Our Taboo/Nondisclosure Moon

"TeaTime" wrote in message


Try getting a decent news server and/or decent ISP then?

You either don't get it, or you're actually a Usenet rusemaster (aka
spool or mole) at heart. The news reader has absolutely nothing to do
with my reply getting banished or otherwise blocked, or are you really
into the notion of suggesting that you are in fact that pathetically
dumb and dumber?

So where's the references that support the idea that shorter visible
wavelengths propagate through CO2, H2SO4 and S8 clouds more efficiently than
infra red?
Good grief, they are within one or more of of my old documents that
apparently are too encrypted for you to read. (sorry about that)

I'll have to see what I can dig back up.

What makes you think an alien's eye will be attuned to the same wavelengths
as ours? If they are used to conditions like those on Venus they more
likely peak in the reds than the greens and blues.

450 nm is simply more than likely the peak visual performance on such a
relatively dark planet (especially of their nighttime season), than 550
nm is for us. Shift everything 100 nm towards UV and you're looking at
what's nocturnal and/or evolved in order to best deal with such filtered
light, as getting through those thick clouds of Venus.

Try that pesky walking on the moon thing, or was that a joke?

I used the term 'allegedly' in referring to the placing of reflectors on the
moon. I also made reference to the Russians' unmanned probe which also
deployed a reflector there.

You'll have to keep using that "allegedly" qualifier, as it's about all
that you've got going on behalf of sustaining your pagan NASA or even of
those USSR efforts.

Allegedly there was a cold-war. Allegedly Iraq had lots of those Muslim
WMD. Allegedly Boeing 747 fuel tanks explode for no apparent reason and
somehow in spite of the laws of physics. Allegedly our government and
those of other governments never lie their butts off, and then some.

Off topic political whinging - not relevant to the discussion.

Silly boy. Life itself is totally "relevant", as well as more often
sucks than not. So, why are such spendy as well as lethal lies upon
lies not "relevant"?

I don't think there are too many people around now who don't realise that
the moon landings videos were studio shot. There are just too many
anomalies that have never been satisfactorily answered. However, the
suit-mounted caneras they had would never have produced anything worth using
so of course the cold-war driven publicity requirement was for something
more 'Hollywood'. None of that says they did or didn't go there. I keep an
open mind on that issue.

Most folks are absolutely deathly afraid of their own shadow, not to
mention afraid of those MIB. To question their pagan god(NASA) is
asking too much.

They allegedly had left much larger and complex instruments as left
behind that were good for nothing outside of the cloak and dagger reams
of whatever club NASA's O-ring collective of purely insider wizards
wanted to promote.

Details of those instruments? references?

Good grief. Can't you go to any number of those ******* NASA/Apollo
pages upon pages, and pull it yourself? What the hell is wrong with
your PC or MAC, or is it just yourself that not being honest?

For roughly 10% the mass of one retroreflector (I believe less cost to
boot), and within the same or less volume, they could have easily
deployed a one degree or possibly two degree xenon strobe offering 10
joules, and perhaps by A16 or A17 could have managed to deploy a 100
joule strobe as a relatively simple and reliable transponder that should
have been technically doable, especially since small/portable lasers
weren't quite prime time technology that could have survived the IR/FIR
and other nasty environmental factors.

Agreed - that's why I said ' shame they couldn't ' .

But they could have so easily accomplished that, and so much more. So,
where's the "shame"? (other than we've been snookered)

Not being expert in optics at that level, I'd value outside opinion on that
one.

Whatever make you a happy camper. Obviously you're the expert and/or
all-knowing wizard that can't be bothered, even if thy boat is getting
rocked.

Yes - it is 100% deductively subjective to the eye and mindset of the
beholder. Personally, I'd LOVE to see something there - but I don't. The
resolution and range is nowhere good enough to differentiate between natural
features and what may be the remains of artificial structures. It just
looks like lava flows, canyons, rills, etc. Interesting topology granted,
but the high level of volcanism is well documented.

Please do tell us, what else did you see with your white cane?

Did you bother to utilize the composite 225 m/pixel version?

Did you bother to crop out just the 5% that I'm talking about?

