A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » History
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

The Moon Has Helium!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old September 12th 12, 01:35 PM posted to sci.space.history
Dean
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 323
Default The Moon Has Helium!

On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 5:12:16 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:
On Sep 10, 5:13*am, Dean wrote:

On Sunday, September 9, 2012 10:42:36 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:


On Sep 9, 11:18*am, Dean wrote:




You are certifiably insane.




Your inability to contribute any sort of deductive science as to the




geology and metallicity of our moon, is proof positive that you and




others of your kind feel like you are being put at risk by way of my




topics and replies.




No, your topics consist of cutting and pasting technical statements to generate an apparently educated personna. You've had your arguments shot down so many times that the flames are continuous.




At least my flames are honestly independent and without ulterior

motives, whereas I bet your flames have a status-quo stench about

them.



Can you tell us what sort of minerals or raw elements make any of

these colors?



The moon is not monochromatic nor inert:

Moon’s natural surface colors are those of all the perfectly natural

minerals as they unavoidably react to the visible and UV spectrum, as

only better viewed with having their natural color/hue saturation

cranked up, as otherwise there’s no false or artificial colors added.


Define "raw element"?
  #12  
Old September 13th 12, 01:12 AM posted to sci.space.history
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default The Moon Has Helium!

On Sep 12, 5:35*am, Dean wrote:
On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 5:12:16 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:
On Sep 10, 5:13*am, Dean wrote:


On Sunday, September 9, 2012 10:42:36 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:


On Sep 9, 11:18*am, Dean wrote:


You are certifiably insane.


Your inability to contribute any sort of deductive science as to the


geology and metallicity of our moon, is proof positive that you and


others of your kind feel like you are being put at risk by way of my


topics and replies.


No, your topics consist of cutting and pasting technical statements to generate an apparently educated personna. You've had your arguments shot down so many times that the flames are continuous.


At least my flames are honestly independent and without ulterior


motives, whereas I bet your flames have a status-quo stench about


them.


Can you tell us what sort of minerals or raw elements make any of


these colors?


The moon is not monochromatic nor inert:


Moon’s natural *surface colors are those of all the perfectly natural


minerals as they unavoidably react to the visible and UV spectrum, as


only better viewed with having their natural color/hue saturation


cranked up, as otherwise there’s no false or artificial colors added.


Define "raw element"?


Helium, uranium, thorium, radium, titanium, iron, sodium and so on.
  #13  
Old September 13th 12, 01:16 PM posted to sci.space.history
Dean
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 323
Default The Moon Has Helium!

On Wednesday, September 12, 2012 8:12:10 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:
On Sep 12, 5:35*am, Dean wrote:

On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 5:12:16 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:


On Sep 10, 5:13*am, Dean wrote:




On Sunday, September 9, 2012 10:42:36 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:




On Sep 9, 11:18*am, Dean wrote:




You are certifiably insane.




Your inability to contribute any sort of deductive science as to the




geology and metallicity of our moon, is proof positive that you and




others of your kind feel like you are being put at risk by way of my




topics and replies.




No, your topics consist of cutting and pasting technical statements to generate an apparently educated personna. You've had your arguments shot down so many times that the flames are continuous.




At least my flames are honestly independent and without ulterior




motives, whereas I bet your flames have a status-quo stench about




them.




Can you tell us what sort of minerals or raw elements make any of




these colors?




The moon is not monochromatic nor inert:




Moon’s natural *surface colors are those of all the perfectly natural




minerals as they unavoidably react to the visible and UV spectrum, as




only better viewed with having their natural color/hue saturation




cranked up, as otherwise there’s no false or artificial colors added.




Define "raw element"?




Helium, uranium, thorium, radium, titanium, iron, sodium and so on.


Other than helium, I doubt if any of those are present in raw form.
  #14  
Old September 15th 12, 12:38 AM posted to sci.space.history
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default The Moon Has Helium!

On Sep 13, 5:16*am, Dean wrote:
On Wednesday, September 12, 2012 8:12:10 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:
On Sep 12, 5:35*am, Dean wrote:


On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 5:12:16 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:


On Sep 10, 5:13*am, Dean wrote:


On Sunday, September 9, 2012 10:42:36 PM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:


On Sep 9, 11:18*am, Dean wrote:


You are certifiably insane.


