A good effective part of NASA's "spin" and "damage control" has more recently shifted itself over to having their army of moles asking some rather redundant questions, rather then as for actually providing nor doing anything constructive. Obviously if there's significant structures situated on Venus, along with rational infrastructure associated, then what's the point of arguing as to the reasoning, as for our even bothering with Venus. Good grief! That's like a new mother not understanding nor comprehending what a tit is for.
Another orestrated tactic has to do with official "spin" and "disinformation" regarding Hubble and TRACE. As for suggesting that Hubble's auto-protect mode of 20 degrees off the solar image is absolute, quite odd when it's FOV is not but 0.1 degree (perhaps all of 1 degree if one includes the entire optical real estate) and, especially when the dark (Earth illuminated) target of Venus is 6+ degrees south of the sun (that two+ solar diameters worth of essentially empty/dark space). Also the recent (quietly unpublicized) relocation of TRACE (out of sight, out of mind because, it's also more then capable of imaging Venus) as to being predominantly behind Earth, this was not only time comsuming but took additional critical energy resources away from the TRACE mission, which was always to greatly magnify upon solar activity and, obviously of any other objects within it's FOV. Unlike SOHO, TRACE sees (200-800 nm) white light and it significantly magnifies.
It's unfortunate that writing, grammar and/or syntax are not my strong point and, I obviously do not have the funding as for the level of skilled editors and/or the polish of the "info-commercial" expertise, such as NASA's NOVA. If I had such, there would be 90% fewer words and lost more pictures and/or computer generated (3D) images and, obviously much other context removed as to any "favor returning". But, that's certainly not because I haven't asked for and even expected some degree of such support from NASA (long before I ever created my first web page), as this entire discovery of "life NOT as we know it" existing on Venus is simply a win-win for anyone involved. Obviously of those involved must have an open mind (a willingness as to working outside the box of otherwise "status quo" stipulating that everything is just fine the way it is) as well as the ability of filling in the observational puzzle as well as the puzzle of technologies at work, as there are rather significant voids of vital information remaining to be obtained.
I also feel that we (NASA) have had ample time as well as resources to have delivered upon a VL2 platform as well as the (1 meter resolution) Magellan-II, as for obtaining those better resolution images and, the VL2 as for insuring our best chances of establishing and maintaining a binary communications link (optical packets converted to microwave). Certainly those two spacecrafts could have been in place prior to the latest near miss of this October/November window of opportunity and, because no new technology would have been involved, the actual cost for our implementing such would have been minimal (a fraction of what's being thrown at Mars).
Actual robotic landers with their two-way audio/video telecommunications, this phase may have required somewhat new (instrument cooling) technology. Manned landers (perhaps hybrid airships), this too would have been something new to our otherwise "rocket only" approach, but certainly not of unproven technology. With the right "think tank" "can do" approach, matters of thermal isolation, heat exchanging as well as CO2-->CO/O2 would have become a done deal (even as of 13 years ago).
Of course, our decision as to firstly not even bother with actually reviewing the Magellan images in the first place, then instead as to concentrating upon supporting our cold-war efforts (some of which are those directly responsible for 9/11 as well as so many other aspects), this broken track or misguided agenda has cost our world dearly, including you and I hundreds of billions more and guess what folks; there's still not one official agenda associated with Venus, even after a year and a half of my efforts, as all I ever seem to get is flak from "spin" and "damage control" freaks, by those bent upon worshiping their pagan God and, screw humanity.
This following context is just another series of examples of my efforts at focusing the expertise of others, even though their ulterior agenda is purely to discredit my every word and to avoid (at all cost) having the public media getting involved (thus no Venus, it's just not there anymore), as why would anyone honestly researching for ET's even bother asking such questions, instead of doing whatever their expertise has to offer towards expediting upon the greater good that's associated with this discovery.