Did you bother to PhotoShop push it a little (say 3X or better)?

Did you see the rather large and thus sgnificant fluid arch?

Did you bother to flush the toilet?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Why is Mailgate/Usenet or perhaps yourself into stealth moderation?

Is this one of your Usenet games? I can obviously post the following
context into other than your original contribution as listed below.

"TeaTime" wrote in message


Try getting a decent news server and/or decent ISP then?

You either don't get it, or you're actually a Usenet rusemaster (aka
spook or mole) at heart. The news reader has absolutely nothing to do
with my reply getting banished or otherwise blocked, or are you really
into the notion of suggesting that you are in fact that pathetically
dumb and dumber?

So where's the references that support the idea that shorter visible
wavelengths propagate through CO2, H2SO4 and S8 clouds more efficiently than
infra red?
Good grief, they are within one or more of of my old documents that
apparently are too encrypted for you to read. (sorry about that)

I'll have to see what I can dig back up.

What makes you think an alien's eye will be attuned to the same wavelengths
as ours? If they are used to conditions like those on Venus they more
likely peak in the reds than the greens and blues.

450 nm is simply more than likely the peak visual performance on such a
relatively dark planet (especially of their nighttime season), than 550
nm is for us. Shift everything 100 nm towards UV and you're looking at
what's nocturnal and/or evolved in order to best deal with such filtered
light, as getting through those thick clouds of Venus.

Try that pesky walking on the moon thing, or was that a joke?

I used the term 'allegedly' in referring to the placing of reflectors on the
moon. I also made reference to the Russians' unmanned probe which also
deployed a reflector there.

You'll have to keep using that "allegedly" qualifier, as it's about all
that you've got going on behalf of sustaining your pagan NASA or even of
those USSR efforts.

Allegedly there was a cold-war. Allegedly Iraq had lots of those Muslim
WMD. Allegedly Boeing 747 fuel tanks explode for no apparent reason and
somehow in spite of the laws of physics. Allegedly our government and
those of other governments never lie their butts off, and then some.

Off topic political whinging - not relevant to the discussion.

Silly boy. Life itself is totally "relevant", as well as more often
sucks than not. So, why are such spendy as well as lethal lies upon
lies not "relevant"?

I don't think there are too many people around now who don't realise that
the moon landings videos were studio shot. There are just too many
anomalies that have never been satisfactorily answered. However, the
suit-mounted caneras they had would never have produced anything worth using
so of course the cold-war driven publicity requirement was for something
more 'Hollywood'. None of that says they did or didn't go there. I keep an
open mind on that issue.

Most folks are absolutely deathly afraid of their own shadow, not to
mention afraid of those MIB. To question their pagan god(NASA) is
asking too much.

They allegedly had left much larger and complex instruments as left
behind that were good for nothing outside of the cloak and dagger reams
of whatever club NASA's O-ring collective of purely insider wizards
wanted to promote.

Details of those instruments? references?

Good grief. Can't you go to any number of those ******* NASA/Apollo
pages upon pages, and pull it yourself? What the hell is wrong with
your PC or MAC, or is it just yourself that not being honest?

For roughly 10% the mass of one retroreflector (I believe less cost to
boot), and within the same or less volume, they could have easily
deployed a one degree or possibly two degree xenon strobe offering 10
joules, and perhaps by A16 or A17 could have managed to deploy a 100
joule strobe as a relatively simple and reliable transponder that should
have been technically doable, especially since small/portable lasers
weren't quite prime time technology that could have survived the IR/FIR
and other nasty environmental factors.

Agreed - that's why I said ' shame they couldn't ' .

But they could have so easily accomplished that, and so much more. So,
where's the "shame"? (other than we've been snookered)

Not being expert in optics at that level, I'd value outside opinion on that
one.

Whatever make you a happy camper. Obviously you're the expert and/or
all-knowing wizard that can't be bothered, even if thy boat is getting
rocked.

Yes - it is 100% deductively subjective to the eye and mindset of the
beholder. Personally, I'd LOVE to see something there - but I don't. The
resolution and range is nowhere good enough to differentiate between natural
features and what may be the remains of artificial structures. It just
looks like lava flows, canyons, rills, etc. Interesting topology granted,
but the high level of volcanism is well documented.

