Hot Rocks of Venus that are looking intelligent

On Oct 22, 6:09 am, BradGuth wrote:
Whenever sharing about our moon or Venus, it's exactly as though we're
not being told the whole truth and nothing but the truth about much of
anything these days. Talk about revising history, science and a whole
lot more, whereas those hot rocks of Venus that so happen to look as
though having been arranged so gosh darn unusually intelligent, are
most likely still there to behold, and we've had the technology for
having taken a much closer look-see for better than a good decade.

This observationology of image interpretation isn't the least bit
hocus-pocus phony, nor is it having any ulterior motives or hidden
agenda like our mutually perpetrated cold-war(s), or even hot-war(s)
over fossil and yellowcake energy as of lately, and there's nothing
but an all around win-win for science and humanity if in fact any of
those hot rocks of Venus are actually of those modified and/or having
been put to good use by intelligent other life. At least there's
nothing about Venus that's technically all that insurmountable, that
is unless you're not quite half as smart as a hot rock.

The official NASA/Magellan image of GIF format, as being that of a 36
look per pixel composite as having been given essentially the benefit
of those 36 confirming radar looks per each pixel, is by itself worthy
of our consideration for all kinds of honest reasons besides those
patterns of whatever's interpreting as so AI /(intelligent/
artificial), as opposed to all of the perfectly natural appearing
items that are of equally outstanding planetology, such as the
impressive FLUID ARCH.

The big question of the day is; Does anyone within Google/NOVA's
usenetland of such all-knowing wizards care to discuss/review the long
and growing list of what-ifs? (after all, for all we know those hot-
foot Venusians could even be of a Zion/semitic faith)

For a topic starter, we are obviously not talking about any cool and
wet Earth like environment, or even that of our weird, naked and
somewhat salty moon, nor of any such dead and nearly frozen to the
core likes of Mars or of whatever's so much further away. At times
Venus is actually extremely nearby (a little over 100X the distance of
our moon), and it's absolutely chuck full of its very own geothermal
cache of raw energy that's sharing a surface of 20.5 w/m2 (roughly 256
fold greater than Earth), that which only a born-again dork of a
naysayer like most of our usenet anti-think-tank rusemasters couldn't
possibly appreciate.

Why exclude the unknown simply because it's unknown? In other words,
most likely your whole intellectual mindset worth of whatever's
supposedly wiser and thus greater than most, that's simply faiyjh-
based obligated on behalf of what has to go out of its infomercial
spewing way in order to exclude upon any such off-world intelligent
other life, regardless of whatever's the applied technology, or even
to banish anything that's of off-world intelligent potential
regardless of whatever's the alternative planetology and of its local
evolution, of which you and I know absolutely nothing about is what
seems a bit counter-productive.

If at all possible, please do further explain as to those very
intelligent and/or rational community looking items, as if somehow
those were being purely natural, by way of offering us some other
image examples, as to sharing in where such a rational complex
community looking group of planetology considerations are otherwise to
be found within common/terrestrial planetology w/o AI benefit of
whatever intelligent life accomplished, such as right here on Earth
should offer. For one basic observationology argument example; How
many complex looking tarmacs are there on Earth that had absolutely
nothing whatsoever of AI to do with their having been created or
otherwise crafted/modified for their rational use by intelligent life?

Thanks once again to our once upon a time "tomcat", for once having
posted a link to this updated page of Venus images.http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/th...humbnails.html

Some of the most interesting AI information can be found within image
No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite frame of
such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the robust,
rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTH Venus', of
which you should apply your own PhotoShop/resampling enlargement of at
least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter plus other image
cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply. Remember that a
purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster simply can't
accomplish such PhotoShop enlargements without making the image look
worse off than it really is.
"Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1"http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.htmlhttp://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif

If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
- Brad Guth -

Why are the supposed smart folks of Usenet so gosh darn deathly afraid
of Venus, or even that of Venus L2?

What's so terribly wrong with having a 36 look per pixel of a nifty
radar obtained image to start off with?
--
Brad Guth

On Oct 22, 6:09 am, BradGuth wrote:
Whenever sharing about our moon or Venus, it's exactly as though we're
not being told the whole truth and nothing but the truth about much of
anything these days. Talk about revising history, science and a whole
lot more, whereas those hot rocks of Venus that so happen to look as
though having been arranged so gosh darn unusually intelligent, are
most likely still there to behold, and we've had the technology for
having taken a much closer look-see for better than a good decade.

