IEIS  ( Imagery Exploration Interpretive Sciences )
ID: ©"GUTH Venus"

Discovery date: December, 2000 / ongoing research: updated April 09, 2002
Source: (NASA/Magellan: mgn_c115s095_1.gif)

Latest Updates: April 09, 2002 ..   and several other recent updates: The "What's Up Report"  ,  The Seasons of Venus  ,  Disinformation R US  ,  (fly Air~Venus)  ,  Extraordinary Proof  ,  BASHING is great SPORT ,  SORE-LOOSERS ,  FAQ  ,  Whom can you Trust  ,  Security Deposit  , What Next , Observationology , (Standards~R~Us)  ,  October 2002 & L2 ,  ( Obtainable GOALS ) ,  What If  ,  NASA's proof (not really)   and   LASER Communications "first contact"

The discovery of ~"GUTH Venus"~ by: Brad Guth  1-253-8576061

In my research for the holy grail of "extraordinary proof", as that insisted upon by my opponents, as that which would best qualify and support my discovery, and please do remember, that for decades I too believed we had landed and walked on the moon and, now I'm not all that sure because, myself and lately neither can NASA prove such accomplishments as under their very own "extraordinary proof" standards. NASA is simply not helping their position, by their not offering proper (extraordinary proof) explanations, such as with regard to those all essential 1/6th gravity scaled lunar lander and of their associated (pilotted) test flight documentation film(s) (absolutely essential documentation that which no longer seem to exist).

As a result, I have come to realize that our pathetic cold-war was essentially not only contrived but well situated behind nearly every aspect of those Apollo missions and, that our actual landing and walking on the moon was simply secondary if that. As a conclusion of these findings, I now realize much of the why and, for the most part where all of my opposition has been coming from and furthermore, that over the decades, that hundreds of billions have been wasted and more so at risk are the hundreds of billions that yet remain at stake (everything somehow being linked and heavily leveraged upon those Apollo missions). My having to first review those Apollo missions has obviously become something foremost at blocking any resources and credits towards the "GUTH Venus" discovery. What a petty for America and, what a pathetic no-win situation (speaking of America) we've gotten ourselves into.

It certainly is not my fault nor responsibility to accept imaginary documents and, to further accept truly piss poor photos that are not even backed by their original negatives, as any form of qualified "extraordinary proof". Sorry guys, that efforts falls squarely upon those responsible and as such profiting from those Apollo missions. Since we are supposedly so damn good at this manned lunar landing stuff (especially that we now have sufficient "fly-by-wire", "modulated rockets" and a sufficient energy capable airframe stabilizing gyro to work with in order to properly deal with such a continually shifting C/G), perhaps we should send our radiation proof astronauts and equally sensitive film back for another round of snapshots, as well as to this time recording those massive radiation exposures that our gold foil lined space suites so effectivey protected their humans from, then upon their triumphant return and thorough decontamination (including that of replenishing bone marrow from their own previous stockpiles), permit the nearest Quicky-Mart 1-hour photo developing to take it from there. As commercial photo labs go (like the sort NASA internally utilized), the possibilities as to obtaining superior negatives as well as producing exceptional prints (especially from 70mm B/W format) that had been given a sufficient degree of burning as to that supposedly pitch black sky, so as to highlighting those stars which NASA claims are there but simply too dim, could have easily and safely been accomplished (not distorted nor in any manner falsified) without affecting one bit (not one grain) of the otherwise solar illuminated landscape of that 10% reflective (dirty gray) lunar surface. Surely a photo capable of showing us those vibrant stars could not have impeeded whatever research and would certainly have made for a better press release (even I would have bought one of those copies).

For the above mentioned reasons and subsequent many layered other considerations, there has become but only one valid overriding logic why this Venus discovery has become so formally ignored and thereby opposed:  Clearly, I have unintentionally uncovered a real ongoing threat to the "status quo", either that or NASA truly has been cultivating the worlds most aggressive campaign of affirmative action hiring, that which goes out of it's way as to employ not only the most incompetent astronauts as photographers but then also braille image interpreters, then stands firm upon whatever they and they alone decide is truth. As otherwise, open considerations towards my discovery, as based upon fairly well known geological parameters and many well established (actual) truths as to classifying purely natural element formations (as those affected by recognized tectonics and purely natural cause and effect erosion), as that opposed to my best understanding of what clearly is being represented in this discovery as that of being entirely artificial, is simply a "no contest" and, I truly believe that others and myself can now sufficiently prove this beyond any reasonable doubt (just like I can now sufficiently prove those Apollo cameras and film would have been capable of capturing vibrant stars above that 10% reflective lunar surface).