Please do tell us, what else did you see with your white cane?

Did you bother to utilize the composite 225 m/pixel version?

Did you bother to crop out just the 5% that I'm talking about?

Did you bother to PhotoShop push it a little (say 3X or better)?

Did you see the rather large and thus sgnificant fluid arch?

Did you bother to flush the toilet?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Because I'm such a nice guy, here's one more new and improved time for
good measure.

Why is Mailgate/Usenet or perhaps yourself into stealth topic
moderation?

Is this one of your silly Usenet games? I can obviously post the
following context into other than your original contribution as listed
below.

"TeaTime" wrote in message


Try getting a decent news server and/or decent ISP then?

You either don't get it, or you're actually a Usenet rusemaster (aka
spook or mole) at heart. The news reader has absolutely nothing to do
with my reply getting banished or otherwise blocked, or are you really
into the silly notion of suggesting that you are in fact that
pathetically dumb and dumber?

So where's the references that support the idea that shorter visible
wavelengths propagate through CO2, H2SO4 and S8 clouds more efficiently
than infra red?
Good grief and Christ almighty back on a stick, the last that I recall
they are within one or more of my old documents, that which apparently
are too encrypted for you to read. (sorry about that)

I'll have to see what I can dig back up, and report back.

What makes you think an alien's eye will be attuned to the same wavelengths
as ours? If they are used to conditions like those on Venus they more
likely peak in the reds than the greens and blues.

450 nm is simply more than likely the peak visual performance on such a
relatively dark planet (I believe we're talking roughly 12 j/m2 by day
and especially dim as of their geothermally toasty nighttime season),
rather than 550 nm is for us. Shift everything 100 nm towards UV and
you're looking at what's nocturnal and/or evolved in order to best deal
with such filtered light, as getting through those thick and S8 loaded
clouds of Venus.

Try that pesky walking on the moon thing, or was that a joke?

I used the term 'allegedly' in referring to the placing of reflectors on
the moon. I also made reference to the Russians' unmanned probe which
also deployed a reflector there.

You'll have to keep using that "allegedly" qualifier, as it's about all
that you've got going on behalf of sustaining your pagan NASA or even of
those equally unprovable USSR efforts.

Allegedly there was a cold-war. Allegedly Iraq had lots of those Muslim
WMD. Allegedly Boeing 747 fuel tanks explode for no apparent reason and
somehow in spite of the laws of physics. Allegedly our government and
those of other governments never lie their butts off, and then some.

Off topic political whinging - not relevant to the discussion.

Silly boy. Life itself is totally "relevant", as well as more often
sucks than not. So, why are such spendy as well as lethal lies upon
lies not "relevant" in your koran?

I don't think there are too many people around now who don't realise that
the moon landings videos were studio shot. There are just too many
anomalies that have never been satisfactorily answered. However, the
suit-mounted caneras they had would never have produced anything worth using
so of course the cold-war driven publicity requirement was for something
more 'Hollywood'. None of that says they did or didn't go there. I keep an
open mind on that issue.

Most folks are absolutely deathly afraid of their own shadow, not to
mention afraid of those MIB. To question their pagan god(NASA) is
asking too much.

They allegedly had left much larger and complex instruments as left
behind that were good for nothing outside of the cloak and dagger reams
of whatever club NASA's O-ring collective of purely insider wizards
wanted to promote.

Details of those instruments? references?

Good grief. Can't you go to any number of those ******* NASA/Apollo
pages upon pages, and pull it yourself? What the hell is wrong with
your PC or MAC, or is it just yourself that not being honest?

For roughly 10% the mass of one retroreflector (I believe less cost to
boot), and within the same or less volume, they could have easily
deployed a one degree or possibly two degree xenon strobe offering 10
joules, and perhaps by A16 or A17 could have managed to deploy a 100
joule strobe as a relatively simple and reliable transponder that should
have been technically doable, especially since small/portable lasers
weren't quite prime time technology that could have survived the IR/FIR
and other nasty environmental factors.