Regarding obtainable goals and worthy issues associated as for benefiting humanity; upon such issues, I have been asked such redundant questions many times, as the following:
Part 1 of 4. (more questions and answers instead of action)
"You want Boeing to point a high powered laser at Venus in an attempt to communicate, why? If, as I assume you are claiming, Venus is inhabited by intelligent beings, they will already know we are here. We are very loud over a very wide range of radio frequencies, and have been for a long time. Any reasonably advanced society within a fair distance of our position will know about us without any need to zap them with lasers."
Yes in deed, as a planet we're so damn loud as well as also smug if not arrogant at that, so much so that most of us do not even bother looking at Venus whenever it this near, let alone attempting any communications. Actually we really don't require that Boeing/TRW laser cannon at this juncture (a wee bit overkill) besides, that spendy instrument of death has been missing for over a month, again no PR, no "good news", nothing whatsoever about our multi billion dollar star-wars laser cannon (entirely capable of other then IR spectrum transmissions, also as "out of sight" and "out of mind", as operating in daylight at 40,000').
First of all, Venus has that truly thick and relatively dense cloud layer, actually it's more like their version of having a suspended ocean situated above their other crystal clear ocean of mostly CO2 (those clouds containing nearly all of the planet's H2O [other then what's stored in those spherical tanks] along with a healthy mix of H2SO4 [I'm informed 30% sulfuric acid]), as such most radio waves simply do not enter nor exit. On Venus a 5 watt hand held radio (sort of CB radio) would efficiently bounce itself around that planet as to be offering 360 degree/global coverage, so not all that much power would ever be required and, from which not one micro pico watt would ever penetrate those clouds. Now it's entirely possible that "S" band microwave could do the job as did Magellan's mapping via SAR imaging, however, if your planet were as freaking hot as Venus and that "all essential" H2O was stuck up in those acidic clouds, there might not be the time nor interest in hobby astronomy, especially as for contacting Earth. As you said, as a planet we're quite loud, so perhaps they've already seen and hear enough, so as to remain as clearly out of sight and sound as possible (perhaps the last thing they need are big planes smashing into their tall buildings).
On the other hand, there's basic light, the absolute universal translator of all times. Most all forms of creatures respond to such stimulus and, best of all, there's no stinking radio technology requirement nor language barriers. As with binary packet forms of light, such "0"/"1" binary communications can range from a nearly continuous beacon to that of seriously high speed baud rate for transmitting live lizard smut. Of course regarding Venus, as in order for anyone to respond to something, they'll first have to be stimulated and then interested enough as to making the effort at responding (human smut might not be such a good beginning). Secondly, Earth will then obviously have to be looking for such responses, such as for this junction of Earth and Venus is only every 19 months. The understanding is that life "NOT as we know it" would more likely be of nocturnal format (thereby evolved as having vastly more sensitive eyes, especially towards the near UV spectrums), then their need for acquiring that all essential H2O would further mean their having and utilizing airship technology (of which Venus could already have applied the ultimate solution, as N2/H2 airships would be seriously impressive), those which could sufficiently penetrate somewhat lower and lesser density nighttime clouds that do exist on their dark side or, as simply throughout their extended (2900 hour) season of night.
I've looked at those IR images of Venus and, there's ample thermal gradients along with cloud/thermal densities far exceeding 20:1 as existing in their daytime cycle, nighttime being where there's ample settling time as well as no new solar IR impact, only thermal conduction and convection issues and, at night those clouds are somewhat lower and, there density ratios could reach 50:1, thus penetrating certain zones as for making astronomy and/or two-way communications possible via that massive airship, I for one believe this is a done deal. I mean, why the hell not.
Part 2 of 4.
"what is the point of trying to communicate with a laser?"
