Sleeper Cells Functioning on Behalf of NASA

( as "spin" and "damage control" moles operate )

( by; Brad Guth / IEIS    updated: October 27, 2002 )

This following is simply another post I've been placing into GOOGLE's "" and, as such will soon be contributed into my URL pages. Obviously I've made some further syntax and grammar improvements, not that the message is changed, it simply should read a whole lot better.

"GUTH Venus confirmed, most recently by Hubble, TRACE, ISS and even SOHO"

As NASA's sleeper cells go;  Their orchestrated avoidance of Venus by all of the above instruments is making for a rather interesting concept, one of curious abstinence that's seriously getting in the way of open astronomy, thereby skewing science into the toilet once again. So, you thought our ruse mastering was done, as finished with all of their cold-war and space-race maneuvers, obviously no way.

It seems these otherwise fine observatory instruments (we're talking all toll trillions of tax dollars worth), as situated outside our atmosphere and reporting no system failures, are in fact entirely blinded by their affiliation with NASA/NSA/DoD "nondisclosure" standards and cult protocol. In other words, if it were not for the under handed efforts of the "status quo", these otherwise truly remarkable instruments and even of those crew onboard ISS, all could be imaging upon Venus as never before (at least as not for another 8+ months worth, then after a month or so behind our sun, picking up again upon the return trip).

This October/November, Venus is becoming a mere 105 times further away then our moon. That's darn close and for the most part I believe it's not even crossing the solar image (like Hubble's previous imaging upon Venus and even SOHO's Mercury imaging as it directly crossed the sun), at least not as such being all that complicated from the perspective of any good space platform instruments and then obviously, the ISS crew could certainly view upon this large object and even communicate via xenon/laser with great ease, not even requiring all that much of any telescope (from such as space platform, as little as a CCD outfitted 10X range finder could do this job). Oddly, according to one of NASA's moles, there's not even a pair of binoculars aboard ISS, let alone any cameras whatsoever.

Being so mutually planetary close, Earth's solar reflection is sufficient as to illuminate a degree of those highly light reflective Venus clouds, where instruments onboard TRACE and certainly Hubble could pull vital atmospheric data from such imaging upon Venus. TRACE could safely image directly through portions of the atmosphere of the solar created crescent zone, where that capture alone is worth metric tonnes to any true astronomer. The exceptional CCD contrast range aboard TRACE, that along with selected filters could maintain a rather significant degree of observations as for any sort of artificial illuminations, hopefully those of xenon format, as binary or whatever packets but, any such illuminations would certainly be artificial, so binary packet or from that of a simple beacon makes no difference whatsoever at this juncture.

The capability of Hubble means that for several weeks, viewing Venus is a rather simple and safe task, as comfortably 4.25% of the Venus diameter can be captured by Hubble, thus eliminating any solar or even Venus Crescent areas from Hubble's sensitive CCD (which I believe could with filters tolerate such intrusions if necessary).

Unlike observing Venus through Earth's polluted atmosphere, where Venus is simply too close to the sun, in space there's no such compromise, as the sun represents a crisp bright target and, at a fraction of a degree away is nearly pitch black darkness unless there are massive solar flares taking place.

So, I have a few questions that others should be asking of NASA and perhaps ESA.

1) Just wondering first off; Where's that Boeing/TRW laser cannon these days?

2) What's with all the deep space observations when Venus is so freaking near?

3) What imaging logs (time-lines) are there upon Hubble, TRACE, SOHO and ISS?

4) Good Earth based observatories can image Venus, so what's not happening?

5) Existing Earth based lasers and xenon beams also exist (including SETI), so what's their status or excuse?

6) When searching for current logs regarding anything Venus, since 21 months ago and seemingly there's nothing whatsoever now nor scheduled in the future, in spite of the massive numbers of highly artificial content issues which my research has exposed (that's also in spite of all the official e-flak), so "Where's the latest beef on Venus"? and, "Why otherwise is NASA avoiding Venus like the Black plague?"

7) If others critical of my discovery have not been able to deliver one iota of similar observational considerations (as from any planet including Earth), that which demonstrates how such artificial looking formations could be so natural, let alone are in fact anything but artificial, then what's all the fuss over my research and subsequent discoveries?

8) If the lower atmosphere of Venus is absolutely crystal clear and those clouds are somewhat transparent as to near UV as well as UV-A and UV-B spectrums, then what's stopping a good xenon/laser beam from illuminating sufficiently through those UV transparent clouds, into their otherwise totally pitch black sky?