Your inability to contribute any sort of deductive science as to the


geology and metallicity of our moon, is proof positive that you and


others of your kind feel like you are being put at risk by way of my


topics and replies.


No, your topics consist of cutting and pasting technical statements to generate an apparently educated personna. You've had your arguments shot down so many times that the flames are continuous.


At least my flames are honestly independent and without ulterior


motives, whereas I bet your flames have a status-quo stench about


them.


Can you tell us what sort of minerals or raw elements make any of


these colors?


The moon is not monochromatic nor inert:


Moon’s natural *surface colors are those of all the perfectly natural


minerals as they unavoidably react to the visible and UV spectrum, as


only better viewed with having their natural color/hue saturation


cranked up, as otherwise there’s no false or artificial colors added.


Define "raw element"?


Helium, uranium, thorium, radium, titanium, iron, sodium and so on.


Other than helium, I doubt if any of those are present in raw form.


Those raw geology colors of our physically dark moon would suggest
otherwise. Are you suggesting that visible plus UV illumination
doesn't yield any secondary/recoil colors of what sort of minerals are
there to behold?

The moon is not monochromatic nor inert:
Moon’s natural surface colors are those of all the perfectly natural
minerals as they unavoidably react to the visible and UV spectrum, as
only better viewed with having their natural color/hue saturation
cranked up, as otherwise there’s no false or artificial colors added.
http://spaceweather.com/submissions/...1346444660.jpg
http://www.spaceweather.com/swpod200...4dnmol44vuaf43


  #15  
Old September 15th 12, 02:56 AM posted to sci.space.history
Dean
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 323
Default The Moon Has Helium!

All of those elements are highly reactive and will not exist in "raw" uncombined forms.
  #16  
Old September 15th 12, 11:01 PM posted to sci.space.history
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default The Moon Has Helium!

On Sep 14, 6:56*pm, Dean wrote:
All of those elements are highly reactive and will not exist in "raw" uncombined forms.


That's all good to know. If there are not minerals and elements of
natural moon geology and deposits (because the Apollo moon was inert
and monochromatic), then tell us what those combined reactive elements
represent by their creating such natural colors.

For example, does that naked surface of our moon have any cobalt?

If there's no cobalt, then what's creating its gamma?

What sort of He outflux (kg/sec) are you suggesting about our naked
moon?

http://spaceweather.com/submissions/...1346444660.jpg
http://www.spaceweather.com/swpod200...4dnmol44vuaf43
  #17  
Old September 16th 12, 10:47 PM posted to sci.space.history
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default The Moon Has Helium!

On Sep 14, 6:56*pm, Dean wrote:
All of those elements are highly reactive and will not exist in "raw" uncombined forms.


That's all good to know. Actually our moon appears to offer any
number of raw elements that are reactive enough to offer their
respective color by way of being illuminated by those photons of
natural and UV enhancement. The ionized sodium is certainly one such
element that's detected as a sparse cloud all the way out to 9r, plus
otherwise our moon offers an impressive solar wind blown comet like
tail of 900,000 km worth of its sodium. No doubt it's helium gets
blown and/or dispersed much easier and a whole lot further than
sodium.

However, If there are not minerals and elements of any natural moon
geology and deposits (because the Apollo moon was so unusually inert
and monochromatic), then tell us what those combined reactive elements
represent by way of their creating such natural colors that are easily
recorded.

For example, does that naked and physically dark surface of our moon
have any cobalt?

If there's no cobalt, then what's creating its gamma?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Moon_egret.jpg

What sort of He outflux (kg/sec) are you suggesting about our naked
moon?

http://spaceweather.com/submissions/...izadeh-fac_134...
http://www.spaceweather.com/swpod200...Licchelli-Satu...
It doesn't seem to offer any shortage of thorium:
http://www.sciencephoto.com/media/325400/enlarge
http://forum.worldwindcentral.com/sh...ad.php?t=20094

Why is our Apollo moon so much less solar wind and cosmic radiation
worthy than our Van Allen belts?

Is the extremely high electrostatic charge keeping those solar wind
charged and cosmic radiation particles from being attracted to its
gravity, that's offering several trillion fold greater attraction than
the same volume of Van Allen belt has to offer?

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”
  #18  
Old September 18th 12, 03:23 PM posted to sci.space.history
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default The Moon Has Helium!