My primary opposition has been irrationally based upon their having to apply non-scientific bully issues and/or narrow if not outright arrogant perceptions, such as basing every justification upon Earth human life standards, which would naturally have to exclude our form of unprotected human life on Venus, then otherwise, so much of this opposition seems to have been involving ever deeper and even far less worthy ulterior motives, inforced as to shun and/or bash anything anti-NASA. Since I felt thoroughly attacked, I was so compelled as to investigate, as to define exactly what constituted their "extraordinary proof" standards. Upon discovering and/or uncovering various facts, I simply could not resist the opportunity as to share, by way of returning the favor. Now it seems, they (my opposition) don't much like this part. Myself, I'm thinking this is great sport, as I've wondered all along what all these priest did all day, since they weren't doing the job they were hired to do in the first place.

At first the basic question(s) regarding "GUTH Venus" should have been; is there or is there not more potentially relevant and/or worthy content that could be considered as artificial within my discovery areas, more then of any other planet except Earth? And, if you are still questioning the claim I've been making, I'm merely asking; why are you even trying to disprove anything, if in fact there is an opportunity of there being greater potential content within the areas of "GUTH Venus" then that of any other explored planet. What exactly is your true motive; if not based upon scientific or at least observational expertise and thereby supported by substantial quantities of equally or better observational image examples, as those depicting such highly complex formations as being purely natural elements. If you are so damn smart; how hard can that simple task be?

Besides myself scanning other substantial areas of Venus (virtually hundreds of other interesting sites), I've even looked hard at Mars and seen some truly great images of what is obviously that of much better resolution, however, I see nothing that's close to being artificial, as compared to what is existing on Venus. If you should perceive the mere size of what is situated on Venus as any disqualifier or can think of any other unscientifically illogical reasons, please do point out such worthy examples because, NASA has so far nothing to work with, not even a lead to anything offering this degree of potentially artificial content such as that existing at "GUTH Venus". And please do remember; as far as supporting "extraordinary proof" goes, conventional photographic's and even of the very best of CCD images are nearly worthless as compared to the vastly superior SAR imaging technology (it's not even a fair contest).

Against all of NASA documentation standards (backed by their moles and from those equally under NASA's rule such as, as to that pertaining to my efforts to otherwise best outline what these artificial elements could represent), and throughout all of my description efforts, I have openly included such phrases of "could be", "perhaps", "apparently", "most likely" and "highly probable" as where these phrases have become necessary only because we lost out on our best ever opportunity when Magellan was still able to re-record data (when the "GUTH Venus" discovery sites could have easily been thoroughly re-mapped by Magellan), now with the exception of old (dead horse and/or mission unfunded) archived SAR images, the entire focus of NASA's space research and exploration has obviously moved onto anything and nearly everything except Venus. What a downright and pathetic shame.

During the Magellan mission, apparently every sole at NASA was so busy phrasing their own work as well as sucking up to whomever else and/or stikll onto Apollo damage control duty, that the timely discovery of "GUTH Venus" was simply never going to happen. Even as of today, 11+ years later and some fourteen months and counting since my discovery, pro-NASA types as well as those formally within NASA or working/funded in conjunction are obviously not so willing to concede one damn thing (such as admitting this could be the really big one that got away). Apparently they're woefully intent upon taking this one, like those Apollo ruse and associated cold-war issues to their graves. Apparently also, any further situations such as 9/11 simply does not matter and, what matters is simply continued taxpayer support for programs holding little if any viable rewards for humanity, and even those must be highly supported by the likes of NSA/DoD. In other words; as long as the endeavors of others somehow assist to further NSA/DoD agendas by proving out technology or by at least not using up their resources and/or getting in their way, then apparently it's perfectly OK, as to go off towards Mars in order to acquire those potentially lethal microbes, where investing another 250 billion or so dollars is truly something wonderful in the eyes od our NSA/DoD.