Any good nocturnal sort (having a magnitude 5+ capability, where magnitude 10 being within evolutionary capability) couldn't possibly ignore such nighttime illuminations and, with their having access to the natural energies of Venus (CO2-->CO/O2 as well as vertical CO2 wind power) plus the access as to acquiring H2O and thereby developing H2O2 and obviously just plain old H2 is not even rocket science), thus various forms of xenon illuminations could easily be generated (especially within all that CO2 environment, where you don't even need a containment vessel for sustaining the arc). With such energies and some rather incredible buoyancy's at hand, foot, claw or tentacle should be more then capable as for achieving massive airship altitudes, as such would place their astronomers above the bulk of those cool nighttime clouds, perhaps a mere 20 km above their surface as during their extended season of nighttime, but an airship as capable of obtaining 75 km if push comes to shove, as buoyancy permits and as those available energies as derived CO/O2 are truly enormous (like potentially 64 kg/m3 buoyancy plus ISP's of 260+), not to mention whatever a little H2O2 could contribute.

Within many other pages, I've explained how such H2 and even N2 buoyancy works greatly to their advantage, I've covered the CO2-->CO/O2 factor that includes compressor bleed-off air conditioning attributes, I've discovered and shared the Vertical CO2 windpower issue and subsequently explained how a tough as nails sort of lizard folk would have applied such attributes if their world were becoming greenhouse, like also utilizing insulation spheres of H2 or N2 that could easily obtain R-200 (that's 0.5% hourly loss or gain of BTU's depending upon your understanding) and even of pyrex triple or 5-plex (that's four voids of N2/H2) as thermal conduction barrier windows offering a minimum of R-50 (R-100 within easy reach) should not be technically out of bounds.

Whereas the main discovery site includes a fair number of massive structures of complex reservoirs (nothing as limited nor pathetic as any Mars face), other symmetrical buildings, a sufficient tarmac w/service bays and equipment on deck, various round and parabolic issues, spherical tanks as well as symmetrically and parallel aligned and did I mention, the freaking suspension bridge that any fool can see what's underneath, plus don't forget about that nifty "fluid arch" consideration, nor of those massive quarry sites, the various switch-back roads and assortments of so many other symmetrically rectangular issues associated with such rational passage and infrastructure considerations.

Of course, all of the expected natural rugged features of recorded tectonics, rilles and canyons, associated erosions and of what ever else makes up Venus are in fact surrounding these more likely artificial then not issues, where all this natural stuff is equally as enlarged upon but equally not being contrived nor distorted by the same photo software, as into anything other, in fact, from thousands of other images enlarged, there seems no other indications of falsely artificial considerations being created, other then of those more likely artificial considerations as at the three recorded "GUTH Venus" sites, and I can prove that far more easily then my opposition can prove otherwise. Besides, what ulterior motive could I possibly have that's of anything up against the NASA/NSA/DoD ruse of the century, the scam of all shams, the ultimate lie built upon steroids.

My ulterior motive is for discovering "truth", then seeing that we focus upon humanly obtainable goals and of especially those which our current technology has to offer, thus no new moneys and least risk and, certainly nothing ethnic nor political based, at least not until NSA/DoD get their butts involved and, that's perhaps including yourself, as then in no time we'll have those heathen Islamic lizard folks from Venus breathing down our necks or perhaps guiding big airships or other through our tallest buildings again. In fact, if our crack NSA/DoD wizards try hard enough, perhaps Venus will have little option but to try out some new anti-stupid-planetary bio-tactical weapon, just so as to put us out of our self-inflicted misery (sort of like how we go about exterminating termites or roaches).

Sorry if I've come into believing our NASA/NSA/DoD have been and are still in the toilet, but that'scertainly becoming a fact of our American way of life, being selfish irregardless of whatever consequences, as our crack wizards of "disinformation" and focussed goals of ruling the universe is truly pathetic and, I believe even downright criminal. So, if my opposition wants to play along with the "status quo", my advice is to not stand to near to these jokers and especially stay out of tall buildings and don't fly if you don't have to, as NSA/DoD have been and are intent upon pushing a number of buttons, many of which they have no idea as to the consequences, or perhaps they do, they just don't give a dam anymore, as long as it's not their butt...

Of course, as my devoted opposition, apparently you folks can afford to remain totally arrogant, unresponsive, intentionally obstructive and thus further proving, that as bad as I believe NASA/NSA/DoD have been, that your fine upstanding example is something far worse and more sinister then of anything those al-Qaida or of bin-Laden has to offer. At least those Islamic's have their reasons based upon some rather obvious provocation by others we have elected to back, as they certainly didn't have to perpetrate and subsequently create their enemies out of thin air (like our perpetrated cold-war with the USSR), especially when we certainly did such a damn fine job of accomplishing that one all by ourselves. If I have to guess, I was wondering if Mr. OM was sort of a "sleeper cell", certainly not much question anymore. As a terrorist tactic, those functioning like Mr. OM have been doing if not directly responsible for far more direct and collateral damage then of any 9/11 event.

If others and I as well as the world can't trust NASA and thereby can't trust America, then we have "trouble in River City" or of wherever NASA/NSA/DoD all sleep together. Of course, it would be nice as to seeing some responsible efforts at focusing our talents and limited resources upon humanly obtainable goals, leaving those unobtainable ones to the wealthiest of wealthy sport astronomy types (just as long as they're paying their fair share of taxes and not taking away moneys from otherwise worthy programs).

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

Brad Guth / IEIS