Every 19 months the planet Venus passes extremely nearby, and gets
ignored each and every time, perhaps because it couldn't even be seen
by any of our colorblind Apollo missions, much less recorded on Kodak
film that survived the worse environmental trauma and demonstrated
terrific dynamic range for everything else. So, like it or not, we're
apparently stuck with exploiting our limited and depleted terrestrial
resources for the foreseeable future, even if it means our having to
survive and pay for WW3 and WW4.

When ‘Big Energy’ as often with multiple offshore protected
corporations that get to run as many accounting hide and seek books as
they like, manage to screw up or cause death and enormous
environmental damage, the only ones ever having to pay for everything
(no matters what they’re telling us) are those of us energy and
product consumers.

According to the redneck and FUD-master likes of Hagar and his company
of ZNR oligarch friends, only deregulation will fix all of that, just
like their ENRON had everything all fixed up until pesky state
attorney generals and a few private energy consumers had just about
enough of being screwed over.

This is not to say that our government has been accomplishing even 10%
of what it claims to have authority over, and in some instances having
directly made situations a whole lot worse and often behind closed
doors so that only generations from now will ever get any chance of
knowing the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

This is why the honest all-inclusive cost of extracting and process
minerals and rare elements is always a whole lot more costly and
otherwise packing loads of Karma, than we’re being told of by our
peers. By allowing some of us to go off-world for obtaining at least
a few of these most depleted and/or restricted minerals and rare
elements would greatly alleviate the local trauma and spendy Karma
that we’re otherwise stuck with. Of course terrestrial use of solar,
wind, geothermal, hydroelectric and even failsafe thorium derived
energy potential is always a given, but that too is tree-hugger
restricted and otherwise politicized to death, in part because of the
mainstream status-quo policies set up and enforced by oligarchs plus
the always “not in my backyard” mindset that our government of this
supposed republic does little if anything to eliminate.

What sort of weird geology shows us such physically dark minerals and
raw element colors/hues from a great distance, but then turns
monochromatic, becomes highly reflective and inert upon close and
totally objective inspections?

Going off-world doesn’t even have to represent an extremely nearby and
geologically active planet like Venus, because we have an enormous
moon that’s loaded with most of everything worth going after.

The moon is not actually monochromatic nor inert:
Moon’s natural surface colors are those of all the perfectly natural
minerals as they unavoidably react to the visible and UV spectrum, as
only better viewed with having their natural color/hue saturation
cranked up, as otherwise there’s no false or artificial colors added.
http://spaceweather.com/submissions/...1346444660.jpg
http://www.spaceweather.com/swpod200...4dnmol44vuaf43

Oddly the NASA/Apollo era and their rad-hard Kodak version of our
physically dark and paramagnetic moon is apparently the one and only
off-world location that becomes more inert as well as more reflective
and monochromatic by the closer you get to it, and any planet other
than Earth simply can’t be recorded within the same FOV as having the
horizon of that naked moon (regardless of the FOV direction or use of
any given lens, as well as not even possible when using the world’s
best film and optics along with a polarized optical filter to reduce
the local surface glare doesn’t seem to help).

Obviously our mainstream peers have always insisted that the regular
laws of physics do not apply to that of Venus or even our moon, and
any natural geology colors are simply intentionally introduced as
false or fake colors because of our Apollo era was that of a purely
monochromatic and inert moon that had nothing of any value to offer,
including not even carbonado or bedrock of any common dark basalt.

BTW; be certain to never get that physically dark moon in the same
FOV as Saturn, Jupiter or especially Venus or even Mercury, because
according to our NASA/Apollo era they’ll hardly show up and there will
be nothing of any color or hue saturation to work with. Oddly the
only color on the moon is supposedly that which astronauts brought
along, and apparently none of that was the least bit UV reactive or
even capable of reflecting our bluish planetshine that offers upwards
of 50 times brighter illumination than any moonlight here on Earth,
and from that Apollo era there’s still no telling what the planetshine
illuminated temperature or any other nighttime environment
consideration is on the cool surface of our naked moon, that is other
than its abundance of gamma and X-rays.

Outside of our natural human visual perceptions of its dynamic range
as well as colors, there’s radar assisted imaging and of course those
methods via laser ranging and always X-ray and gamma spectrometry of
any given surface that becomes quite reliably viewable regardless of
day or night, cloudy or clear via such imaging technology, that which
only redneck bigots and FUD-masters claim is inadmissible.

