Venus is not too hot to touch with the Ovglove

On May 29, 6:47 am, BradGuth wrote:
At losing 20.5 w/m2, Venus is still not the least bit too hot to touch
with the Ovglove, much less of any problem for a composite rigid
airship.

Comparing Earth/Venus is not even a fair game, as to any half smart ET
village idiot, the planet Venus wins every time.

Too bad that Cambridge and the like are too mainstream snookered and
otherwise dumbfounded past the point of no return, as to know about
such things.

Too bad that ADOBE PhotoShop or the likes of digital photographic
enlargement alternatives that are even better, is still so taboo/
nondisclosure rated.

Too bad them pesky laws of physics and of whatever's the best
available science can't function off-world. I obviously didn't know
that such regular laws of physics and of whatever science were so
unusually terrestrial limited.
-BradGuth
-
"whoever controls the past, controls the future" / George Orwell

On Apr 4, 5:07 pm, wrote:



As long as you don't run yourself out of ice cold beer and pizza, I
don't see all that much of a problem.

As long as you've got way more spare/renewable energy at your disposal
than you could possibly know what to do with, and having that nifty
thermal suit made by Ovglove, where's the big-ass insurmountable
problem with taking that hot-foot of a toasty stroll onVenus?

CO2--CO/O2 is not hardly a technical problem, hasn't been for a good
decade or more.

Pure H2O as easily extracted from those somewhat cool nighttime acidic
clouds (above the S8 layer) is simply another mission positive win-
win.

The 65 kg/m3 worth of buoyancy as working along with the 90.5% gravity
is offering a couple of other nifty factors that'll work rather well
for your composite rigid airship (just like on behalf of those
Venusian composite rigid airships).

If you're any damn good at PhotoShop, goto:http://guthvenus.tripod.com/http://g...om/gv-town.htm
or best you start with your very own look-see at the following
official image site:http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif

The 36 look per pixel of that GIF image format starts getting
interesting at being 3X resampled, and then giving it all the best
PhotoShop or whatever else you can muster, although the original GIF
1:1 image was actually good enough for my PhotoShop configured brain
to deductively interpret upon what's most likely artificial as opposed
to what's perfectly natural. 36 looks per pixel is offering a lot of
truthworthy image data to start with, so it's a good one to stick with
rather than dealing with their individual 75 meter/pixel versions as
having combined but four looks per pixel.

Don't try to process the entire image unless you've got one heck of a
nifty PC or MAC. Try clipping out only the small portion of the total
image that's roughly a third up from the bottom and just to the right
of center, as we're talking about utilizing less than 10% or perhaps
even as little as 5% of that primary GIF image, and to process upon
just that much shouldn't traumatise your memory or performance PC or
MAC.

I'll review each of your results, that by rights should become a whole
lot better than mine. Obviously anyone can over/under force those
PhotoShop refinements, well past the point of no return, so don't do
that. My extremely old version of PhotoShop can't accomplish much
better than 8X resampling without losing ground, and besides, we don't
actually require much better than 6X for most others to see most
clearly what I'd interpreted from the original 1:1 format.

Thanks once again to 'tomcat' for also having posted this updated page
ofVenusimages.http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/th...humbnails.html

It's image No.17 from the top left being the one that so happens to
include the robust, sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTHVenus'.
"Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles,Venusfrom Magellan Cycle 1"http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.htm...
-BradGuth- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Venus is not at all too hot to touch with the Ovglove. If our SR-71
can survive 1200 degree F, then where's the big ass insurmountable
technical problem with surviving Venus within our composite rigid
airship?

That's right folks, there has been and may still be other intelligent
life existing/coexisting on Venus, and silly old me, I still think
it's wrong of us for having suppressed or otherwise banished Muslim
oil away from the global market, or that of our having merely taken
such oil away from Muslims, and also having taken nearly a million of
their mostly innocent lives in the process seems a tadbit not so silly
to me.

If we simply can't be honest to ourselves (admitting to our often
faith-based cultivated arrogance, greed, bigotry and subsequent
mistakes), then any hope of accomplishing good relationships with
other species of ETs or even others of our own kind is unlikely, if
not impossible when our very own history is so terribly skewed in
favor of directly benefitting those minority faith-based groups that
insist upon remaining in charge of our private parts.

I mean to keep asking, how totally dumb and dumber do you think other
intelligent life really is?