This observationology of image interpretation isn't the least bit
hocus-pocus phony, nor is it having any ulterior motives or hidden
agenda like our mutually perpetrated cold-war(s), or even hot-war(s)
over fossil and yellowcake energy as of lately, and there's nothing
but an all around win-win for science and humanity if in fact any of
those hot rocks of Venus are actually of those modified and/or having
been put to good use by intelligent other life. At least there's
nothing about Venus that's technically all that insurmountable, that
is unless you're not quite half as smart as a hot rock.

The official NASA/Magellan image of GIF format, as being that of a 36
look per pixel composite as having been given essentially the benefit
of those 36 confirming radar looks per each pixel, is by itself worthy
of our consideration for all kinds of honest reasons besides those
patterns of whatever's interpreting as so AI /(intelligent/
artificial), as opposed to all of the perfectly natural appearing
items that are of equally outstanding planetology, such as the
impressive FLUID ARCH.

The big question of the day is; Does anyone within Google/NOVA's
usenetland of such all-knowing wizards care to discuss/review the long
and growing list of what-ifs? (after all, for all we know those hot-
foot Venusians could even be of a Zion/semitic faith)

For a topic starter, we are obviously not talking about any cool and
wet Earth like environment, or even that of our weird, naked and
somewhat salty moon, nor of any such dead and nearly frozen to the
core likes of Mars or of whatever's so much further away. At times
Venus is actually extremely nearby (a little over 100X the distance of
our moon), and it's absolutely chuck full of its very own geothermal
cache of raw energy that's sharing a surface of 20.5 w/m2 (roughly 256
fold greater than Earth), that which only a born-again dork of a
naysayer like most of our usenet anti-think-tank rusemasters couldn't
possibly appreciate.

Why exclude the unknown simply because it's unknown? In other words,
most likely your whole intellectual mindset worth of whatever's
supposedly wiser and thus greater than most, that's simply faiyjh-
based obligated on behalf of what has to go out of its infomercial
spewing way in order to exclude upon any such off-world intelligent
other life, regardless of whatever's the applied technology, or even
to banish anything that's of off-world intelligent potential
regardless of whatever's the alternative planetology and of its local
evolution, of which you and I know absolutely nothing about is what
seems a bit counter-productive.

If at all possible, please do further explain as to those very
intelligent and/or rational community looking items, as if somehow
those were being purely natural, by way of offering us some other
image examples, as to sharing in where such a rational complex
community looking group of planetology considerations are otherwise to
be found within common/terrestrial planetology w/o AI benefit of
whatever intelligent life accomplished, such as right here on Earth
should offer. For one basic observationology argument example; How
many complex looking tarmacs are there on Earth that had absolutely
nothing whatsoever of AI to do with their having been created or
otherwise crafted/modified for their rational use by intelligent life?

Thanks once again to our once upon a time "tomcat", for once having
posted a link to this updated page of Venus images.http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/th...humbnails.html

Some of the most interesting AI information can be found within image
No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite frame of
such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the robust,
rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTH Venus', of
which you should apply your own PhotoShop/resampling enlargement of at
least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter plus other image
cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply. Remember that a
purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster simply can't
accomplish such PhotoShop enlargements without making the image look
worse off than it really is.
"Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1"http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.htmlhttp://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif

If you still can not find this community of interesting pixels, then
you are not nearly as good at observationology as you think you are.
- Brad Guth -


Seems the ESA Venus Express/VIRTIS mission has either fallen off the
edge of Earth or at least out of favor within their very own ESA home
webpage.