There are times when I do wish my discovery documentation was a bit more formal and thereby perceptively more competitive against the establishment, so, if you can provide that sort of documentation polish, have at it, as this discovery needs all the attention it can get. Then understand, that because of my discovery (as of December 2000), the present astronomy data base sponsored and being so formally upheld by NASA and, thereby further supporting all subsequent as well as future research and documentation, thus affecting and/or channeling so called conclusive definitions, of which establish "truths", as well as virtually impacting upon millions of subsequently printed publications and upon the lives of those which read them, such as documents specifically pertaining to the planet Venus, have been woefully incomplete and thereby lacking in proper study/review for at least the past 11+ years.

Sorry, historians and technical publishers; but that's the whole truth. So, if your intention or profession includes publishing and/or creating anything new as far as becoming formal documentation that happens to include references to space research and exploration related issues, be my freaking guest, remembering that when it comes down to recalling those millions of books and associated documents, that it was I that "told you so". (I understand that some publishers are diminishing or outright pulling their Apollo references and, perhaps this will become a darn good time to likewise pull and revamp everything regarding the planet Venus).

For much of my discovery description to work properly, it is advisory that the reader have some basis for comprehending (understanding) aerial images of natural terrain as well as that of differentiating as to man-made artificial considerations. This has apparently become a rare and very skilled talent and, not just anyone can do what others and myself have mastered, as teams of highly trained and well funded researchers having nothing but the very best imaging technology, photo software and supposed talents as to apply onto everything, they all somehow missed this opportunity for the past decade and then some.

Through implementing my personal capabilities of experienced photographic's and observational research and, obviously inspired by that of my supporting a far better appreciation of the possibilities (somewhat totally in spite of NASA's point of view), we have for the first time discovered a real opportunity, that which I believe is easily obtainable and obviously worthy of receiving your attention.

From the very outset of my introducing fairly complex photo analysis, along with considerable (non-distorted) digital photo-software enlightenment and, otherwise that of solely my interpretation(s) thereof, I truly believe I have sufficiently uncovered this most recent (first ever recorded) discovery as thoroughly comprised of substantially artificial elements, as those clearly existing on the planet Venus.

The following image(s) and supportive text/image links are those pertaining to the planet Venus and, specifically of extracts taken from an 11 year old image that is of sufficient high resolution (as those acquired from the Magellan mission), by which I (nearly 11 years after the fact) achieved this discovery in spite of NASA's misleading and/or incorrect data and, in spite of their flat out statements to the effect of total denial of there being any such probabilities. Contrary to NASA wishes, absolute existence of substantially artificial elements is about as "extraordinary" and real as it's ever going to get (in highly technical radar terminology; this discovery is "as plain as night").

I ask only that you take a sufficient look at the image and then simply ponder why Club NASA still can't see a damn thing. As far as I'm concerned, this certified SAR image is all too clear, as showing fairly large items at that, therefore, other then of my text overlays, I have not had to introduce one single raw pixel of new image data. Applying only that of universally accepted (industry certified) digital photo-software has enabled some degree of enlargement, where virtually everything as to be seen is that reconstructed from and purely as a result of the raw original (SAR) official image data. In other words; because these identifiable elements are those sufficiently large, as to being comprised of many raw pixels each, I did not have to manipulate nor falsify one pixel in order to basically establish this discovery, plus another extremely important fact is that everyone has full access to the original raw image data (which is apparently a whole lot more then can be said of those Apollo images).

Try having this image/text braille overlay image on screen at the same time, and if all that somehow fails, simply call upon me. Understand that the original raw discovery of "GUTH Venus" sites have nothing whatsoever to do with my ongoing attempts at describing what I believe some of these structures must represent, as pro-NASA types will and have tried (but have so far failed to otherwise disperse my findings) and, because they have managed nothing whatsoever as to supporting or backing up their views (as to all this being purely natural), they have simply continued to utilize portions of my descriptions willfully out of context and, purely as further cause to somehow (apparently at all cost because the taxpayers are now paying for this damage control effort as well, exactly as they have been paying for all the Apollo damage control) discredit this monumental achievement, as well as towards further destroying the global opportunity which this discovery clearly represents. I can only believe those opposed must have sufficient motives and/or sufficient fears as to what this represents; "truth(s)", because all scientific efforts simply have clearly not supported my critics, in fact, some of the abuse has offered myself and others insight into portions of Club NASA which we had no previous idea existed.