Laser is not even required when we're this damn close, as simple and affordable xenon beams of sufficient concentration should do this trick (xenon's and mercury/xenon lamps can be binary pulse driven at 5X normal power levels). If any nocturnal form of life were capable of viewing Earth at this time, they would be seeing a fairly sizable and contrasting globe with their naked magnitude 5+ vision eyes, Earth would be 4% the diameter of our viewing the moon, thus no stinking telescope requirement, as those capable eyes could offer sufficient resolution as to realize and easily differentiate between the larger cloud covers, oceans and land mass areas. Obviously an artificial xenon beam (100^9cd) as emitting from the darker contrasting background of land mass or ocean areas of Earth, thus would become considerably brighter then of any solar reflection off our clouds.
The point of trying is also about the fact that we can in fact do this and, at nearly zilch cost, as we already have this as existing technology along with thousands of SETI folks willing to detect any reply. In fact, SETI even has their own laser transmitter, but I've discovered they're not only so freaking arrogant but stupid as well, as looking for life that's hundreds to tens of thousands of light years away is a pathetic joke. What good is it, to be receiving messages from thoroughly dead folks and, then equally our sending a reply from our dead planet, especially when the round trip communication requirements are those in thousands of years. At the present rate we Earth humans are going, as a species, we're simply not going to be around that long.
Least of all, one has to be aware, or at the very least receptive, that something constructed a fairly large number of significant attributes on that planet of Venus, which clearly means you as an observer can not have been trained at camp "Hogan's Heroes", by Sgt. Schultz´ and Col. Wilhelm Klink, whom continually "see nothing".
"If they are advanced enough to understand, or pickup our communication's, they will be advanced enough to produce their own signals which will be picked up by us. It would be impossible to hide this fact as all sorts of individuals, groups, societies etc. Would detect them and publish the fact."
Not necessarily advanced enough nor interested, but most creatures do respond to light, thereby excluding any language and/or intellectual barriers. Remember folks, it's toasty hot on Venus, even somewhat at night and, by going into those cool nighttime clouds as for gathering H2O is not likely so simple nor without risk. So, astronomy may be impractical or just unacceptable, as opposed to doing whatever it takes as to surviving under such greenhouse conditions. Obviously I'm hoping there's sufficient surplus in their resources for their accomplishing a little astronomy, as being near their cloud tops (say 25 km to 50+ km) might be essential as for anything capable of two-way happening. Obviously we can wait as for being contacted first by Venus or, we can easily initiate this conversation, especially easy when we're each with our mutual local xenon/laser area code.
"If they are not advanced, what would be the point of NASA or anybody else trying to hide the fact of their existence, they would be no threat, so pointless trying to protect us, so pointless hiding their existence."
Obviously you want or would rather be acquiring those potentially lethal Mars microbes instead, at two decades worth and a cost of 250 billions and, that's if nothing goes terribly wrong. Others seem to want only the vast extremes of our galaxy, as thousands to perhaps millions of light years beyond anything humanly obtainable. I'll guess if I were as rich and smug and as reckless with Earth's resources, including disregarding anything that might become so much more so obtainable and potentially beneficial to humanity (if nothing else simply not costing nearly so much), then I too would be ignoring what's sitting right next door. More likely, our crack wizard teams of NASA/NSA/DoD have in fact made a total freaking blunder of overlooking this discovery as of 13 years ago and, as such decided this belated discovery obviously needed to be hidden from the public, especially if that blunder were now associated with an individual that was willing to discover/uncover and subsequently tell other "truths" outside of the NASA cult "nondisclosure" policy, as under that dreadful light, there's no way in hell is there anything whatsoever existing on Venus.
Part 3 of 4.
"why should we believe your claims when non of the others stand up to scrutiny. I've taken a quick squint at your web pages, but I haven't yet come across anything that could be considered proof of life on Venus, just claims and this is something we can all do."
First off, don't squint.