Agreed - that's why I said ' shame they couldn't ' .

But they could have so easily accomplished that, and so much more. So,
where's the "shame"? (other than the shame of our having been snookered)

Not being expert in optics at that level, I'd value outside opinion on that
one.

Whatever makes you into a happy camper. Obviously you're the expert
and/or all-knowing wizard that can't be bothered, even if thy boat is
getting rocked.

Yes - it is 100% deductively subjective to the eye and mindset of the
beholder. Personally, I'd LOVE to see something there - but I don't. The
resolution and range is nowhere good enough to differentiate between natural
features and what may be the remains of artificial structures. It just
looks like lava flows, canyons, rills, etc. Interesting topology granted,
but the high level of volcanism is well documented.

Please do tell us, what else did you see with your white cane?

Did you bother to utilize the composite 225 m/pixel version?

Did you bother to crop out just the 5% that I'm talking about?

Did you bother to PhotoShop push it a little (say 3X or better)?

Did you see the rather large and thus sgnificant fluid arch?

Did you bother to flush the toilet? (after you removed your naysay head)
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

We're having yet another silly problem of remote and otherwise
selectively stealth topic/author moderation taking place.

It's rather obvious, as it is entirely pathetic and only more proof
positive that I'm even more right than I'd thought.

It is not my PC or that of my wussy ISP, although it certainly could be
Mailgate spook/mole insiders or even the MI/NSA/KGB wizards of GOOGLE
doing their usual cloak and dagger thing on behalf of their Skull and
Bone partners in their usual Old Testament crimes against humanity
(including against those of their own kind).
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:c3952f6da5886f231f3aad7236decb6f.49644@mygate .mailgate.org...
We're having yet another silly problem of remote and otherwise
selectively stealth topic/author moderation taking place.

It's rather obvious, as it is entirely pathetic and only more proof
positive that I'm even more right than I'd thought.

It is not my PC or that of my wussy ISP, although it certainly could be
Mailgate spook/mole insiders or even the MI/NSA/KGB wizards of GOOGLE
doing their usual cloak and dagger thing on behalf of their Skull and
Bone partners in their usual Old Testament crimes against humanity
(including against those of their own kind).
-
Brad Guth

I can see both your posts above, Brad and I've been conversing with you
openly and asking sensible questions. I haven't attempted to naysay your
basic ideas, only discuss the finer details. I can't see where you're
getting the author moderation thing from - your posts are here aren't they?

Your last main reply to me was extremely rude and most of it without any
good reason whatsoever. You still persist in calling me dumb and dumber, so
I can't see much point in continuing with you. I'm probably the only ally
you had here but once again you've blown it by your paranoia and rudeness. I
am not blind and yes I did look at the high resolution tiff image on the URL
you posted here. I do see the so-called 'arch' and studied that area ion
some detail. The width of the photo by my estimation is around 22km. That
makes the wavy line around 500 metres wide. If you follow the 'road' all
the way up to the plateau it originated from you can see it is a lava flow.
I do not believe the lower section of it is an arch - it looks to me like a
raised bluff against a darker background. You have to remember the pic was
taken from 618 km away.

"TeaTime" wrote in message


I can see both your posts above, Brad and I've been conversing with you
openly and asking sensible questions. I haven't attempted to naysay your
basic ideas, only discuss the finer details. I can't see where you're
getting the author moderation thing from - your posts are here aren't they?

No, they are not where they are supposed to be. Obviously you think I'm
a liar.

As I'd said before, that I 'can not' post directly into several of
'your' contributions, thus I'm having to work-around by posting to other
portions of this topic that are still allowing my reply to stick. Got
it!

Perhaps it's your doings that's at fault, because it most certainly
isn't me.

Your last main reply to me was extremely rude and most of it without any
good reason whatsoever. You still persist in calling me dumb and dumber, so
I can't see much point in continuing with you. I'm probably the only ally
you had here but once again you've blown it by your paranoia and rudeness. I
am not blind and yes I did look at the high resolution tiff image on the URL
you posted here. I do see the so-called 'arch' and studied that area ion
some detail. The width of the photo by my estimation is around 22km. That
makes the wavy line around 500 metres wide. If you follow the 'road' all
the way up to the plateau it originated from you can see it is a lava flow.
I do not believe the lower section of it is an arch - it looks to me like a
raised bluff against a darker background. You have to remember the pic was
taken from 618 km away.