ESA is still not sharing any byte worth of anything as getting
released from their robust PFS instrument, of which they claim has
been faulty/broken from nearly the very get go. (I rather doubt this
is entirely true, because they can't share as to the internal workings
of that PFS instrument, in that there's absolutely no technical
accounting or any other measure on behalf of those internal mechanics
other than going by their word, which simply doesn't make any sense)
http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?mi...Express&type=I
http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/are...cfm?fareaid=64

In spite of the Venus EXPRESS having supposedly lost all use of their
robust PFS, as representing nearly 90% worth of their mission's
science capability, whereas in spite of that handicap or intentional
banishment it's still offering darn good though much lower resolution
results of the IR mapping:
http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?b=...le=y &start=4
http://www.esa.int/esa-mmg/mmg.pl?b=...start=4&size=b

Notice how there's never one scientific word as to the specific
thermal temperatures of those IR obtained images, but instead a whole
lot of careful wordings that manage to divert as much attention as
possible away from the matter of fact that Venus has been losing
roughly 20.5 w/m2 (256 fold greater than Earth) away from its
geothermally toasty surface. Further notice how the all-knowing
wizards of Usenet or even those rusemasters of NASA's very own
uplink.space.com are entirely without an honest thought, clue or much
less having been asking any questions as to why there's still no
public information getting shared as to the wide differentials of
those surface and atmospheric temperatures of Venus. Even though the
remaining IR instruments of ESA's Venus Express are of extremely poor
resolution doesn't exclude those kinds of low resolution IR readings
from providing a sufficient degree of thermal mapping, as to the best
available extent that's possible, and yet we've seen almost nothing of
their supposed science in sharing IR specifics of such thermal issues
other than IR ratios which can be without a basic reference to a given
spectrum of temperature interpreted as to mean damn near anything.

Of course from the long shot of Venus L2 is where a modern day radar
and IR imaging pair of instruments as of the last decade could have
accomplished a whole lot better results, and if from within that nifty
and relatively cool halo station-keeping location sending in probes of
the rigid airship kind, that which would obviously cruise below those
thick acidic clouds and subsequently get those absolutely terrific
closeup look-see mappings of the Venus surface down to less than 0.1
meter/pixel, and of visual spectrum imaging down to as tight as a few
mm, which technically could have by now been doable.

There are still those extremely interesting pixels of previous radar
mapping of what looks entirely intelligent and/or artificially
rational, as though representing a community of substantial structures
and otherwise of extremely interesting natural terrain/geology
features (including an active fluid arch and of multiple reservoirs)
like none other. For those with an honestly serious mindset of
considering all such options, I have had exactly what you're looking
for as of nearly the past 8 years, and I also have the other proof
positive as to how those in charge have been doing all they can in
order to disqualify, exclude or rather banish any such notions that
Venus has been technically a viable planet for accommodating
intelligent other life.

This doesn't require that such be of an intelligent other life as
having locally evolved within that newish planetology of such a
geothermally forced environment, although technically even that's a
remote possibility for those of us residing outside of the mainstream
status quo of naysayville's bigots-R-us mindset.
--
Brad Guth

Usenet: rec.photo.digital
Thanks again to our once upon a time "tomcat", for having posted
another link to this updated page of Venus images.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/th...humbnails.html

Some of the most interesting of AI information can be found within
image No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite
frame of such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the
robust, rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTH Venus',
of which you folks should apply your own PhotoShop resampling/
enlargement of at least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter
plus other image cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply.
Remember that a purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster
simply can not accomplish such enlargements without making whatever
image look worse off than it really is. (go figure)
"Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1"
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/ht...115s095_1.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif

If you still can not find this rational community worth of extremely
interesting pixels, then you are not nearly as good at
observationology as you think you are.

Digital photo resampling or enlarging with various pixel interpolation
algorithms are not new nor unused by our NIMA and multiple other spy
and commercial photo agencies. The sorts of freeware or trialware
such as PhotoCleaner, PhotoZoom and CleanerZoomer are just examples
that'll perform as well or better than ADOBE PhotoShop, are each
sufficiently user friendly and as always allows for user options in
order to suit the kinds of results that'll yield the best possible
enlargement without introducing weird distortions or artifacts out of
thin air(sort of speak).

http://www.photocleaner.com
PhotoCleaner w/multiple resize algorithms and automatic unsharp

http://www.benvista.com/main/content...otozoompro_ 1
http://www.benvista.com/main/content...page=downloads
PhotoZoom Pro w/S-Spline XL interpolation algorithm enlarging