Do you folks think we're ever going to be able to snooker those
intelligent ETs that simply have to exist/coexist within our universe
and even quite possibly within our own solar system?

If you were such an ET arriving on Earth for the first time; how long
would it take you to discover what a total fiasco farce this 98.5%
fluid world of such over-populated souls, was actually based upon most
anything hocus-pocus or just plain old lies upon lies. I mean, how
totally dumbfounded would you have to be, not to realize that the
worse of our faith-based populations of this screwed up planet have
been such horrific losers, in almost every way imaginable to boot.

Considering what natural resources and the time we've had to work
with, just look at what has been raped out of mother Earth, and of the
subsequent pollutions and soot that are each subsequently adding their
insult to the global warming injury, that's otherwise mostly caused by
way of our moon's gravity and of its nearby orbital tidal energy
that's unavoidably keeping those portions of our 98.5% fluid earth on
the move (inside and out).

BTW, I'll gladly change my tune as soon as the regular laws of physics
apply, and/or whenever the best available science is telling us
otherwise.

My having to uncover the truth about the sick and perverted history of
humanity is just a little extra icing on the cake, though apparently
necessary in order to fully appreciate as to why and of where all of
the naysayism flak is coming from.
-
Brad Guth

On Jul 6, 1:14 pm, BradGuth wrote:
On May 29, 6:47 am, BradGuth wrote:



At losing 20.5 w/m2, Venus is still not the least bit too hot to touch
with the Ovglove, much less of any problem for a composite rigid
airship.

Comparing Earth/Venus is not even a fair game, as to any half smart ET
village idiot, the planet Venus wins every time.

Too bad that Cambridge and the like are too mainstream snookered and
otherwise dumbfounded past the point of no return, as to know about
such things.

Too bad that ADOBE PhotoShop or the likes of digital photographic
enlargement alternatives that are even better, is still so taboo/
nondisclosure rated.

Too bad them pesky laws of physics and of whatever's the best
available science can't function off-world. I obviously didn't know
that such regular laws of physics and of whatever science were so
unusually terrestrial limited.
-BradGuth
-
"whoever controls the past, controls the future" / George Orwell

On Apr 4, 5:07 pm, wrote:

As long as you don't run yourself out of ice cold beer and pizza, I
don't see all that much of a problem.

As long as you've got way more spare/renewable energy at your disposal
than you could possibly know what to do with, and having that nifty
thermal suit made by Ovglove, where's the big-ass insurmountable
problem with taking that hot-foot of a toasty stroll onVenus?

CO2--CO/O2 is not hardly a technical problem, hasn't been for a good
decade or more.

Pure H2O as easily extracted from those somewhat cool nighttime acidic
clouds (above the S8 layer) is simply another mission positive win-
win.

The 65 kg/m3 worth of buoyancy as working along with the 90.5% gravity
is offering a couple of other nifty factors that'll work rather well
for your composite rigid airship (just like on behalf of those
Venusian composite rigid airships).

If you're any damn good at PhotoShop, goto:http://guthvenus.tripod.com/http://g...om/gv-town.htm
or best you start with your very own look-see at the following
official image site:http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif

The 36 look per pixel of that GIF image format starts getting
interesting at being 3X resampled, and then giving it all the best
PhotoShop or whatever else you can muster, although the original GIF
1:1 image was actually good enough for my PhotoShop configured brain
to deductively interpret upon what's most likely artificial as opposed
to what's perfectly natural. 36 looks per pixel is offering a lot of
truthworthy image data to start with, so it's a good one to stick with
rather than dealing with their individual 75 meter/pixel versions as
having combined but four looks per pixel.

Don't try to process the entire image unless you've got one heck of a
nifty PC or MAC. Try clipping out only the small portion of the total
image that's roughly a third up from the bottom and just to the right
of center, as we're talking about utilizing less than 10% or perhaps
even as little as 5% of that primary GIF image, and to process upon
just that much shouldn't traumatise your memory or performance PC or
MAC.

I'll review each of your results, that by rights should become a whole
lot better than mine. Obviously anyone can over/under force those
PhotoShop refinements, well past the point of no return, so don't do
that. My extremely old version of PhotoShop can't accomplish much
better than 8X resampling without losing ground, and besides, we don't
actually require much better than 6X for most others to see most
clearly what I'd interpreted from the original 1:1 format.