Besides merely following my deductive interpretations, do reconsider
bothering yourself to take another subjective and open mindset look-
see, and then honestly and deductively interpret this hot terrain of
Venus for yourself, as to what some of those highly unusual patterns
could possibly represent, as offering anything other than the random
geology happenstance of hot rocks that only so happen to look exactly
like complex infrastructure.

“Guth Venus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...79402364691314

This is not to say that 99.9999% of the Venus surface doesn’t look
perfectly natural (at least it does to me), just like the surface of
Earth might look if having to use the exact same SAR-C imaging methods
and its limited resolution. After all, a millionth of that hot Venus
surface area is still 4.6e8 m2, or 460 km2, and this most complex area
of “Guth Venus” (100 x 100 pixels or 506 km2) that still includes
mostly natural geology, isn’t involving but a fraction more than a
millionth of the Venus surface area, and yet it seems as though highly
developed and to a large enough scale that by rights should make for
deductively interpreting those patterns as rather easy, for even a
dysfunctional 5th grader.

It can also be suggested and reasonably argued that initially (4+
billion years ago) our sun was 25% cooler than nowadays, thereby
making Venus quite naked Goldilocks approved. But this doesn’t fully
explain as to why such a large sale of a community or mining operation
was established, and as to why Venus has been radiating such a large
amount of its geothermal core energy and as having been creating all
of that unprotected atmosphere that has to be continually renewed due
to the lack of any geomagnetic field, 10% less gravity and being
closer to the sun.

Other thumbnail images, including “mgn_c115s095_1.gif” (225 m/pixel)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/th...humbnails.html
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

BTW; there's still no American flags on Venus, but there have been
USSR/Russian flags on multiple landers that got their landers situated
there decades before us. So, perhaps we’ll have to concede and
otherwise accept that Venus and all of its natural resources belongs
to Russia.

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”
  #19  
Old September 18th 12, 07:14 PM posted to sci.space.history
Dean
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 323
Default The Moon Has Helium!

On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 10:23:58 AM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:
Every 19 months the planet Venus passes extremely nearby, and gets

ignored each and every time, perhaps because it couldn't even be seen

by any of our colorblind Apollo missions, much less recorded on Kodak

film that survived the worse environmental trauma and demonstrated

terrific dynamic range for everything else. So, like it or not, we're

apparently stuck with exploiting our limited and depleted terrestrial

resources for the foreseeable future, even if it means our having to

survive and pay for WW3 and WW4.



When ‘Big Energy’ as often with multiple offshore protected

corporations that get to run as many accounting hide and seek books as

they like, manage to screw up or cause death and enormous

environmental damage, the only ones ever having to pay for everything

(no matters what they’re telling us) are those of us energy and

product consumers.



According to the redneck and FUD-master likes of Hagar and his company

of ZNR oligarch friends, only deregulation will fix all of that, just

like their ENRON had everything all fixed up until pesky state

attorney generals and a few private energy consumers had just about

enough of being screwed over.



This is not to say that our government has been accomplishing even 10%

of what it claims to have authority over, and in some instances having

directly made situations a whole lot worse and often behind closed

doors so that only generations from now will ever get any chance of

knowing the whole truth and nothing but the truth.



This is why the honest all-inclusive cost of extracting and process

minerals and rare elements is always a whole lot more costly and

otherwise packing loads of Karma, than we’re being told of by our

peers. By allowing some of us to go off-world for obtaining at least

a few of these most depleted and/or restricted minerals and rare

elements would greatly alleviate the local trauma and spendy Karma

that we’re otherwise stuck with. Of course terrestrial use of solar,

wind, geothermal, hydroelectric and even failsafe thorium derived

energy potential is always a given, but that too is tree-hugger

restricted and otherwise politicized to death, in part because of the

mainstream status-quo policies set up and enforced by oligarchs plus

the always “not in my backyard” mindset that our government of this

supposed republic does little if anything to eliminate.



What sort of weird geology shows us such physically dark minerals and

raw element colors/hues from a great distance, but then turns

monochromatic, becomes highly reflective and inert upon close and

totally objective inspections?



Going off-world doesn’t even have to represent an extremely nearby and

geologically active planet like Venus, because we have an enormous

moon that’s loaded with most of everything worth going after.