CleanerZoomer
http://www.stratopoint.com/czoomer.htm
Of course the digital radar image of 36 looks per pixel is somewhat
better to begin with, as nearly 3D worthy and each raw pixel being
about as real or as truth worthy of pixel as we're going to get, which
sort of makes up for the 225 meter per pixel resolution that's being
enlarged for a better look-see at whatever's most likely associated
with those raw pixels.

http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...-restoration1/
"Red Fox, image from Figure 3 after photoshop unsharp mask, radius =
4.0, 75%, threshold = 3, then another unsharp mask with radius = 2.0,
66%, threshold = 3. This is a about the best I can do with the unsharp
mask tool"

As you can see for yourself, between ADOBE PhotoShop and Adaptive
Richardson-Lucy Iteration there's nothing getting artificially
generated via enlarge/resampling and unsharp applications that created
weird pixels out of nowhere. As long as the raw pixel patterns were
there to behold in the first place, there's nothing that gets software
AI or otherwise created weird in the enlarged images that's
indifferent to whatever those original pixels represent. Of course
with the likes of PhotoShop is where any damn village idiot fool can
just as easily force the original image into distorting everything in
sight, which only proves that such a result can be accomplished if
that's the intended objective.

However, most folks within Usenet's anti-think-tank of naysayland
should as IggyZiggy says, have that word "obfuscate" tattooed to their
forehead, as they quite often intend to live, breathe, eat, and
worship that mostly semitic God of obfuscation by using word games,
something their Third Reich and the likes of our very own resident
LLPOF warlord(GW Bush) and of his puppeteer Dick Cheney are really
good at obfuscating the hell out of most everything.

So, when I've asked of others to share and share alike, as to
providing their own best effort examples of the image pertaining to
Venus that I'd pointed out as of nearly 8 years ago, lo and behold the
brown-nosed obfuscation clowns of Usenet's naysayland kicked into full
topic/author stalking, bashing and banishment action, whit all of
their usual gauntlet of evidence exclusion so as to not rock their
mainstream good ship LOLLIPOP status quo that's clearly more semitic
faith based than not.

We need to take a very close look at Venus, as for giving this
extremely nearby planet proper consideration on behalf of other
intelligent life that once upon a time having been and by rights may
even still be existing/coexisting within that geothermally forced
environment, of their having survived within such a newish worth of
active planetology that not exactly user friendly to the likes of us
naked humans. I'm certainly not speaking of the dumbfounded sorts of
naked humans without a clue other than their terrestrial limited faith-
based analogy towards everything, but rather of either locally evolved
and/or new and improved species as having been imported intelligent
life, that's simply utilizing applied physics and obviously good
technology that's taking the fullest advantage of their applied
physics and local cache of such vast amounts of renewable energy.

There's no argument that Venus in most surface locations is nearly hot
as hell, however, if you can constructively contribute a little
something of image processing, or otherwise on behalf of explaining
the sorts of physics and applied technology that'll function within
such a thermal dynamic worth of planetology, that'll actually survive
within the regular laws of physics (such as the process of the local
makings and sustaining ice), is exactly what I'd appreciate and give
the fullest of credit for whatever talent or expertise you'd care to
share.
--
Brad Guth

Just because the frail DNA of mere humans haven't walked on the moon
is no good reason as to why those future rad-hard and physically
robust robotics of Japan and China can't manage.

Perhaps this is best being shared with other Usenet groups:
rec.photo.digital, uk.rec.photo.misc, alt.journalism.newspapers,
alt.revisionism, sci.geo.satellite-nav, sci.geo.geology, talk.atheism

In addition of our getting access to those new and greatly improved
images of our moon that's will worth further enlarging, plus future
loads of other new and improved science that'll begin telling us what
that naked and somewhat salty moon surface has to offer, there's still
good old and at times extremely nearby Venus that's looking as though
having been lived upon.

