Just Because I Can't Prove It

( that doesn't mean it didn't happen that way or perhaps for better or worse )

Just because I can't possibly prove we never went to the moon, that doesn't mean we didn't.

Just because so many others can't seem to prove we ever went to and walked upon the moon doesn't mean that we didn't manage to do just that (just means that we oddly can't seem to prove it anymore).

We're told by all the expertise held by those wizards of NASA that the moon reflects upon average roughly 10% of the solar illumination and, that obviously means of those darker areas we can clearly see from Earth are most likely reflecting 5% (basalt or soot black) and, of the brighter areas are of somewhat most likely not exceeding 20% reflective, roughly half the reflection value of typically old concrete.

So, when the bulk of those Apollo photos of the lunar surface seem to be reflecting nearly 50% (as compared to their stark white moon suit which reflected roughly 85%) and, that of the background terrain which seems not to contain anything whatsoever lesser than 25%, that doesn't mean we we're not on the moon and simply totally incompetent about photographing anything, including those vibrant stars which were contrasted by the ultra pitch black sky (actually that's the point, as actually there was no atmospheric sky whatsoever, absolutely nothing getting in the way of photographing those incredibly vibrant stars that were at least 25% more vibrant than of just about anywhere remote on Earth). Photographing such stars against a supposedly 10% average reflective lunar landscape should have been nearly ideal, but obviously that still doesn't mean we weren't there, on the surface of the moon.

Just because I can not recreate a nighttime image, utilizing commercial 50mm format equipment, upon any composition of any format by using an artificial light that invariably doesn't create a notable "hot spot", that doesn't mean that the imaged "hot spots" photographed upon the lunar surface weren't caused by some yet unknown lunar gravity lens affect or perhaps by one of those massive solar flares which just so happened to become gravity focused into a spot light affect without carrying any radiation exposure whatsoever, as otherwise that sensitive film as residing within those unprotected cameras would have been fogged or at least thermally distorted, and/or the photographer would have received another 0.1 Sv full body burst worth of radiation, which as you know would have been easily detectable by any number of ways (premature death for example, as we're certainly not talking about any partial chest exposure of 0.0001 Sv xray).

Just because I can't prove the 1/6th gravity scaled lunar lander never once made a successful test flight, let alone several as being a rather essential mission component for technology confirmation as well as pilot training, that certainly doesn't mean we didn't accomplish that but simply forgot to document any phase of such critical test/training flights, as obviously due to our long running expertise of the late 60's in "fly-by-wire" and of airframe stability via "gyro mass induction" as well as our "modulated rocket thrusters" was at the time so reliably good and previously so well proven, that perhaps no one needed to document something that had already been safely accomplished so many times before, in so much that this phase would have been simply another boring waste of good film (how thoughtful for NASA to save us taxpayers all that money while not wasting our time and, perhaps explains why we can't seem to keep those Osprey's in the air, as they're so much more complicated than any lunar lander).

Just because I can't prove that such terrific KODAK film would have stood the test of +/-250F thermal shock as well as radiation exposures of 0.1 < 10 Sv is just another perectly good example of how I could be dead wrong, that's obviously not because KODAK and Hasselblad equally can not explain how those photo negatives ever survived in such perfect condition, as this is not proving nor saying that durring every exposure (there were altogether thousands) that the sun light was not nearly so hot, the shade not nearly so cold and, those solar flares were apparently nonexistent as well as cosmic radiation essentially had subsided (I guess that also represents that we here on Earth don't actually need any stinking Van Allen belts, and to think, we couldn't have know about all that unless we stepped on the moon).

Just because I've enlarged upon a few areas of the Venus surface, utilizing the raw original files directly from the NASA archives, showing what's never been recorded as being anything ever geologically and/or erosion formed as on Earth, that obviously doesn't mean that somewhere in our universe there aren't such geological formations that look exactly like suspension bridges of several km, of other massive formations that come off looking like a cluster of complex reservoirs structured and gathered above the surface and of those being interfaced via aqueduct to another massive reservoir, of other highly complex formations that looks exactly like a rational community of high-rise symmetrical structures having associated tangent and parallel causeways along with 90 degree intersections and, a bloody nearby tarmac of sorts with what even looks like equipment on deck, not to mention having those sub/service bays depicted as being purposely constructed in rectangular formation along with their rounded corners and arch features supporting that massive overhead tarmac, as obviously somewhere in this universe those sorts of peculiar attributes are as natural and as common as acid rain. None of this is proving that evolution for Venus was ever capable of sustained life, as much as it's more likely proving it couldn't have been any other way. Obviously imaging proof is in the eye of the beholder, by which that's clearly stipulating that a valid critic must be sighted, as for the truly blind/braille is not a handicap to which this discovery lends itself (with a little funding I could certainly fix that aspect).

Just because the Magellan imaging of Venus was of SAR format, which is certified as being vastly superior to anything photographic, by a strong and provable factor of 10:1 better, that doesn't mean that even of any one of the most likely natural items that looks somewhat like a massive fluid arch isn't simply another illusion that's never before been recorded by any SAR imaging, as perhaps equally for another massive item which looks pretty much like a horizontal hangar/silo as indicating having those multiple geometrical as well as symmetrical side vents and of having numerous roof top symmetrical features that are just about exactly like what such an airship silo of roof top vents would need to be, including that feature of accommodating what certainly looks like a relatively massive overhead door or hatch that further seems to pivot as exposing what certainly looks like a massively large rigid airship and, that somehow all of this more likely artificial content is actually an illusion which must have been caused by those undocumented imaging faults turning themselves on and off at random intervals, such as whenever depicting upon the rugged countryside or of that canyon/rille is obviously when the imaging system was working absolutely perfectly and, when capturing the item looking very much like an airship and of it's silo/hanger and/or of those nearby multiple as well as symmetrically arranged and oddly recessed spheres situated into either sided of a mountain, or how about of those large parabolic items situated at the main causeway intersection, as I'll suppose these are merely good examples where the Magellan imaging was temporarily hopping about while running itself amuck.