As it stands to date; I alone (totally against NASA's stance opposing virtually every aspect of this discovery or perhaps just opposing me) have been able to faithfully uncover what others and I believe has become our best available evidence to date, as that which clearly establishes this effort as a worthy discovery depicting a fairly considerable number of symmetrically unified as well as rationally geometrically structural elements, along with their associated lattice of community like infrastructure and, as that which I believe is clearly defining that of an artificial (alien) nature and, as that clearly situated right smack on the planet Venus (in solid SAR terminology; this discovery is "plain as night" along with every pixel sampled at least 4 times over so as to be certifiable in verifying what is to be seen).

You should Understand; this observational form of evidence and my conclusions (as clear and obvious as it may eventually appear) have not yet become that of any formal NASA opinion or consciences (don't ask why, at least not until you have further reviewed this discovery and my conclusions in greater depth, then perhaps still don't ask questions of NASA if you care not to receive the wrath NASA's indoctrination enemas). Also to remember this little tidbit; I believe their cult mole population is quite considerable, as I have since discovered they are deeply involved in virtually every space related web site and institution, especially wherever my discoveries could potentially represent any form of undermining of their past, current and future agendas. I now believe the soup of NASA history has been thicken with special interest as well as C&D (Cloak & Dagger) agendas and, perhaps the last thing they need right about now, is for someone uncovering yet other mega-oversight and, otherwise that of disclosing continuing damage control efforts because, I believe the public has simply heard enough bad government news to last a while.

what can I say: I never fully realized just how deep I was having to dig for my understanding of "extraordinary proof", as apparently it has become unfortunate my opposing (observational astronomy) views as to that of NASA's (as well as those pertaining to several publicly perceived historical events) have somehow become far more at issue, causing the greater concern and apparently a direct job security threat outweighing anything as revolutionary as the discovery of potential "LIFE" existing on Venus. All that I can believe is; how pathetic and, who would have ever thought so much grief could be the result of my little discovery, then apparently more so impacted over NASA's past and present episodes involving hidden NSA/DoD agendas as well as comprehending the ultimate cold-war ruse, and thus resulting in such horrific non-disclosure policy compromise/enforcement issues, where as such, obviously this has been distracting from their sworn duties as well as resources as pertaining to otherwise honest space research and exploration (which I do not believe should necessarily include "Star-Wars" agendas unless actual aliens should pose a new threat).

For those truly interested in this exploration opportunity, I am further pointing out the coming of October 2002 as clearly representing another grandiose opportunity for NASA types to either shine or not (will, I hate to say it but, I personally think we are all going to need flashlights). Please, do not bother to inform NASA upon your realization that this discovery just might be for-real, as they've been given the fullest opportunities to do something, anything, and that opportunity has so far resulted in absolutely nothing, nada, zip, or perhaps not zip, because after all, they did in fact bother to thoroughly misdirect my efforts and, otherwise banish the very thought that I'm even remotely (God forbid) right about anything, thereby that certainly did infuse me as to uncovering the very essence of those Apollo missions and, now I understand why all the opposition and what's at state that is more worthy then anything represented by "GUTH Venus"..

This discovery is now well over a year old and counting, however, should all of this be new to your eyes (without your having to discover more from my other pages, such as index-Pg.03), then you may simply require a little basic fundamental understanding. The first consideration being is this; that my discovery is that based upon an 11 year old original (SAR) high resolution (I refer to this as being an archived "dead horse") better then any true to life digital image, as that originally acquired by the NASA/Magellan aperture~radar (NSA spy grade) imaging, which is about as good as spy images ever get. The "dead horse" factor; simply qualifies that NASA has officially demonstrated as well as essentially stipulated no further need of, and places little if any value upon these old images, as they previously spent all their Venus allotted funding plus then some, retired or dispersed essentially every technician/engineer involved, and obviously have since stipulated and essentially supported having no further interest in discovering a damn thing with any regard to the planet Venus.

(well excuse me)

And yet, upon my closer examination of even the raw original (72 dpi) image format (perhaps obviously for the first honest time since these images were so expensively gathered and, that anyone had actually and officially looked for anything such as artificial evidence) and even this was prior to my subsequent digital imaging enlargements, there was what I discovered and believed sufficient cause to further explore the "possibilities". And, that it was shortly after this initial realization of my clearly identifying several unified structural shapes and unlikely patterns, as those considerations also were somehow exhibiting closely interrelated rational infrastructure, that I merely pre-concluded such highly complex formations were most likely not anything so natural as NASA had previously documented and frequently re-stipulated, but were in fact most likely that of artificial formations, and to such an extent that I bothered to professionally enlarge upon the image area as well as to further inform and advise NASA as to my findings, (big freaking mistake! and, so far a total waste of time and as far as I can tell, more then a decade's worth of wasting hundreds of billions in tax dollars upon effort to locate life elsewhere).