Thanks again to our once upon a time "tomcat", for having posted
another public link to this somewhat updated page of Venus images.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/th...humbnails.html

Some of the most interesting of AI pixel worthy information can be
found within image No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel
composite frame of such radar obtained pixels that so happens to
include the robust, rather sizable and somewhat complex community of
'GUTH Venus', of which you folks should apply your own PhotoShop
resampling/enlargement of at least 3X, along with whatever unsharp
mask filter plus other image cleaning or treatment options you'd care
to apply. Remember that a purely negative or naysay mindset of a true
rusemaster simply can not accomplish such enlargements without making
whatever image look worse off than it really is. (go figure)
"Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1"
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/ht...115s095_1.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif

If you still can not find this rational community worth of extremely
interesting pixels, then you are not nearly as good at
observationology as you think you are. Usually this only happens with
the sorts of pretend atheists that are forever stuck or sequestered
within their own faith-based naysay mode, regardless of whatever
physics or the best available science has to offer.

Digital photo resampling or enlarging with various pixel interpolation
algorithms are not new nor unused by our NIMA and multiple other spy
and commercial photo agencies. The sorts of freeware or trialware
such as PhotoCleaner, PhotoZoom and CleanerZoomer are just examples
that'll perform as well or better than ADOBE PhotoShop, are each
sufficiently user friendly and as always allows for user options in
order to suit the kinds of results that'll yield the best possible
enlargement without introducing weird distortions or artifacts out of
thin air(sort of speak).

http://www.photocleaner.com
PhotoCleaner w/multiple resize algorithms and automatic unsharp

http://www.benvista.com/main/content...otozoompro_ 1
http://www.benvista.com/main/content...page=downloads
PhotoZoom Pro w/S-Spline XL interpolation algorithm enlarging

CleanerZoomer
http://www.stratopoint.com/czoomer.htm
Of course the digital radar image of 36 looks per pixel is somewhat
better to begin with, as nearly 3D worthy and each raw pixel being
about as real or as truth worthy of pixel as we're going to get, which
sort of makes up for the 225 meter per pixel resolution that's being
enlarged for a better look-see at whatever's most likely associated
with those raw pixels.

http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...-restoration1/
"Red Fox, image from Figure 3 after photoshop unsharp mask, radius =
4.0, 75%, threshold = 3, then another unsharp mask with radius = 2.0,
66%, threshold = 3. This is a about the best I can do with the unsharp
mask tool"

As you can see for yourself, between ADOBE PhotoShop and Adaptive
Richardson-Lucy Iteration there's nothing getting artificially
generated via enlarge/resampling and unsharp applications that created
weird pixels out of nowhere. As long as the raw pixel patterns were
there to behold in the first place, there's nothing that gets software
AI or otherwise created weird in the enlarged images that's
indifferent to whatever those original pixels represent. Of course
with the likes of PhotoShop is where any damn village idiot fool can
just as easily force the original image into distorting everything in
sight, which only proves that such a result can be accomplished if
that's the intended objective.

However, most folks within Usenet's anti-think-tank of naysayland
should as IggyZiggy says, have that word "obfuscate" tattooed to their
forehead, as they quite often intend to live, breathe, eat, and
worship that mostly semitic God of obfuscation by using word games,
something their Third Reich and the likes of our very own resident
LLPOF warlord(GW Bush) and of his puppeteer Dick Cheney are really
good at obfuscating the hell out of most everything.

So, when I've asked of others to share and share alike, as to
providing their own best effort examples of the image pertaining to
Venus that I'd pointed out as of nearly 8 years ago, lo and behold the
brown-nosed obfuscation clowns of Usenet's naysayland kicked into full
topic/author stalking, bashing and banishment action, whit all of
their usual gauntlet of evidence exclusion so as to not rock their
mainstream good ship LOLLIPOP status quo that's clearly more semitic
faith based than not.

We need to take a very close look at Venus, as for giving this
extremely nearby planet proper consideration on behalf of other
intelligent life that once upon a time having been and by rights may
even still be existing/coexisting within that geothermally forced
environment, of their having survived within such a newish worth of
active planetology that not exactly user friendly to the likes of us
naked humans. I'm certainly not speaking of the dumbfounded sorts of
naked humans without a clue other than their terrestrial limited faith-
based analogy towards everything, but rather of either locally evolved
and/or new and improved species as having been imported intelligent
life, that's simply utilizing applied physics and obviously good
technology that's taking the fullest advantage of their applied
physics and local cache of such vast amounts of renewable energy.