The moon is not actually monochromatic nor inert:

Moon’s natural surface colors are those of all the perfectly natural

minerals as they unavoidably react to the visible and UV spectrum, as

only better viewed with having their natural color/hue saturation

cranked up, as otherwise there’s no false or artificial colors added.

http://spaceweather.com/submissions/...1346444660.jpg

http://www.spaceweather.com/swpod200...4dnmol44vuaf43



Oddly the NASA/Apollo era and their rad-hard Kodak version of our

physically dark and paramagnetic moon is apparently the one and only

off-world location that becomes more inert as well as more reflective

and monochromatic by the closer you get to it, and any planet other

than Earth simply can’t be recorded within the same FOV as having the

horizon of that naked moon (regardless of the FOV direction or use of

any given lens, as well as not even possible when using the world’s

best film and optics along with a polarized optical filter to reduce

the local surface glare doesn’t seem to help).



Obviously our mainstream peers have always insisted that the regular

laws of physics do not apply to that of Venus or even our moon, and

any natural geology colors are simply intentionally introduced as

false or fake colors because of our Apollo era was that of a purely

monochromatic and inert moon that had nothing of any value to offer,

including not even carbonado or bedrock of any common dark basalt.



BTW; be certain to never get that physically dark moon in the same

FOV as Saturn, Jupiter or especially Venus or even Mercury, because

according to our NASA/Apollo era they’ll hardly show up and there will

be nothing of any color or hue saturation to work with. Oddly the

only color on the moon is supposedly that which astronauts brought

along, and apparently none of that was the least bit UV reactive or

even capable of reflecting our bluish planetshine that offers upwards

of 50 times brighter illumination than any moonlight here on Earth,

and from that Apollo era there’s still no telling what the planetshine

illuminated temperature or any other nighttime environment

consideration is on the cool surface of our naked moon, that is other

than its abundance of gamma and X-rays.



Outside of our natural human visual perceptions of its dynamic range

as well as colors, there’s radar assisted imaging and of course those

methods via laser ranging and always X-ray and gamma spectrometry of

any given surface that becomes quite reliably viewable regardless of

day or night, cloudy or clear via such imaging technology, that which

only redneck bigots and FUD-masters claim is inadmissible.



Besides merely following my deductive interpretations, do reconsider

bothering yourself to take another subjective and open mindset look-

see, and then honestly and deductively interpret this hot terrain of

Venus for yourself, as to what some of those highly unusual patterns

could possibly represent, as offering anything other than the random

geology happenstance of hot rocks that only so happen to look exactly

like complex infrastructure.



“Guth Venus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in

question:

https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...79402364691314



This is not to say that 99.9999% of the Venus surface doesn’t look

perfectly natural (at least it does to me), just like the surface of

Earth might look if having to use the exact same SAR-C imaging methods

and its limited resolution. After all, a millionth of that hot Venus

surface area is still 4.6e8 m2, or 460 km2, and this most complex area

of “Guth Venus” (100 x 100 pixels or 506 km2) that still includes

mostly natural geology, isn’t involving but a fraction more than a

millionth of the Venus surface area, and yet it seems as though highly

developed and to a large enough scale that by rights should make for

deductively interpreting those patterns as rather easy, for even a

dysfunctional 5th grader.



It can also be suggested and reasonably argued that initially (4+

billion years ago) our sun was 25% cooler than nowadays, thereby

making Venus quite naked Goldilocks approved. But this doesn’t fully

explain as to why such a large sale of a community or mining operation

was established, and as to why Venus has been radiating such a large

amount of its geothermal core energy and as having been creating all

of that unprotected atmosphere that has to be continually renewed due

to the lack of any geomagnetic field, 10% less gravity and being

closer to the sun.



Other thumbnail images, including “mgn_c115s095_1.gif” (225 m/pixel)

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/th...humbnails.html

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



BTW; there's still no American flags on Venus, but there have been

USSR/Russian flags on multiple landers that got their landers situated

there decades before us. So, perhaps we’ll have to concede and

otherwise accept that Venus and all of its natural resources belongs

to Russia.



http://groups.google.com/groups/search

http://translate.google.com/#

Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”


Look, you'd do everyone a favor if you'd clip 95% of your writing and just state clearly what you are proposing. If I parse away 95%, I suspect you are advocating the immediate exploitation of Venus (and its not "extremely" nearby) for it's mineral resources? And please elaborate without using your excessive adverbs and adjectives on just how you propose to get those minerals off Venus? It still has 90% of terrestial gravity and how difficult is it to lift 1 lb of material off Earth? Now, compound that by having to work in a hellishly hot, corrosive, high pressure environment.