Perhaps there's nothing but the pre-greenhouse remains. On the other hand, even that's far more then of any other space exploration discovery. It seems you and many others have not bothered to read about the loads of natural as well as other "energy options" (none of which exist for Mars and even some do not exist for Earth), nor about the "airship" nor of the "Venus bridge" attributes, apparently those massive reservoirs issues do not exist, nor as to the other significant tarmac area and the freaking nearby multiple structures of that elevated city. Good grief! There more "extraordinary" facts existing in plain sight then of any planet except Earth. SAR imaging does not lie, it does not require nor affected by lighting nor the lack thereof, there's no freaking lens distortions and those images were acquired at the truly great perspective of 43 degrees. Folks, a closer look would be certainly be nice but, it doesn't get any better.
Having so many natural energy resources (just of that vertical CO2 wind power alone is enough, not to mention CO2-->CO/O2), along with evolution being on your side and a rather obvious incentive as to be doing something about your environment that's getting toasty hot. Thereby it's not only possible but most likely that solutions to sustaining life would prevail (that's not the same thing as flourishing, as life on Venus has got to be representing something close to Hell).
"So can you offer more than claims and produce a few facts?"
You bet; Let's talk about one and only one item at a time, disregarding the fact that so much ulterior "spin" and "damage control" has been formally applied against my research. Since space exploration is about observations and then of understanding what we're seeing, as with regard to Venus there are dozens of interestingly artificial worthy attributes. So, you pick any one and I'll focus what ever I have on that. You can and should also select anything that's more likely natural, as for contrasting against whatever you have selected as supposedly that being artificial, as obviously there's far more natural aspects surrounding everything that's more likely artificial and, they too were enlarged with the same degree of "extraordinary" equality. The contrast of what is natural against what's more likely artificial is basically what this degree of "observationology" is all about. Without such contrast or comparisons, nothing exist, not even Earth, perhaps not even yourself.
Warning(s): If you elect to disregard the pixels as those representing what's more likely artificial, then we must also consider disregarding those pixels representing what's most likely natural. You can't have it both ways and not expect my photographically experienced abilities to not question or challenge upon the other. Either those pixels are sufficiently "truth" or they're not. If they're not "truth", then perhaps the entire Magellan mission was a total waste of time as well as hundreds of millions of dollars, meaning that primary canyon or rille is not what it is and, those mountains and associated rugged terrain issues are perhaps equally not what they appear as being either, just like what's fluid looking and associated with highly regular geometrical forms as well as the "fluid arch" associated with it's secondary erosion are not of valid pixels either, which pretty much disqualifies the entire Magellan mission and, if that be the case, then I want my money back.
We identify upon what's artificial by comparison to what is surrounding such as being most likely natural. For instance; I can spot a small rusty nail lying in the mixed environment of equally brown soil and brownish grass (nearly zero contrast difference, as in terms of perhaps as little as one bit out of 64 bits worth of difference), especially if I were to be utilizing a valid perspective that's improving upon my perception of what the surface at hand has to offer (not a pathetic 2D plan view). I know for a fact that most qualified individuals could not locate that rusty nail, even if their life depended upon it, so you're not alone and not even expected to see what I or others see. So, tell me what you do see, as your expertise of such formations as natural or otherwise attributes could be more correct then mine. It's entirely possible that things happen naturally on Venus as nowhere else, as according to my opponents, that's apparently including as nowhere on Earth.
Part 4 of 4.
"btw. What makes you think any inhabitant of Venus would understand Morse? "
Who the heck needs to understand Morse? Any form of artificial illumination is a viable message, even if that's merely a beacon and/or of a fully UV spectrum packets. Artificial light is light and, as such, if we were to send off a few of our own (low baud rate) binary sequences (packets) and they responded with "Duh", that only means we're the stupid ones, at least 13 years worth of utter stupidity.
I believe this opportunity is absolutely win win, so what exactly do you, NASA, ESA, SETI or others have to lose?
If and when some of my opponents come around as to realizing upon what this discovery has to offer (like for the past 22 months and counting), I for one will be the first to forgive and forget, I'll even publicly apologize if I've pushed one or two too many buttons.