Thanks once again to 'tomcat' for also having posted this updated page
ofVenusimages.http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/th...humbnails.html

It's image No.17 from the top left being the one that so happens to
include the robust, sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTHVenus'.
"Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles,Venusfrom Magellan Cycle 1"http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.htm...
-BradGuth- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Venus is not at all too hot to touch with the Ovglove. If our SR-71
can survive 1200 degree F, then where's the big ass insurmountable
technical problem with surviving Venus within our composite rigid
airship?

This is going to go right over your head, but it's an answer to
your question anyway.

Your computer has a cooling fan in it. Because of that, components
inside the computer can get very hot (let's say 180 F) and
yet not cause the computer's disk or other heat-sensitive
components to cook.

Yet if the entire computer were in a 180 F room, the cooling
fan would be useless and the computer would cook.

Why do you think that is true?

- Randy

On Jul 6, 10:18 am, Randy Poe wrote:
On Jul 6, 1:14 pm, BradGuth wrote:





On May 29, 6:47 am, BradGuth wrote:

At losing 20.5 w/m2, Venus is still not the least bit too hot to touch
with the Ovglove, much less of any problem for a composite rigid
airship.

Comparing Earth/Venus is not even a fair game, as to any half smart ET
village idiot, the planet Venus wins every time.

Too bad that Cambridge and the like are too mainstream snookered and
otherwise dumbfounded past the point of no return, as to know about
such things.

Too bad that ADOBE PhotoShop or the likes of digital photographic
enlargement alternatives that are even better, is still so taboo/
nondisclosure rated.

Too bad them pesky laws of physics and of whatever's the best
available science can't function off-world. I obviously didn't know
that such regular laws of physics and of whatever science were so
unusually terrestrial limited.
-BradGuth
-
"whoever controls the past, controls the future" / George Orwell

On Apr 4, 5:07 pm, wrote:

As long as you don't run yourself out of ice cold beer and pizza, I
don't see all that much of a problem.

As long as you've got way more spare/renewable energy at your disposal
than you could possibly know what to do with, and having that nifty
thermal suit made by Ovglove, where's the big-ass insurmountable
problem with taking that hot-foot of a toasty stroll onVenus?

CO2--CO/O2 is not hardly a technical problem, hasn't been for a good
decade or more.

Pure H2O as easily extracted from those somewhat cool nighttime acidic
clouds (above the S8 layer) is simply another mission positive win-
win.

The 65 kg/m3 worth of buoyancy as working along with the 90.5% gravity
is offering a couple of other nifty factors that'll work rather well
for your composite rigid airship (just like on behalf of those
Venusian composite rigid airships).

If you're any damn good at PhotoShop, goto:http://guthvenus.tripod.com/http://g...om/gv-town.htm
or best you start with your very own look-see at the following
official image site:http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif

The 36 look per pixel of that GIF image format starts getting
interesting at being 3X resampled, and then giving it all the best
PhotoShop or whatever else you can muster, although the original GIF
1:1 image was actually good enough for my PhotoShop configured brain
to deductively interpret upon what's most likely artificial as opposed
to what's perfectly natural. 36 looks per pixel is offering a lot of
truthworthy image data to start with, so it's a good one to stick with
rather than dealing with their individual 75 meter/pixel versions as
having combined but four looks per pixel.

Don't try to process the entire image unless you've got one heck of a
nifty PC or MAC. Try clipping out only the small portion of the total
image that's roughly a third up from the bottom and just to the right
of center, as we're talking about utilizing less than 10% or perhaps
even as little as 5% of that primary GIF image, and to process upon
just that much shouldn't traumatise your memory or performance PC or
MAC.

I'll review each of your results, that by rights should become a whole
lot better than mine. Obviously anyone can over/under force those
PhotoShop refinements, well past the point of no return, so don't do
that. My extremely old version of PhotoShop can't accomplish much
better than 8X resampling without losing ground, and besides, we don't
actually require much better than 6X for most others to see most
clearly what I'd interpreted from the original 1:1 format.

Thanks once again to 'tomcat' for also having posted this updated page
ofVenusimages.http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/th...humbnails.html

It's image No.17 from the top left being the one that so happens to
include the robust, sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTHVenus'.
"Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles,Venusfrom Magellan Cycle 1"http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.htm...
-BradGuth- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Venus is not at all too hot to touch with the Ovglove. If our SR-71
can survive 1200 degree F, then where's the big ass insurmountable
technical problem with surviving Venus within our composite rigid
airship?

This is going to go right over your head, but it's an answer to
your question anyway.