Speaking of time, and over somewhat considerable time at that;  I set out (because no one else would) as to develop several discovery pages with images and variations of text dealing with what others and I see at "GUTH Venus" and, further pages as to describe my observational efforts, which have been applied only because others less skilled may simply not at first see a thing, such as: Description and then the latter portion of Guth-Venus-03, as well as throughout several other efforts as to be found throughout most all of my documentation.

I ask that you Keep one very important bit of knowledge in mind; that our Magellan mission was obviously meaningful and I believe invaluable, however, with any regard to NASA ever formally looking for such specific criteria, and thereby officially funding research directed at discovering any potential of artificial elements and therefore signs of "life", apparently it was the hell with that idea, as it looks as though there never was research specifically allocated (focused for that of identifying artificial content), and then not all that much beyond bulk planetary analysis of the atmosphere(s) as pertaining to the average and/or commonality aspects, and not otherwise the least bit considering the obvious layering of various atmospheric elements in order to sufficiently understand the greater potential of the associated (elevated/cooler) atmospheric nighttime temperatures, which I believe could have easily defined (well over ten years ago) a specific altitude and thereby ground elevations most worthy of further investigation worthy of discovering signs of life (past or current).

Obviously such an early detection of areas such as "GUTH Venus" and that of otherwise obtaining further atmospheric layering information would have become a monumental advancement as well as an enormous departmental goal, not to mention that of a global research community cost savings. But then what do I know? Apparently our infamous Club NASA has never been required to consider such mundane issues as accountability or cost restraints (aren't we lucky).

The image below is representative of the raw NASA/Magellan original, with that of my further identifying this specific area of discovery as "GUTH Venus", as an area which I further enlarged upon (a standard qualified procedure of NIMA, yet apparently a foreign and unapproved procedure by NASA types). A mouse click on this image will deliver you to my "images-2" page offering a few more qualifying statements, and then also towards the end of this index document are several reference pages, including: "Huston we have a problem" offering somewhat further wording as to what I perceive as NASA's apparently (willfully politically motivated because they didn't bother to even look) substantially incorrect and thereby incomplete and, now unreliable (questionable) data regarding the planet Venus (among other issues), and towards reviewing and/or trying to understand their lack of supportive involvement towards this discovery (among other counter productive issues) as that pertaining to their continuing and obviously willful disregard of this discovery opportunity, as well as that of this becoming an affordable and most easily manageable research/exploration opportunity and, perhaps with regard to what I feel could have been far better accomplished on a mere 10% of their past budgets (basically I'm offering excellent bang for the buck, instead of NASA's fizzle for their hundreds of billions, which I personally feel have been thrown at wasted efforts) could have easily placed us on the surface with two-way inner-active technology. Yes, I already know it's hot on Venus, so what? We know how to build and properly insulate from the heat and, we also know how to apply geothermal (sterling) heat exchanging and, besides all that, it's not so damn hot above 5 km and, especially at nighttime which is 2900 hours worth.

My discovery enlargements were all essentially developed from this one official NASA/Magellan original: mgn_c115s095_1.gif , where this link is your direct NASA (dead horse) archive resource. Another TIF image format is also available, however, I discovered there was no apparent advantage in my using that version, but if your photo software prefers TIF over the GIF image format, then by all means, use it: mgn_c115s095_1.tif , and this is the fact sheet.

The second image above is merely representing that of a 1:1 direct extraction from the NASA original (no resampling and nothing whatsoever modified). Just utilizing this image (as I initially did) should be sufficient, and by implementing your screen image magnifier at 2X should otherwise help do the trick (a mouse click on this image offers a most basic 5X resampled version). Upon applying further digital (certifiable and notarized) enlargements, as well as some fairly comprehensive studies, I was able to better isolate and further identify that which I believe are truly distinctive characteristics, that which are clearly and unmistakable as not representative of any natural origins, and I further believe I am able to stipulate and thus claim this official raw image firmly contains and offers sufficient (overwhelming and/or extraordinary) evidence as proof (onto those looking to reveal such) as to the very existence of fairly large numbers of artificially established structures having a considerable lattice of rational infrastructure (just as I initially documented well over a year ago).