No, go right ahead and use your typical FUD argument. But you know damned well that its not FUD, its more common sense which apparently you lack entirely.
  #20  
Old September 18th 12, 11:53 PM posted to sci.space.history
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default The Moon Has Helium!

On Sep 18, 11:14*am, Dean wrote:
On Tuesday, September 18, 2012 10:23:58 AM UTC-4, Brad Guth wrote:
Every 19 months the planet Venus passes extremely nearby, and gets


ignored each and every time, perhaps because it couldn't even be seen


by any of our colorblind Apollo missions, much less recorded on Kodak


film that survived the worse environmental trauma and demonstrated


terrific dynamic range for everything else. *So, like it or not, we're


apparently stuck with exploiting our limited and depleted terrestrial


resources for the foreseeable future, even if it means our having to


survive and pay for WW3 and WW4.


When ‘Big Energy’ as often with multiple offshore protected


corporations that get to run as many accounting hide and seek books as


they like, manage to screw up or cause death and enormous


environmental damage, the only ones ever having to pay for everything


(no matters what they’re telling us) are those of us energy and


product consumers.


According to the redneck and FUD-master likes of Hagar and his company


of ZNR oligarch friends, only deregulation will fix all of that, just


like their ENRON had everything all fixed up until pesky state


attorney generals and a few private energy consumers had just about


enough of being screwed over.


This is not to say that our government has been accomplishing even 10%


of what it claims to have authority over, and in some instances having


directly made situations a whole lot worse and often behind closed


doors so that only generations from now will ever get any chance of


knowing the whole truth and nothing but the truth.


This is why the honest all-inclusive cost of extracting and process


minerals and rare elements is always a whole lot more costly and


otherwise packing loads of Karma, than we’re being told of by our


peers. *By allowing some of us to go off-world for obtaining at least


a few of these most depleted and/or restricted minerals and rare


elements would greatly alleviate the local trauma and spendy Karma


that we’re otherwise stuck with. *Of course terrestrial use of solar,


wind, geothermal, hydroelectric and even failsafe thorium derived


energy potential is always a given, but that too is tree-hugger


restricted and otherwise politicized to death, in part because of the


mainstream status-quo policies set up and enforced by oligarchs plus


the always “not in my backyard” mindset that our government of this


supposed republic does little if anything to eliminate.


What sort of weird geology shows us such physically dark minerals and


raw element colors/hues from a great distance, but then turns


monochromatic, becomes highly reflective and inert upon close and


totally objective inspections?


Going off-world doesn’t even have to represent an extremely nearby and


geologically active planet like Venus, because we have an enormous


moon that’s loaded with most of everything worth going after.


The moon is not actually monochromatic nor inert:


Moon’s natural *surface colors are those of all the perfectly natural


minerals as they unavoidably react to the visible and UV spectrum, as


only better viewed with having their natural color/hue saturation


cranked up, as otherwise there’s no false or artificial colors added.


*http://spaceweather.com/submissions/...izadeh-fac_134...


*http://www.spaceweather.com/swpod200...Licchelli-Satu...


*Oddly the NASA/Apollo era and their rad-hard Kodak version of our


physically dark and paramagnetic moon is apparently the one and only


off-world location that becomes more inert as well as more reflective


and monochromatic by the closer you get to it, and any planet other


than Earth simply can’t be recorded within the same FOV as having the


horizon of that naked moon (regardless of the FOV direction or use of


any given lens, as well as not even possible when using the world’s


best film and optics along with a polarized optical filter to reduce


the local surface glare doesn’t seem to help).


Obviously our mainstream peers have always insisted that the regular


laws of physics do not apply to that of Venus or even our moon, and


any natural geology colors are simply intentionally introduced as


false or fake colors because of our Apollo era was that of a purely


monochromatic and inert moon that had nothing of any value to offer,


including not even carbonado or bedrock of any common dark basalt.