There's no argument that Venus in most surface locations is nearly hot
as hell, however, if you can constructively contribute a little
something of image processing, or otherwise on behalf of explaining
the sorts of physics and applied technology that'll function within
such a thermal dynamic worth of planetology, that'll actually survive
within the regular laws of physics (such as the process of the local
makings and sustaining ice), is exactly what I'd appreciate and give
the fullest of credit for whatever talent or expertise you'd care to
share.
--
Brad Guth

Venus is simply an Earth like toasty poptart of a newish planet,
that's getting itself geothermally forced from the bottom up, although
having a POOF City as our interplanetary depot/gateway at Venus L2 is
more than a touch on the cool side. However, if we can't even manage
a mostly robotic Clarke Station within our moon's interactive L1, much
less of anything moon tethered, then even the extremely nearby worth
of the halo orbital energy efficient and much lower gamma radiation
location of our utilizing Venus L2 is never going to happen.

From what's officially offered to us as purely in-house or via
minionship endorsed evidence, I still do not believe that we've
returned safely from having walked on that moon, as there's just way
too many easy enough methods of proof-positive that could and should
have been employed, that would have 100+% nailed that question as an
easily replicated matter of fact, as well as easily accommodated via
computer simulated orbital 3D interactive physics, that is if we in
fact had ever down-range soft landed and having walked on that dusty
moon 6 times w/o so much as a DNA scratch.

So, we'll need that new and improved fleet of Barack Obama shuttles,
along with those fully reusable LRBs, that which at most becomes a
50/50 kind of public/private investment, and that's going to happen w/
o our infamous NASA because, like so much of our old guard cold-war
government that's intent upon global energy domination, it seems they
and of their semitic puppeteers simply can not be trusted with our
hard earned loot or our private parts. So, it's past due for a fresh
start, that is if we can somehow manage to avoid WWIII.

Ponder your way through this one:
A few of us outsiders have been and/or become sufficiently correct
about our naked moon that seems somewhat hollow or at least light
headed (as possibly having a mostly sodium core), in that much of our
terrestrial physics and replicated science that relates to those
spendy fly-by-rocket Apollo missions, and about our reactive/
anticathode moon that's so physically dark, that simply doesn't add up
according to that holy grail of our NASA/Apollo Old Testament.

If we'd landed upon and collectively (US+USSR) having left 171 tonnes
of our mostly metallic crap on that moon, much of it physically
sizable or having become unavoidably impact scattered over a km+
radius (unless that surface debris and dust at impact was simply too
damn thick), whereas you'd think most any GB-SAR obtained image is
unavoidably going to look in places as somewhat like a seriously lit
up Christmas tree parked in the center of an open pit coal mine.

I believe that somewhat old radar imaging resolution via Arecibo is
actually worthy of 20 meters/pixel, and having so much as an empty
beer can within any one of those 20 by 20 meter pixels is in fact
going to light up that given GB-SAR pixel by pixel observation quite
nicely, especially when all of that crystal dry cosmic debris as moon
dust that's surrounding that empty beer can is hardly anything but
radar signal reflective.

Sadly, not even God or those of his/her minion wizards can help the
likes of our MI5/NSA/CIA~NASA's Usenet cesspool of infowar/infomercial
spewing spooks and moles, or so many brown-nosed others of their
pretend atheist kind. Of course otherwise those terrestrial smart
brown-nosed folks of the all-knowing mainstream status quo or bust
(aka Skull and Bones semitic Third Reich) could have always used any
one of those true to life virtual simulations via any number of public
owned supercomputers in order to easily prove myself wrong, though
they've all had nearly 8 years and counting with less than zero/zilch
worth of favorable results so far.

I guess it's still going Usenet 0, Guth 1.

BTW, remote PC/mouse tampering is a federal offence (pretty hard to
miss the per cession "Error Console" reporting and such loss of mouse/
cursor control as so often happening), and yet in spite of this
mainstream of damage-control gauntlet, I've just posted another topic
"To Tell the Truth" for all the warm and fuzzy enjoyment of those
diehard naysayers and brown-nosed minions of the mainstream status
quo, not unlike most others within Usenet.
- Brad Guth


On Nov 24, 11:24 am, BradGuth wrote:
Usenet: rec.photo.digital
Thanks again to our once upon a time "tomcat", for having posted
another link to this updated page ofVenusimages.http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/th...humbnails.html