Your computer has a cooling fan in it. Because of that, components
inside the computer can get very hot (let's say 180 F) and
yet not cause the computer's disk or other heat-sensitive
components to cook.

Yet if the entire computer were in a 180 F room, the cooling
fan would be useless and the computer would cook.

Why do you think that is true?

- Randy- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

With unlimited local energy (how many spare teraWatts would you
like?); we could hold the future Winter Olympics on Venus, and then
some.

What's insurmountable when there's such unlimited and otherwise 100%
renewable energy that's already there to behold?

Did you miss out on physics-duh-101?

BTW, if I were every bit as dumbfounded and otherwise as naysay
snookered to death as yourself, I would not try using a standard PC on
Venus, although within the cool as you like composite rigid airship or
much less our extremely cool POOF City at VL2 isn't any problem
whatsoever.

Ever heard of a cold cathode vacuume tube? It seems they can be made
extremely small, obviously energy efficient and good for perhaps
better than twice whatever that Venusian environment has to share.
That cold cathode has a 1600 year half life to boot.
-
Brad Guth

On Jul 6, 2:02 pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 6, 10:18 am, Randy Poe wrote:
Says I:
This is going to go right over your head...

Says Brad:
whoooooosh

- Randy

On Jul 6, 10:14 am, BradGuth wrote:
On May 29, 6:47 am, BradGuth wrote:





At losing 20.5 w/m2, Venus is still not the least bit too hot to touch
with the Ovglove, much less of any problem for a composite rigid
airship.

Comparing Earth/Venus is not even a fair game, as to any half smart ET
village idiot, the planet Venus wins every time.

Too bad that Cambridge and the like are too mainstream snookered and
otherwise dumbfounded past the point of no return, as to know about
such things.

Too bad that ADOBE PhotoShop or the likes of digital photographic
enlargement alternatives that are even better, is still so taboo/
nondisclosure rated.

Too bad them pesky laws of physics and of whatever's the best
available science can't function off-world. I obviously didn't know
that such regular laws of physics and of whatever science were so
unusually terrestrial limited.
-BradGuth
-
"whoever controls the past, controls the future" / George Orwell

On Apr 4, 5:07 pm, wrote:

As long as you don't run yourself out of ice cold beer and pizza, I
don't see all that much of a problem.

As long as you've got way more spare/renewable energy at your disposal
than you could possibly know what to do with, and having that nifty
thermal suit made by Ovglove, where's the big-ass insurmountable
problem with taking that hot-foot of a toasty stroll onVenus?

CO2--CO/O2 is not hardly a technical problem, hasn't been for a good
decade or more.

Pure H2O as easily extracted from those somewhat cool nighttime acidic
clouds (above the S8 layer) is simply another mission positive win-
win.

The 65 kg/m3 worth of buoyancy as working along with the 90.5% gravity
is offering a couple of other nifty factors that'll work rather well
for your composite rigid airship (just like on behalf of those
Venusian composite rigid airships).

If you're any damn good at PhotoShop, goto:http://guthvenus.tripod.com/http://g...om/gv-town.htm
or best you start with your very own look-see at the following
official image site:http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif

The 36 look per pixel of that GIF image format starts getting
interesting at being 3X resampled, and then giving it all the best
PhotoShop or whatever else you can muster, although the original GIF
1:1 image was actually good enough for my PhotoShop configured brain
to deductively interpret upon what's most likely artificial as opposed
to what's perfectly natural. 36 looks per pixel is offering a lot of
truthworthy image data to start with, so it's a good one to stick with
rather than dealing with their individual 75 meter/pixel versions as
having combined but four looks per pixel.

Don't try to process the entire image unless you've got one heck of a
nifty PC or MAC. Try clipping out only the small portion of the total
image that's roughly a third up from the bottom and just to the right
of center, as we're talking about utilizing less than 10% or perhaps
even as little as 5% of that primary GIF image, and to process upon
just that much shouldn't traumatise your memory or performance PC or
MAC.

I'll review each of your results, that by rights should become a whole
lot better than mine. Obviously anyone can over/under force those
PhotoShop refinements, well past the point of no return, so don't do
that. My extremely old version of PhotoShop can't accomplish much
better than 8X resampling without losing ground, and besides, we don't
actually require much better than 6X for most others to see most
clearly what I'd interpreted from the original 1:1 format.