Unless you already know such things, you must first understand something fundamental about SAR aperture~radar imaging;
When viewing nearly any format of such data: Dark areas (those black or nearly so) are generally representing radar absorbing targets such as water, mud or thick vegetation, and otherwise common soils and loose rock may be represented by somewhat medium gray tones, and that harder surfaces such as solid rock containing sufficient minerals or that of artificial pavements and of typical structures are going to be nearly white, with the hardest elements such as your metal like surfaces will be depicted as pure white (white = maximum radar signal reflective quality). The angle at which the target signal is reflected from obviously qualifies as a variable, but is a very useful variable which allows for shadow or shape reveling, as that best suited for indicating tunnels and/or vertical openings or even that of depressions and curved/shaped surfaces (equivalent standard photographic technology, besides needing a clear shot as well as illumination factors, could and often misses this information entirely). Having nearby terrain elements, of all sorts larger as well as smaller dimensional natural elements, along with the 43 degree angle of imaging perspective, gives further support as to our properly differentiating between what's obviously natural and that which is clearly artificial.

Since my initial discovery (december 2000); I have further contended and subsequently outlined several basic considerations of this discovery, as those issues depicting significantly complex structured communities, supporting the greatest possibility to date, as that of my identifying intelligent LIFE, as hosting from within a highly complex and well established infrastructure and, thereby formulating the most reasonable conjecture (as that based upon the best ever enhanced high resolution and extraordinary SAR imaging results) which depicts an engaging lattice of precisely what I have been contending for the past 14+ months; as that being of my uncovering highly rational passage/roadways, those clearly supporting and interfacing with major facilities as well as several transportation considerations (including an airship). There are also channel/flow modification issues along with an extensive suspension bridge span and various (multiple) tunnel/entrance attributes. This site also accommodates considerable fluid reservoir/storage units plus, ever so much more as being potentially relevant and worthy of the most serious re-examination and open contention, including by those I believe have been most capable of and likely those responsible for impeding this discovery from ever becoming accepted.

Now, how about all that temperature;  First off, and very much in spite of the extremely high (average) surface temperatures recorded on Venus, irregardless of how hot it is, temperature alone offers nothing whatsoever as having to do with disqualifying this discovery because, those massive structures and associated infrastructure are not only still flat-out there but remain to be otherwise accounted for as anything natural, especially when natural causes seem to have had nothing to do with their origin. If any thing, hotter is simply all that much better because, that clearly indicates a much greater degree of intelligence at work. By simply considering the exceptionally elevated nature of this specific site at "GUTH Venus" (at least 5km to perhaps 8km mountain peak ranges) as that of a fairly revolutionary concept, that of merely promoting the somewhat rational idea and therefore reasonable assumptions that such evolved accustomed/tolerant inhabitants (at some point in time) situated at such elevated locations, (duh), most likely did so for the common good of their surviving on a hot planet and, obviously did so for the much cooler temperatures associated with their mountain locations, those having added moisture availability, and perhaps obviously so as to being within a more life supportive (breathable) atmosphere. Considering what we believe we know about their atmosphere (which is damn little with regard to specific layers and then nighttime), high ground seems to make a great deal of sense, as perhaps opposed to the heavier and mor ghastly Venus "DEATH VALLEY" experience (I mean, who would want to go there, anywhere near ground zero, especially when there is cooler and more breathable atmosphere as well as sufficient fluids plus others living in those mountains).

Because elevation is obviously a fairly logical and believable factor; I do consider there are other lessor sites worthy of hosting life, perhaps utilized as purely reclusive (2900 hr. protection from all that solar UV radiation) survival outpost or perhaps supportive of alternative civilizations. It is likely and quite reasonable to consider that some of these lessor locations may have been long abandoned due to available resources and/or impacted by global if not cultural events, events which would have forced those most capable (most advanced) to perhaps retreat and/or totally relocate everything to a more sustaining/survival location(s) (such as at "GUTH Venus"). I therefore obviously consider the current visual/observational evidence supports that Venus is potentially alive and well, at least I hope that's been the case, rather then discovering to their demise, as well as our dismay and total embarrassment, that they just recently perished a year or two prior to our pathetically belated recognition of their mere existence.