In my rush to push for some essentially zero cost action, I've made a number of mistakes, as I've been learning on that nifty "need to know" basis and, from what I've been told I've applied several inaccurate statements, non of which were all that intentional, other then for pressing this opportunity into the main stream of whatever action there is to be found. As I soon discovered, there's not all that much action upon any front unless it's for obtaining and/or extending resources for the current agendas (like going after those potentially lethal Mars microbes and obviously for whatever it takes as to sustaining the ongoing ruse of the century).
Regards, Brad Guth / IEIS * "GUTH Venus" and "Life (not as we know it) on Venus" (in spite of NASA)
There's life, perhaps NOT as we know it on "Venus" and, all you critics can do is bitch, bitch, bitch about my posting. Why the hell don't you try to pitch in and deliver upon something that we can all use. Like try to collaborate a little and then calculate something other out, even making a few mistakes and move on to the next step. Taking steps backward is entirely OK my me, as sooner or later you're going to make another mistake that turns out being right on the money and, I'll not only point that out but insure that you get the credit. Trying that approach with NASA and all you'll get is squat nothing.
For some stupid reason, it seems I have to remind myself that some of our wizard astronomers are not only anti-everything but more then just a little bit dense (humor is not even genetically involved). In some of my previous postings, I never stated anything about having to view upon the surface of Venus (a Magellan-II would certainly be nice, but not essential). Good grief folks, what the hell's the point of even trying to communicate with some of the idiots here on Earth. I'll have better luck with those Islamic lizard folks on Venus, long before I ever get the message through about there's "life *NOT* as we know it existing on Venus and, as for communicating we certainly do not require having to see their surface, just those cloud tops and, for that one I know SOHO, TRACE as well as ISS and even Hubble (with a safe bypass upon it's solar auto-protect as reset to 6 degrees instead of the existing 20 degrees) can do the trick. If not, then what are we even doing in space, if that's not looking for other life.
I for one hope to God we don't locate upon additionally stupid humans (we can't seem to manage with the ones we've got).
Nearly all forms of space exploration and subsequent research is based initially upon visual observations (that's looking at things with your eyes and hopefully a brain that's not NASA/Borg implanted), then certainly upon whatever measurements and subsequently conjectures as based upon such findings. Then our crack space science wizards try to make further sense of the data and then certain lords often taking all the credit for anything that's worthy of helping their cause and/or extending their funding (screw whatever truth, as this being your basic job security formula).
If limiting ET Life as to what we know of, then I guess we're going to be out of luck, as even if someone discovers a full blown resort villa situated on Mars (even if such were captured at 3D and at 0.1 meter/pixel), as according to my esteemed critics, it will not even exist, simply because no Earth human can possibly live there. I know, what a shame and, what a pathetic way of exploring for other life (talk about being blind, arrogant and just stupid all rolled into one).
If limiting our perceptions as to what's potentially artificial looking as to what's humanly possible to achieve, in other words, if Earth humans could not have survived within the present environment of Venus, could not otherwise have evolved (irregardless of any time frame), could not have devised technology that was capable of coping with a poor situation going full blown greenhouse, then what's the point of our looking anywhere except right here on Earth. NASA can't even honestly substantiate that humans ever walked on the moon (because the facts supporting such simply do not exist) and, the more they try the worse off things get. The odds that we can supposedly devise a technology that will some day place man on Mars, this seems to only point out that our doing such is (cost be no object) obtainable, even though Mars is so much further away and offers nearly zilch worth of natural energy, including that pathetically thin (0.006 bar) CO2 atmosphere is a freaking joke as compared to what Venus has to offer.
If you simply can't realize what potential there is for Venus, then perhaps you don't deserve being classified as an astronomer nor of any superior ologist other then of the obvious classification of stupid-ologist, such as those fighting this opportunity ever since I introduced my findings. It's no wonder why so may think our pathetic existence on Earth is no longer required, as who in hell would want the likes of our arrogance ruling anything, let alone our world.