Thanks once again to 'tomcat' for also having posted this updated page
ofVenusimages.http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/th...humbnails.html

It's image No.17 from the top left being the one that so happens to
include the robust, sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTHVenus'.
"Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles,Venusfrom Magellan Cycle 1"http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.htm...
-BradGuth- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Venus is not at all too hot to touch with the Ovglove. If our SR-71
can survive 1200 degree F, then where's the big ass insurmountable
technical problem with surviving Venus within our composite rigid
airship?

That's right folks, there has been and may still be other intelligent
life existing/coexisting on Venus, and silly old me, I still think
it's wrong of us for having suppressed or otherwise banished Muslim
oil away from the global market, or that of our having merely taken
such oil away from Muslims, and also having taken nearly a million of
their mostly innocent lives in the process seems a tadbit not so silly
to me.

If we simply can't be honest to ourselves (admitting to our often
faith-based cultivated arrogance, greed, bigotry and subsequent
mistakes), then any hope of accomplishing good relationships with
other species of ETs or even others of our own kind is unlikely, if
not impossible when our very own history is so terribly skewed in
favor of directly benefitting those minority faith-based groups that
insist upon remaining in charge of our private parts.

I mean to keep asking, how totally dumb and dumber do you think other
intelligent life really is?

Do you folks think we're ever going to be able to snooker those
intelligent ETs that simply have to exist/coexist within our universe
and even quite possibly within our own solar system?

If you were such an ET arriving on Earth for the first time; how long
would it take you to discover what a total fiasco farce this 98.5%
fluid world of such over-populated souls, was actually based upon most
anything hocus-pocus or just plain old lies upon lies. I mean, how
totally dumbfounded would you have to be, not to realize that the
worse of our faith-based populations of this screwed up planet have
been such horrific losers, in almost every way imaginable to boot.

Considering what natural resources and the time we've had to work
with, just look at what has been raped out of mother Earth, and of the
subsequent pollutions and soot that are each subsequently adding their
insult to the global warming injury, that's otherwise mostly caused by
way of our moon's gravity and of its nearby orbital tidal energy
that's unavoidably keeping those portions of our 98.5% fluid earth on
the move (inside and out).

BTW, I'll gladly change my tune as soon as the regular laws of physics
apply, and/or whenever the best available science is telling us
otherwise.

My having to uncover the truth about the sick and perverted history of
humanity is just a little extra icing on the cake, though apparently
necessary in order to fully appreciate as to why and of where all of
the naysayism flak is coming from.
-
Brad Guth- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The naysayism swarm mindset of this GOOGLE/NOVA Usenet from Zion hell
on Earth is nearly all Zionism orchestrated from start to finish, with
a few other faith-based cults picking up the rear (meaning as official
Zion pooper scoopers).

For a perfectly good example of what's technically doable:
With unlimited local energy (how many spare teraWatts would you folks
like?); as such we could hold the future of our Winter Olympics on
Venus, and then some.

What's all that insurmountable when there's such unlimited and
otherwise 100% renewable energy that's already there to behold?

Did each of you silly naysay folks entirely miss out on your doctorate
of physics-duh-101?

BTW, if I were every bit as dumbfounded and otherwise as naysay
snookered to death as yourself, as such I would not try using the
likes of any standard PC on Venus, although within the cool as you
like composite rigid airship or much less our extremely cool POOF City
at VL2 isn't any problem whatsoever.

Have any of you rusemasters of naysayism ever heard of the cold
cathode vacuume tube? It seems they can be made extremely small,
obviously energy efficient and good for perhaps better than twice
whatever that Venusian environment has to share. That cold cathode
has a 1600 year half life to boot.

There's almost no limits as to the structural byouancy derived as
hauling capacity of our composite rigid airship, as well as offering
lots of internal volume of cooled habitat to spare. (no shortages of
ice cold beer on this mission)

Of locally produced thermal insulation, that's also every bit as
structural as you'd like to make it, is clearly not the least bit
insurmountable of such a local product of basalt obtaining R256/m, or
even as good as R1024/m.
-
Brad Guth

On Jul 6, 3:07 pm, BradGuth wrote:
snipped rant about Venus

What is your problem with Venus and the moon? You are obsessed by
showing the "superiority" of Venus (despite its high temperature,
crushing atmosphere, and sulfuric acid clouds) over the "dark and
nasty" and "good for nothing" moon.

Your obsessions suggest that you view Venus and the moon as
projections of your fantasies about women.

Don't walk, RUN to the nearest psychiatrist.