Some of the most interesting of AI information can be found within
image No.17 from the top left, as being the 225 m/pixel composite
frame of such radar obtained pixels that so happens to include the
robust, rather sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTHVenus',
of which you folks should apply your own PhotoShop resampling/
enlargement of at least 3X, along with whatever unsharp mask filter
plus other image cleaning or treatment options you'd care to apply.
Remember that a purely negative or naysay mindset of a true rusemaster
simply can not accomplish such enlargements without making whatever
image look worse off than it really is. (go figure)
"Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles,Venusfrom Magellan Cycle 1"http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.htmlhttp://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif

If you still can not find this rational community worth of extremely
interesting pixels, then you are not nearly as good at
observationology as you think you are.

Digital photo resampling or enlarging with various pixel interpolation
algorithms are not new nor unused by our NIMA and multiple other spy
and commercial photo agencies. The sorts of freeware or trialware
such as PhotoCleaner, PhotoZoom and CleanerZoomer are just examples
that'll perform as well or better than ADOBE PhotoShop, are each
sufficiently user friendly and as always allows for user options in
order to suit the kinds of results that'll yield the best possible
enlargement without introducing weird distortions or artifacts out of
thin air(sort of speak).

http://www.photocleaner.com
PhotoCleaner w/multiple resize algorithms and automatic unsharp

http://www.benvista.com/main/content...page=downloads
PhotoZoom Pro w/S-Spline XL interpolation algorithm enlarging

CleanerZoomerhttp://www.stratopoint.com/czoomer.htm
Of course the digital radar image of 36 looks per pixel is somewhat
better to begin with, as nearly 3D worthy and each raw pixel being
about as real or as truth worthy of pixel as we're going to get, which
sort of makes up for the 225 meter per pixel resolution that's being
enlarged for a better look-see at whatever's most likely associated
with those raw pixels.

http://www.clarkvision.com/imagedeta...-restoration1/
"Red Fox, image from Figure 3 after photoshop unsharp mask, radius =
4.0, 75%, threshold = 3, then another unsharp mask with radius = 2.0,
66%, threshold = 3. This is a about the best I can do with the unsharp
mask tool"

As you can see for yourself, between ADOBE PhotoShop and Adaptive
Richardson-Lucy Iteration there's nothing getting artificially
generated via enlarge/resampling and unsharp applications that created
weird pixels out of nowhere. As long as the raw pixel patterns were
there to behold in the first place, there's nothing that gets software
AI or otherwise created weird in the enlarged images that's
indifferent to whatever those original pixels represent. Of course
with the likes of PhotoShop is where any damn village idiot fool can
just as easily force the original image into distorting everything in
sight, which only proves that such a result can be accomplished if
that's the intended objective.

However, most folks within Usenet's anti-think-tank of naysayland
should as IggyZiggy says, have that word "obfuscate" tattooed to their
forehead, as they quite often intend to live, breathe, eat, and
worship that mostly semitic God of obfuscation by using word games,
something their Third Reich and the likes of our very own resident
LLPOF warlord(GW Bush) and of his puppeteer Dick Cheney are really
good at obfuscating the hell out of most everything.

So, when I've asked of others to share and share alike, as to
providing their own best effort examples of the image pertaining toVenusthat I'd pointed out as of nearly 8 years ago, lo and behold the
brown-nosed obfuscation clowns of Usenet's naysayland kicked into full
topic/author stalking, bashing and banishment action, whit all of
their usual gauntlet of evidence exclusion so as to not rock their
mainstream good ship LOLLIPOP status quo that's clearly more semitic
faith based than not.

We need to take a very close look atVenus, as for giving this
extremely nearby planet proper consideration on behalf of other
intelligent life that once upon a time having been and by rights may
even still be existing/coexisting within that geothermally forced
environment, of their having survived within such a newish worth of
active planetology that not exactly user friendly to the likes of us
naked humans. I'm certainly not speaking of the dumbfounded sorts of
naked humans without a clue other than their terrestrial limited faith-
based analogy towards everything, but rather of either locally evolved
and/or new and improved species as having been imported intelligent
life, that's simply utilizing applied physics and obviously good
technology that's taking the fullest advantage of their applied
physics and local cache of such vast amounts of renewable energy.