About my ongoing description(s) of "GUTH Venus":
You would think that the discovery of this site should have nothing whatsoever to do with my description efforts thereof but, lead astronomy types (pro-NASA) and their followers seem thoroughly bent to discredit anything that No.1; was not their idea and, No.2; places a poor light upon their pagan God (NASA). That's just too darn bad because; the bold facts clearly indicate that a excavated roadway which shows clearly as not being formed by any understood erosion, tectonic or lava flow creation, as clearly circumventing a mountain range and then emerging onto a suspension bridge, is blatantly and clearly existing as any evidence of artificial content. This is in fact a damn road if there ever were, that furthermore adjoins just outside a significantly complex Venus community, that of a fairly large community consisting of multiple large multi-faceted compound structures hosting highly complex infrastructure issues (including that of a massively raised and extended flat platform/runway configuration which offers two or more sub-staging service bays).

All of this seems somewhat overwhelming compelling, yet obviously this is somehow insufficient for our typical pro-NASA types, and even though the fact that I have further identified so much other evidence, including that of two significantly separated compound shaped and obviously assembled reservoirs that have been thoroughly connected to each other (from the upper edge of one to the center of the lower four collected receivers) and by that of a substantially large and long causeway/aqueduct at that (again, this offering no signs whatsoever of any natural formation by so called lava-flow beginnings or accumulations and otherwise being simply too big for any known crystal formations) seems rather overly suspicious if not simply downright compelling. Plus, the added fact that the larger (upper) reservoir has been clearly identified as that having a darker core (caused by lessor radar reflective qualities, such as that created by the presents of radar signal absorbing "H2O2 or whatever").

Now you would think all of this should ring someone's bell, but apparently NASA no longer has a bell anymore, they must of hocked the damn thing in order to pay their last utility bill or otherwise perhaps merely lost access to their bell along with all those 10's of thousands of original Apollo negatives, as well as that all important film of that (properly 1/6th gravity scaled) lunar lander test flight footage (the one showing a successful test flight that did not in fact crash, burn and subsequently explode like the only footage I can recall).

What do you think; Is all this looking bad or what?. You can tell me by either supporting my discovery and/or through proving your side of the equation (including NASA's past). My God, do you happen to realize what I may have uncovered, especially if not one sole can manage to produce that film footage of the lunar lander test flights. I have been looking and asking of others to locate that supportive evidence on behalf of NASA, but nothing yet shows on my screen, and so perhaps, if you should have the one and only "extraordinary" proof, please feel free to share and show it off and, I believe NASA would pay you millions for that footage.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it looks as though I'm calling upon NASA as to being accountable, to put up their resources for that of supporting this Venus discovery and to otherwise expedite whatever it takes to accommodate the much needed research and future re-exploration of Venus. The fact that so many past mistakes haveso thoroughly drained our national resources and so badly infected the true functionality of NASA, especially with regard to NSA/DoD agendas, is simply unfortunate and even more reason to properly refocus our meager remaining resources upon obtainable goals, especially those having the greatest chance of returning something meaningful for humanity and, not as to supporting some deeper cosmic space conjecturing, nor do we really need those potentially lethal microbes from Mars and, especially if such goals are to be representing hundreds of billions. Good grief NASA, get a grip.

This following image (resampled/enlargement) is one which I believe is sufficiently representative (true) of most digital photo-enlargement efforts, sufficiently enlarged (contrast and sharpness enhanced but not otherwise altered nor distorted), so as to best depict what the original (raw) Magellan's aperture~radar imaging had in fact recorded. The elevation of areas such as "GUTH Venus" are obviously situated high (much of the surrounding mountains are likely at least 5 km [16,500 feet] or greater) and thereby sufficiently above the heavier (denser and less breathable) atmospheric layers, as well as obviously becoming that of much cooler (especially into their extended 2900 hr. nighttime). Consider this area as their version of our Himalaya or that of our upper most Swiss Alps, and being aware that there are in fact (as officially recorded by the Magellan as well as other missions) other such extensive areas or regions available on the planet Venus offering 33,000' (10+ km) worth of equally much cooler site considerations (perhaps even sufficiently above certain nighttime cloud barriers).

The following image was inserted into this HTML document at 50%, therefore down-loading the image should improve upon it's resolution as well as offering (depending upon your software) the fullest printing capabilities. This image, as well as others, will be further up-graded (enhanced but not intentionally distorted) from time to time and, as soon as I can manage to do so. Clicking on the image will offer a full scale presentation, plus utilizing your screen magnifier utility @2X is also highly beneficial, as much of what is to be seen and perceived is defined within +/- 1 or 2 shades of gray-tone. And please try to remember, anything captured within this image, is in fact there because, the SAR technology picked it up and furthermore verified it, and there simply were no optical distortions nor lens compromises or lighting considerations at fault (in other words "WYSIWYG").