On Jul 6, 2:15 pm, The_Man wrote:
On Jul 6, 3:07 pm, BradGuth wrote:
snipped rant about Venus

What is your problem with Venus and the moon? You are obsessed by
showing the "superiority" of Venus (despite its high temperature,
crushing atmosphere, and sulfuric acid clouds) over the "dark and
nasty" and "good for nothing" moon.

Your obsessions suggest that you view Venus and the moon as
projections of your fantasies about women.

Don't walk, RUN to the nearest psychiatrist.

We see that you still have no such 3D interactive simulator as backing
up anything you had to share, from which to view upon the likes of
Venus while situated upon our moon.

Is that another Zion taboo/nondisclosure sort of thing?
-
Brad Guth

On Jul 6, 12:07 pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Jul 6, 10:14 am, BradGuth wrote:





On May 29, 6:47 am, BradGuth wrote:

At losing 20.5 w/m2, Venus is still not the least bit too hot to touch
with the Ovglove, much less of any problem for a composite rigid
airship.

Comparing Earth/Venus is not even a fair game, as to any half smart ET
village idiot, the planet Venus wins every time.

Too bad that Cambridge and the like are too mainstream snookered and
otherwise dumbfounded past the point of no return, as to know about
such things.

Too bad that ADOBE PhotoShop or the likes of digital photographic
enlargement alternatives that are even better, is still so taboo/
nondisclosure rated.

Too bad them pesky laws of physics and of whatever's the best
available science can't function off-world. I obviously didn't know
that such regular laws of physics and of whatever science were so
unusually terrestrial limited.
-BradGuth
-
"whoever controls the past, controls the future" / George Orwell

On Apr 4, 5:07 pm, wrote:

As long as you don't run yourself out of ice cold beer and pizza, I
don't see all that much of a problem.

As long as you've got way more spare/renewable energy at your disposal
than you could possibly know what to do with, and having that nifty
thermal suit made by Ovglove, where's the big-ass insurmountable
problem with taking that hot-foot of a toasty stroll onVenus?

CO2--CO/O2 is not hardly a technical problem, hasn't been for a good
decade or more.

Pure H2O as easily extracted from those somewhat cool nighttime acidic
clouds (above the S8 layer) is simply another mission positive win-
win.

The 65 kg/m3 worth of buoyancy as working along with the 90.5% gravity
is offering a couple of other nifty factors that'll work rather well
for your composite rigid airship (just like on behalf of those
Venusian composite rigid airships).

If you're any damn good at PhotoShop, goto:http://guthvenus.tripod.com/http://g...om/gv-town.htm
or best you start with your very own look-see at the following
official image site:http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif

The 36 look per pixel of that GIF image format starts getting
interesting at being 3X resampled, and then giving it all the best
PhotoShop or whatever else you can muster, although the original GIF
1:1 image was actually good enough for my PhotoShop configured brain
to deductively interpret upon what's most likely artificial as opposed
to what's perfectly natural. 36 looks per pixel is offering a lot of
truthworthy image data to start with, so it's a good one to stick with
rather than dealing with their individual 75 meter/pixel versions as
having combined but four looks per pixel.

Don't try to process the entire image unless you've got one heck of a
nifty PC or MAC. Try clipping out only the small portion of the total
image that's roughly a third up from the bottom and just to the right
of center, as we're talking about utilizing less than 10% or perhaps
even as little as 5% of that primary GIF image, and to process upon
just that much shouldn't traumatise your memory or performance PC or
MAC.

I'll review each of your results, that by rights should become a whole
lot better than mine. Obviously anyone can over/under force those
PhotoShop refinements, well past the point of no return, so don't do
that. My extremely old version of PhotoShop can't accomplish much
better than 8X resampling without losing ground, and besides, we don't
actually require much better than 6X for most others to see most
clearly what I'd interpreted from the original 1:1 format.

Thanks once again to 'tomcat' for also having posted this updated page
ofVenusimages.http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/th...humbnails.html

It's image No.17 from the top left being the one that so happens to
include the robust, sizable and somewhat complex community of 'GUTHVenus'.
"Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles,Venusfrom Magellan Cycle 1"http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.htm...
-BradGuth- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Venus is not at all too hot to touch with the Ovglove. If our SR-71
can survive 1200 degree F, then where's the big ass insurmountable
technical problem with surviving Venus within our composite rigid
airship?

That's right folks, there has been and may still be other intelligent
life existing/coexisting on Venus, and silly old me, I still think
it's wrong of us for having suppressed or otherwise banished Muslim
oil away from the global market, or that of our having merely taken
such oil away from Muslims, and also having taken nearly a million of
their mostly innocent lives in the process seems a tadbit not so silly
to me.

If we simply can't be honest to ourselves (admitting to our often
faith-based cultivated arrogance, greed, bigotry and subsequent
mistakes), then any hope of accomplishing good relationships with
other species of ETs or even others of our own kind is unlikely, if
not impossible when our very own history is so terribly skewed in
favor of directly benefitting those minority faith-based groups that
insist upon remaining in charge of our private parts.

I mean to keep asking, how totally dumb and dumber do you think other
intelligent life really is?

Do you folks think we're ever going to be able to snooker those
intelligent ETs that simply have to exist/coexist within our universe
and even quite possibly within our own solar system?

If you were such an ET arriving on Earth for the first time; how long
would it take you to discover what a total fiasco farce this 98.5%
fluid world of such over-populated souls, was actually based upon most
anything hocus-pocus or just plain old lies upon lies. I mean, how
totally dumbfounded would you have to be, not to realize that the
worse of our faith-based populations of this screwed up planet have
been such horrific losers, in almost every way imaginable to boot.

Considering what natural resources and the time we've had to work
with, just look at what has been raped out of mother Earth, and of the
subsequent pollutions and soot that are each subsequently adding their
insult to the global warming injury, that's otherwise mostly caused by
way of our moon's gravity and of its nearby orbital tidal energy
that's unavoidably keeping those portions of our 98.5% fluid earth on
the move (inside and out).

BTW, I'll gladly change my tune as soon as the regular laws of physics
apply, and/or whenever the best available science is telling us
otherwise.

My having to uncover the truth about the sick and perverted history of
humanity is just a little extra icing on the cake, though apparently
necessary in order to fully appreciate as to why and of where all of
the naysayism flak is coming from.
-
Brad Guth- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The naysayism swarm mindset of this GOOGLE/NOVA Usenet from Zion hell
on Earth is nearly all Zionism orchestrated from start to finish, with
a few other faith-based cults picking up the rear (meaning as official
Zion pooper scoopers).

For a perfectly good example of what's technically doable:
With unlimited local energy (how many spare teraWatts would you folks
like?); as such we could hold the future of our Winter Olympics on
Venus, and then some.

What's all that insurmountable when there's such unlimited and
otherwise 100% renewable energy that's already there to behold?

Did each of you silly naysay folks entirely miss out on your doctorate
of physics-duh-101?

BTW, if I were every bit as dumbfounded and otherwise as naysay
snookered to death as yourself, as such I would not try using the
likes of any standard PC on Venus, although within the cool as you
like composite rigid airship or much less our extremely cool POOF City
at VL2 isn't any problem whatsoever.

Have any of you rusemasters of naysayism ever heard of the cold
cathode vacuume tube? It seems they can be made extremely small,
obviously energy efficient and good for perhaps better than twice
whatever that Venusian environment has to share. That cold cathode
has a 1600 year half life to boot.

There's almost no limits as to the structural byouancy derived as
hauling capacity of our composite rigid airship, as well as offering
lots of internal volume of cooled habitat to spare. (no shortages of
ice cold beer on this mission)

Of locally produced thermal insulation, that's also every bit as
structural as you'd like to make it, is clearly not the least bit
insurmountable of such a local product of basalt obtaining R256/m, or
even as good as R1024/m.
-
Brad Guth- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Since each of our warm and fuzzy naysayers and obviously our local
swarm intelligence worth of rusemasters continually manage to forget
mentioning that Venus actually has teratonnes (possibly hundreds of
teratonnes) worth of spare water, as efficiently sequestered within
them thar acidic clouds, and once again that's not even including all
the ice cold beer imported by or on behalf of those smart enough to
survive as locals or as deployed ETs.

Is it ever polite to ask; how little h2o is actually necessary for
sustaining an advanced form of intelligent carbon life? (think
exoskeletal)

If there's not too many Venusian souls in need of cold beer, whereas
the existing geothermal toasty and atmosphertic pressure differential
as energy resources of Venus are going to more than provide for their
needs. Personally, I wouldn't expect to uncover a Venus population of
millions, whereas more than likely a few thousand could become the
magic number, down to a few hundred as homestead or mining place
savers, especially of few souls if most of their really hard work is
accomplished via robots.