There's no argument thatVenusin most surface locations is nearly hot
as hell, however, if you can constructively contribute a little
something of image processing, or otherwise on behalf of explaining
the sorts of physics and applied technology that'll function within
such a thermal dynamic worth of planetology, that'll actually survive
within the regular laws of physics (such as the process of the local
makings and sustaining ice), is exactly what I'd appreciate and give
the fullest of credit for whatever talent or expertise you'd care to
share.
--
Brad Guth

On Dec 4, 11:48 am, Saul Levy wrote:
Your title just shows that you aren't, Brad. And the content is just
DRIVEL! I see that you're using frootbat's scorecard! lol

Saul Levy

My "title"?

I aren't what?

And you are posting this off-topic infowar crapolla of yours from
which failsafe off-world location?

We take it that you have absolutely nothing pertaining to our moon,
Venus or even on behalf of Earth to offer. Or did I miss a little
something?
- Brad Guth

On Dec 4, 2:51 pm, nightbat wrote:
nightbat wrote

Saul Levy wrote:

Silly Desert Saul

Your title just shows that you aren't, Brad. And the content is just
DRIVEL! I see that you're using frootbat's scorecard! lol

Saul Levy

nightbat

Stop it Saul, now you're upsetting profound science posters with
more of your catch up drivel and mal accusations, so unbecoming of a
good researcher. Science Officers are too busy to baby-sit and hold your
hand just tell the nursing home attendants you need attending. That
desert air must be drying out your brain oh doubting one, oh mercy!
Coffeeboys a fresh cup of hot coffee for our Saul, heaven knows he needs
one.

Saul Levy thinks the regular laws of physics are "DRIVEL" worthy, that
is unless they are fully conditional in order to suit his brown--nosed
kind of NASA/Apollo "DRIVEL".

Saul Levy doesn't even believe in SAR obtained images, especially if
they are of the 36 look per pixel kind. Apparently the more SAR looks
per pixel the less truth worthy such pixels become, and only worse yet
if getting taken at 43 degrees instead of using a 2D limited plan
view.
- Brad Guth

On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 12:02:55PM -0800, BradGuth wrote:
On Dec 4, 11:48 am, Saul Levy wrote:
Your title just shows that you aren't, Brad. And the content is just
DRIVEL! I see that you're using frootbat's scorecard! lol

Saul Levy

My "title"?

I aren't what?

And you are posting this off-topic infowar crapolla of yours from
which failsafe off-world location?

We take it that you have absolutely nothing pertaining to our moon,
Venus or even on behalf of Earth to offer. Or did I miss a little
something?

Yes. You forgot to take a class in basic civility, and they won't even
consider you for the advanced class in civics as a result. Buh-bye.


Regards,

Steve

--
( I've got to hold my train of thought, here, and not get off on some sick,
twisted tangent that will blow any hope of a book deal with a publisher
that doesn't sell off of the back of a pickup truck in the sleazy part of
town )

On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 10:31:57AM -0800, BradGuth wrote:
Venus is simply an Earth like toasty poptart of a newish planet,
[snip]
I guess it's still going Usenet 0, Guth 1.

Sorry, Brad. You lose no matter what the score may appear to be.


Regards,

Steve

--
( I've got to hold my train of thought, here, and not get off on some sick,
twisted tangent that will blow any hope of a book deal with a publisher
that doesn't sell off of the back of a pickup truck in the sleazy part of
town )

On Dec 5, 2:32 pm, "Steve wrote:
On Tue, Dec 04, 2007 at 12:02:55PM -0800, BradGuth wrote:
On Dec 4, 11:48 am, Saul Levy wrote:
Your title just shows that you aren't, Brad. And the content is just
DRIVEL! I see that you're using frootbat's scorecard! lol

Saul Levy

My "title"?

I aren't what?

And you are posting this off-topic infowar crapolla of yours from
which failsafe off-world location?

We take it that you have absolutely nothing pertaining to our moon,
Venus or even on behalf of Earth to offer. Or did I miss a little
something?

Yes. You forgot to take a class in basic civility, and they won't even
consider you for the advanced class in civics as a result. Buh-bye.

Regards,

Steve

If that's what makes you a happy though snookered and fully
dumbfounded camper.
- Brad Guth