If you have thoughts worthy of consideration or not, and/or hopefully better photo-software results (such as from our NIMA.MIL), as well as further insight into the planet Venus, please pass those along, and/or at least allow me to link to your research.

This discovery effort was never intended to become a contest of wit, as in the manner by which NASA has been operating (for at least the past 11 years and counting), as I believe lives have most certainly been and are perhaps yet at stake. Unlike NASA, I believe what's ahead of us may become that we have nearly run out of time and resources for playing such global games at the expense of others, however, exactly how I foresee this discovery evolving into something positive for Club NASA is perhaps still in the works. Your ideas and experience may become a whole lot more valuable then you might think, that is of course, as long as you are not persuaded by merely NASA's point of view, in which case (in the eyes of NASA) you're either simply another taxpayer/idiot revenue source (perhaps one holding out at that) or a good little official mole, doing exactly what NASA expects of you.

The following list of pages and image links have nearly all been recently updated, as I am always attempting to improve upon my presentations as well as introducing whatever I can as new and relevant. Several of these pages were developed early on and have been retained and only somewhat edited. If you believe you could do better or perhaps offer greater experience into any aspect that could potentially help to revive this "NASA dead-horse", then please render your conclusions and perspectives and, be prepared to share them with the world (that is; if you dare to be scorned by the all knowing establishment).

I will certainly post credits towards whatever you can deliver, as I have personally found that many well educated none-NASA soles are quite proud of what their specialized community has accomplished as well as where their future is headed (as long as that endeavor is ultimately at taxpayer expense) and perhaps in their eyes, it will be those such as myself that should be thoroughly disqualified, regardless of the "truths", especially if my work impacts negatively upon their plans and hopes.

The way this nation and Earth are headed, time is simply not in our favor, as resources are becoming limited and otherwise more costly as well as politically and environmentally risky and so, I hope this discovery eventually opens otherwise closed doors so as to essentially instill a little mutual cost saving focus, thereby to insure that we taxpayers are obtaining the most "bang for your buck", as perhaps otherise, you should stop supporting Club NASA and, try sending me your ideas and research funding, as my overhead is nearly zilch, just look at what I've accomplished, all by little myself (basically I'm having to work from what others must consider as NASA's trash/dumpster).

I am asking; how pathetic can this pretentious space agency be?  I have recently come to realize that pro-NASA followers have been so blinded by the light and, thereby I sometimes refer to these individuals as either their braille image interpreters or simply as NASA's official moles. At first, prior to my January 2001 endeavors as to openly and nicely inform NASA, I had never considered the possibility of such agency compromises and of such individuals existing, now I certainly know better. The USS STARK and USS LIBERTY fiascos and now 9/11 has only further clarified what can eventually happen when an agency is overrun with NSA/DoD agendas, such as those promoted by the Administration on behalf of conquering "cold-wars" which just happen to coincide with the advancing of American global interest. Well obviously, this time it really backfired and, I'm beginning to believe my recent discoveries could lead to further revelations because, nothing scientific has provided sufficient cause as to ignore what I have discovered existing on Venus, plus my questions as to past NASA accomplishments have still not been address, so that leaves us with ulterior motives driven by some obvious fear of whatever repercussions.

If you should happen to agree or not, please let me and others know, and otherwise knock yourself out!, or, simply send money just like you have been forking over to NASA for all these decades, just be certain to put my name and address on that check and envelope, then I'll personally see to it that you get the most bang for your buck.

Return to GUTH Venus "index.html"
Copyright ©GUTH Venus 2000/2002 - Brad E. Guth
All Rights Reserved
IEIS / Webmaster: - Brad Guth

Please forward your comments and research links onto: Brad Guth 1-253-8576061
4410 SE Nelson Rd. Olalla, WA 98359

( NOTE: due to the controversy of my discovery, if you've sent e-mail and I have not returned a reply, that's only because your message either never arrived or the greater body of the letter was missing and, there is only one group sufficiently motivated and capable of intentionally moderating outgoing as well as incoming e-mail. Call or use direct mail if you feel a need to bring anything to my attention: 4410 SE Nelson Rd. Olalla, Wa. 98359  1-253-8576061 )

My email:

My Yahoo URL has at times been running at or above download transfer limits, so if you can't access certain pages or images, please try shifting to my alternate site: