a rather obvious alternative to pressure storage methods. Subsequently extracting volumes of H2 on demand is certainly not rocket science, thus buoyancy capability of any rigid airship format is going to exceed 65 kg/m3, especially during their cooler and thereby denser season of nighttime.

Because of the good density factor of the Venus atmosphere, our existing technologies of delivering relatively large and even massively heavy technology to the Venus surface, especially of the elevated nighttime surface that's already tarmac configured, is hardly even a challenge. Even the aerodynamics of the shuttle would more than compensate for a surface landing, though at a relative slow speed due to the terrific density of atmosphere, where approach and landing at perhaps 20 knots might get a little boring.

I've been informed by some of the best of science and physics, that of having renewable energy as a primary resource is all that's needed to deal within the extremes of Venus. Obtaining other mineral deposits and/or nuclear materials is simply icing on the cake, though first you have to get there and survive long enough to insure that your beer is being kept sufficiently cool and, that you have at least something of worth to those Venus lizard folks, especially if they turn out being Taliban or perhaps those having an even bigger grudge to settle, such as Cathars would, in which case it might not be such a good idea as to being associated with anything Pope or even the least bit catholic.

This "having renewable energy" seems rather a good thing to know of, at least you're starting off some fifteen thousands times better than what Mars has to offer plus, at least Venus affords a pretty darn good cosmic as well as solar radiation shield from all that nifty atmospheric buffer. With energy one can deal with a little heat, even a great deal of heat, though without radiation shielding you haven't got squat because, within a few days on Mars you're over-dosed and losing ground, as sort of a dead man walking (Jack Kavorkian would be proud). At least on Venus, especially as surviving within their extended seasons of nighttime, there's damn little radiation getting through, where daytime is more of a UV dosage issue, even a somewhat overly illuminated environment for nocturnal folks.

If what I'm seeing is supposedly an illusion, then perhaps the whole of what we're seeing is an illusion, as those areas depicting the rugged if not sharply ragged terrain of mountains, ravines, channels or rilles, large rock formations and otherwise of the most unusually looking attributes that seems to portray themselves as for being a fairly rational community are entirely something other (BTW; there's no indication of the sorts of surface acid and weathering patterns of said terrain being smoothed off), as from my limited observation in the 1:1 raw pixel format is of a surface image as equally connecting the dots/pixels, of what's obviously indicating as entirely natural (99.999% of Venus being quite natural), as well as for subsequently my discriminating upon what other (perhaps 0.001% of the globe) is remaining as being more likely artificial or at least affected/modified by those surviving than not.

BTW; The application of photo software is not what discovered site No.1, nor has such software introduced anything that wasn't there in the first place and, that issue can be debated as proven at least 10 certified ways. Understanding the "extraordinary proof" aspects of SAR imaging is also not the sort of deep rocket science my opponents are insisting upon, it's not even astronomy science, as it's more like science 101, as in duh!, much like looking out the window of an airplane.

For the possibility of other life to have existed and survived through the Venus greenhouse onset, there seems no new science, no new physiology nor new laws of physics required, only the recognition of yet another species that has become sufficiently adapted to their environment, obviously a whole lot smarter about their surviving than man can even conceive of but, none the less making a go of a truly piss poor situation rather than merely rolling over and dying on the spot. Unlike so many ignorant and obviously pagan worshiping and now warlord supporting and bigoted Americans would have just given up, mostly because we're too god damn stupid to accomplish anything of true global humanitarian worth on our own merits.

If I've managed to leave out your race, religion or political affiliations, sorry about that, as I'll probably do a whole lot better the next time around. As fortunately or perhaps unfortunately (depending on your point of view), it seems highly unlikely that of any truly honest scientist or even astronomer (especially SETI folks) could remain justified in their moral existence by further ignoring such overwhelming evidence, especially when there's such abundance of logic as backed by so much science and physics truth. That leaves but only the intentional orchestrated ruse of NASA/NSA/DoD snookering all of America and of more so snookering the entire world. It's no wonder there's so many intelligent souls that seem to be aware of but unable to derail this global domination locomotive from hell, especially when there's been such momentum created in locating all those invisible WMDs, while expending at such human as well as global resource cost, all of which seems a bit Pope/Cathar to me but; what do I know?

With respect to arrogance; in deed I'm remaining arrogant towards those claiming that there's absolutely nothing of worth to life existing on Venus, as that's just plain old horse pucky. If on the other hand, someone cares to reinterpret the meaning and/or function of certain pixel patterns, as for being something other than what I'm suggesting, that's perfectly fine and dandy, even if that definition is leaning strongly towards being natural, as that sort of argument would obviously come along with imaged examples of other such similar formations that have been confirmed as being natural and, as I've stipulated before (dozens of times), that's exactly what I'm looking for and, I'll even post links to such and give the fullest of credits for your expertise or sheer nerve. Unlike my opposition, I'm not pretending to being God nor that I don't make a few too many mistakes, though I believe the bulk of what's potentially unnatural as to be seen on the surface of Venus is hardly one of those mistakes.

So what if I were 90% dead wrong; that still leaves 10% of what I have been stipulating as for being artificial, as sufficient "proof positive", which is by far exceeding whatever other has been discovered by all of astronomy and by all of accumulated explorations of other worlds by virtually every recorded mission (US and any other), where that's especially including Mars.

Sorry if I can't be more explicit but, seems the powers that be are on this one like going after those invisible WMDs, applying as much dog wagging spin and damage control as humanly possible, perhaps even to the point of exceeding disinformation by creating and instigating some rather despicable acts as diversion tactics (wouldn't be the first time).

To the INDEX page: GUTH Venus (with loads of UPDATES)
alternate URL's:  and
Copyright © 2000/2002/2003 - Brad E. Guth
GUTH Venus: All Rights Reserved
Webmaster: Brad Guth - Brad Guth / IEIS   ~  1-253-8576061
created: June 27, 2003

Brad Guth / IEIS