BTW; *be certain to never get that physically dark moon in the same


FOV as Saturn, Jupiter or especially Venus or even Mercury, because


according to our NASA/Apollo era they’ll hardly show up and there will


be nothing of any color or hue saturation to work with. *Oddly the


only color on the moon is supposedly that which astronauts brought


along, and apparently none of that was the least bit UV reactive or


even capable of reflecting our bluish planetshine that offers upwards


of 50 times brighter illumination than any moonlight here on Earth,


and from that Apollo era there’s still no telling what the planetshine


illuminated temperature or any other nighttime environment


consideration is on the cool surface of our naked moon, that is other


than its abundance of gamma and X-rays.


Outside of our natural human visual perceptions of its dynamic range


as well as colors, there’s radar assisted imaging and of course those


methods via laser ranging and always X-ray and gamma spectrometry of


any given surface that becomes quite reliably viewable regardless of


day or night, cloudy or clear via such imaging technology, that which


only redneck bigots and FUD-masters claim is inadmissible.


Besides merely following my deductive interpretations, do reconsider


bothering yourself to take another subjective and open mindset look-


see, and then honestly and deductively interpret this hot terrain of


Venus for yourself, as to what some of those highly unusual patterns


could possibly represent, as offering anything other than the random


geology happenstance of hot rocks that only so happen to look exactly


like complex infrastructure.


“Guth Venus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in


question:


https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...Guth#slideshow...


*This is not to say that 99.9999% of the Venus surface doesn’t look


perfectly natural (at least it does to me), just like the surface of


Earth might look if having to use the exact same SAR-C imaging methods


and its limited resolution. *After all, a millionth of that hot Venus


surface area is still 4.6e8 m2, or 460 km2, and this most complex area


of “Guth Venus” (100 x 100 pixels or 506 km2) that still includes


mostly natural geology, isn’t involving but a fraction more than a


millionth of the Venus surface area, and yet it seems as though highly


developed and to a large enough scale that by rights should make for


deductively interpreting those patterns as rather easy, for even a


dysfunctional 5th grader.


It can also be suggested and reasonably argued that initially (4+


billion years ago) our sun was 25% cooler than nowadays, thereby


making Venus quite naked Goldilocks approved. *But this doesn’t fully


explain as to why such a large sale of a community or mining operation


was established, and as to why Venus has been radiating such a large


amount of its geothermal core energy and as having been creating all


of that unprotected atmosphere that has to be continually renewed due


to the lack of any geomagnetic field, 10% less gravity and being


closer to the sun.


*Other thumbnail images, including “mgn_c115s095_1.gif” (225 m/pixel)


*http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/th...humbnails.html


*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


* BTW; *there's still no American flags on Venus, but there have been


USSR/Russian flags on multiple landers that got their landers situated


there decades before us. *So, perhaps we’ll have to concede and


otherwise accept that Venus and all of its natural resources belongs


to Russia.


*http://groups.google.com/groups/search


*http://translate.google.com/#


*Brad Guth,Brad_Guth,Brad.Guth,BradGuth,BG,Guth Usenet/”Guth Venus”


Look, you'd do everyone a favor if you'd clip 95% of your writing and just state clearly what you are proposing. *If I parse away 95%, I suspect you are advocating the immediate exploitation of Venus (and its not "extremely" nearby) for it's mineral resources? *And please elaborate without using your excessive adverbs and adjectives on just how you propose to get those minerals off Venus? *It still has 90% of terrestial gravity and how difficult is it to lift 1 lb of material off Earth? *Now, compound that by having to work in a hellishly hot, corrosive, high pressure environment.

No, go right ahead and use your typical FUD argument. *But you know damned well that its not FUD, its more common sense which apparently you lack entirely.


Obviously reading comprehension isn't one of your better skills.

We should do the moon first, using as many TBMs as possible to dig
into its thick and very protective crust, but also immediately send
off multiple probes to further investigate the extremely nearby (110
LD) planet Venus.

Personally I'd also do my LSE-CM/ISS, but that one takes real
expertise, though not nearly as much as relocating our moon as per
keeping it within a halo of Earth L1.

How's that?
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Would a helium balloon work on Mars ? SAT W-7 Astronomy Misc 6 February 9th 10 07:44 PM
China to land on moon in 2017 and get helium 3 for power.. Jan Panteltje Astronomy Misc 0 November 7th 05 08:30 PM
Helium 3 and the moon David Ball Policy 11 August 4th 05 06:05 AM
Helium-3 Article in USA Today Mark R. Whittington Policy 35 December 26th 04 02:03 AM
Helium-3? [email protected] Policy 7 December 7th 04 03:15 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:09 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.