I'm thinking of at most not more than a liter, as perhaps their making
do with a 6pack if not otherwise sucking down two of those extra large
and fortified beers worth of h2o per 100 kg Venusian per 24 hours,
whereas this exoskeletal Venusian isn't hardly going to sweat,
especially not at nearly 100 bar, and you likely wouldn't dare pull it
out in order **** off the back porch.

Without hardly any sweat glands, you'd think a liter of beer might
outlast 100 hours per hard working 100 kg Venusian. So, where's the
actual demand for all of that h2o? (that's not ever going anywhere
except back up into those acidic clouds, where it can once again be
easily extracted on demand). At least that's entirely within the
regular laws of physics, and otherwise based upon the best available
science.

..01 liter/hr of h2o or beer per 100 kg exoskeletal soul seems rather
doable, don't you think?

Of obtaining that initial fresh supply of h2o from those acidic
clouds, the making of such into beer, and of getting that beer cold
and keeping it cold is going to demand energy, but once again there's
absolutely no such shortage of said energy as long as you're on Venus,
and of Venus cloud sucking might even be an ongoing sport, much like
skydiving is here on Earth.
-
Brad Guth

On Jul 5, 8:37 pm, John Griffin wrote:
BradGuth wrote:
Seems a tadbit odd there's so little honest Usenet motivation
on behalf of Venus, as though Venus is supposedly too hot to
touch with that Ovglove, when in fact it isn't nearly half as
hot as a terrestrial craft doing Mach 5 (1700 m/s).

Even that old SR-71 Blackbird at the subfreezing and humanly
lethal altitude of 85,000', making mach 3.2 creates an outter
skin of 1200 degrees F, thus geting itself much hotter than
Venus.

So, where's the big insurmountable deal about the geothermally
active environment of Venus being a whole lot less hot than
what we otherwise deal with and obviously survive on a regular
terrestrial basis all the time?

That was extra stupid, Crazy Brad. You obviously don't
understand that temperature and heat are not the same thing.

You know better than that, as well as you know the honest jest of what
I'm driving at.
-
Brad Guth

The original and full context of this topic "Venus is not too hot to
touch with the Ovglove" is in cam.misc
http://groups.google.com/group/cam.m...2883f520?hl=en

Since each of our warm and fuzzy naysayers and obviously our local
swarm intelligence worth of official rusemasters continually manage to
forget mentioning that Venus actually has teratonnes (possibly
hundreds of teratonnes) worth of spare water, as efficiently
sequestered within them thar acidic clouds, and once again that's not
even including all the ice cold beer imported by or on behalf of those
smart enough to survive as locals or as deployed ETs.

Is it ever polite to ask; how little h2o is actually necessary for
sustaining an advanced form of intelligent carbon life? (think
exoskeletal)

If there's not too many Venusian souls in need of cold beer, whereas
the existing geothermal toasty and atmosphertic pressure differential
as energy resources of Venus are going to more than provide for their
needs. Personally, I wouldn't expect to uncover a Venus population of
millions, whereas more than likely a few thousand could become the
magic number, down to a few hundred as homestead or mining place
savers, especially of few souls if most of their really hard work is
accomplished via robots.

I'm thinking of at most not more than a liter, as perhaps their making
do with a 6pack if not otherwise sucking down two of those extra large
and fortified beers worth of h2o per 100 kg Venusian per 24 hours,
whereas this exoskeletal Venusian isn't hardly going to sweat,
especially not at nearly 100 bar, and you likely wouldn't dare pull it
out in order **** off the back porch.

Without hardly any sweat glands, you'd think a liter of beer might
outlast 100 hours per hard working 100 kg Venusian. So, where's the
actual demand for all of that h2o? (that's not ever going anywhere
except back up into those acidic clouds, where it can once again be
easily extracted on demand). At least that's entirely within the
regular laws of physics, and otherwise based upon the best available
science.

..01 liter/hr of h2o or beer per 100 kg exoskeletal soul seems rather
doable, don't you think?

Of rather easily obtaining that initial fresh supply of h2o from those
acidic clouds, the making of such into beer, and of getting that beer
cold and keeping it cold is going to demand energy, but once again
there's absolutely no such shortage of said energy as long as you're
on Venus, and of Venus cloud sucking might even be an ongoing sport,
much like skydiving is here on Earth.
-
Brad Guth