Just because I can't physically prove any rigid airship exist, even though all of science and physics seem (within tolerable limits) to support what would make the airship real, that certainly doesn't mean there's absolutely no airship to look at. Basically what I'm saying is, I can't disprove there's no Venus Metro Airship, nor can anyone other prove that such an unusually massive and complex formation is anything naturally possible, as not even a good conjecture can formulate nature into what's showing.

Just because I can't prove to you that there's other life out there, not even other life NOT as we know it (lizard folk or not) existing on Venus, even though the fundamental principals of creation (terraforming if you will), evolution and of just the well motivated incentives of innovation being chased along by the greenhouse of your worst possible nightmare should have managed something, rather than dying on the spot. Though it's become hot and nasty, it's still not outside the limits as for those being sufficiently acclimated along with whatever a little technology can provide and, that technology need not include anything radio.

So, just because I can't sufficiently prove there are sufficient crooks, fools and arrogant blood thirsty bastards among despicably worse individuals as cloaked within NASA/NSA/DoD, nor that we have a certified warlord for our leader, that also doesn't mean those nice folks don't exist.

Just because I can't prove the Boeing/TRW team didn't utilize the shuttle re-entry as an opportunity for a damn fine real world field calibration test in order to fine tune and document there latest capability as based upon a mere 1% laser cannon output, that obviously doesn't mean that it didn't happen that way.

Just because I can't personally prove the Catholics and their Pope wiped out an entire civilization and/or species of Cathars (as well as anyone associated with Cathars), that also doesn't mean such good and/or nasty deeds didn't happen. At some point in time, someone has to account for history and thereby someone other has to read that information and ponder the meanings, where obviously if you were there you don't need any stinking book to inform you of how thoroughly despicable your ancestors were.

Just because I can't prove that our space age technology along with the USS LIBERTY did or didn't support and orchestrate the 6-Day war on behalf of Israel, that also doesn't mean we didn't do our part in the wholesale extermination of those thousands of muslim and Islamic war prisoners (we know for a fact that Israel never had to construct nor had they utilized any confinement of those tens of thousands of prisoners, but that obviously doesn't mean anything).

Just because some of those relatives of the 6-Day war, of prisoners that otherwise vanished off the face of Earth, have held their grudge ever since, that doesn't mean that they orchestrated the 9/11 as an eye for an eye favor return, in retribution for not only those dead at the hands of the Israeli but as for those so thoughtfully helping out, such as the NASA/NSA/DoD's space age technology efforts of support being further accommodated by the USS LIBERTY and of everything NASA/NSA/DoD/CIA had at their disposal. None of this means anything whatsoever and, would be pure speculation at best. Just ask for Dr. H.K's opinion about why 9/11 and of what's coming next, as in privet I'm certain he'll set the record straight.

As I continue to reflect upon other items of interest (Venus and of other matters getting in the way), which I'm certain my loyal critics will need to be reassured, that nothing is ever what it seems, especially if it conflicts with your faith or beliefs (pagan or otherwise).

If anyone was being the least bit snookered, especially up until a couple of years ago, it's obviously been myself, as otherwise I simply can't understand what all the recent fuss is about (moon, Venus or middle East), especially if you believed that Americans have never once made a serious mistake, never been disrespectful of others, never broken a treaty nor been intentionally or perhaps pretentiously antagonistic, never been dishonest nor concealing by flaunting of disinformation in order to hurt others while protecting American interest or those of our allies. Thereby all is well and good with the world, our actions are just and moral, especially as long as it's warlord Bush's world. After all, God had to come from somewhere and, that somewhere must have been America, Texas no less. And, Lord Bush certainly can't possibly be any Cathar descendant because, the Pope had all of them bastards and anyone associated killed off centuries ago (thank God, sort of).

Just because I can't always use the fanciest right words, and deliver upon everything within a politically polished web document along with promotional animation and custom orchestrated surround sound, nor can I afford to publish and distribute a significant hardback, that certainly doesn't mean I'm wrong, it just may represent that you're not nearly smart enough to figure things out for yourself and, that further represents that I'm entirely right about how so many can be so easily snookered (Walter Cronkite and myself included), at the expense and of such carnage of so many others and, all and all being so unknowingly immoral against the rest of the world at the same time.

As always, from time to time I'll return to this document, correcting words, syntax and adding a few more favor returning tit for tat's here or there. If you have expertise or just other ideas (weird or not), I'm not only interested but, I'll give you all the credit, dollars too once someone realizes how pathetically snookered they've been, taken to the cleaners and all by their very own government. Surprise, surprise, life's not fair and government isn't honest about admitting their mistakes nor sharing responsibilities.

To the INDEX page: GUTH Venus (with loads of updates)
alternate URL's: http://guthvenus.tripod.com  and  http://geocities.com/bradguth
Copyright © 2000/2001/2002/2003 - Brad E. Guth
GUTH Venus: All Rights Reserved
Webmaster: Brad Guth - Brad Guth / IEIS   ~  1-253-8576061
created: March 20, 2003

Brad Guth / IEIS IEIS-Brad@Juno.com