Thanks anyway, but I don't have to remember squat. It's my stinking
though honestly deductive interpretation that's got the likes of
yourself all huffy, and downright tight butt-crack naysay no matters
what is potentially there to behold. In other words, try a little
harder, or at least break a little wind before you explode.

I suppose you're the one as having pointed out all of those Muslim WMD
that I nor anyone else could see. (I just had to toss that one on the
pile. Sorry about that.)

The 36 look/pixel truth worthly nature of those 225 m/pixel resolution
composite images, which can be conservatively pushed by at least 3X and
rounded off via whatever PhotoShop, as such isn't nearly as difficult as
you're making it.

BTW; I never said anything about using the TIFF format, whereas there's
absolutely nothing the least bit improper or otherwise wrong with the
650 k GIF format, and I never once stipulated that there wasn't a number
of lava paterns to behold. In fact, that rather substantial arch could
be of a mud/fluid like substance that's most likely hotter than hell (as
it should be).

What do you think about the not so little bridge? or is that very
horizontal and flat span also another one of a Venusian kind of weird
lava flow created formation, that just so happens to look exactly like a
bridge that's connecting to a fairly complex road at either end, along
with lots of other highly unusual (aka other one of a kind) and
artificial looking patterns or as intelligent attributes associated?

Try using their GIF format, croping out just the specific area and
converting it if need be into JPAG if you like. Then send it to me as
GIF or JPAG, or otherwise post it for a look-see at whatever you've
accomplished. I'll even redo my efforts and share my results.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

The 225 meter/pixel and of 36 radar looks/pixel as an image is actually
about as truth-worthy of such pixels as they ever tend to get. As long
as we're looking at and subsequently interpreting as to whatever's as
large or larger than 225 meters per given dimension, there's not hardly
a better class of a more trust-worthy image in town, and especially
since it's nearly 3D worthy because of the original SAR 43 degree
observation or radar illumination angle and of having recorded all the
associated terrain that's perfectly natural looking. As for surrounding
all that's otherwise looking so gosh darn artificial/intelligent, of
depicting various complex structures as having been incorporated into
such a rational community like infrastructure, where no such ratioinal
paters should otherwise have existed.

BTW; this sort of deductive reasoning takes on a certain degree of
observationology expertise, and at best it still demands a good deal of
personal study time. In other words, it's not ever a snap observational
decision as typically imposed by literally all that claim they simply
can't see a damn thing, because alter all, it's supposedly so freaking
hot and nasty, so apparently it's down to the usual naysay mindset of
why even bother giving it a second thought.

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/ht...115s095_1.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif
Image croping or the digital method of resampling at 3X, 5X or possibly
even 9X isn't by itself distorting a damn thing, nor is the matter of
using the unsharp mask or whatever your photo enlargement software likes
to call such a filter, imposing a problem. That is unless you
intentionally over-push those unsharp (or whatever photo
enhance/clean-up) filter(s) to the point of no return, as even I have an
old dog that's smart enough to do that much.

Our 'tomcat' image wizard on behalf of hyping Mars at every possible
turn in the road, whereas he wants us to see what only he sees in
miniature form, as supposedly representing his itsy-bitsy Martian life.
I've tried but still can't put any of those little Martian pixels into
sufficient agreement with whatever is apparently seen as intelligent
life by 'tomcat'. Sorry about that. (I guess one of us is a little
crazier or more snookered than the other)

So, if you still can't see a damn thing, perhaps you can simply post
your best image enlargement, in that I too will see the exactly same
nothing that you claim to see. For all we know, you could be right.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Observationology is a science that is especially demanding of one's
expertise and deductive reasoning, and that's because of the imaging
format and resolution is seldom ideal. It is a matter of our realizing
upon what's perfectly natural as opposed to what's unnatural looking,
and not just per given item but for a given collection of associated
items or rather pixel patterns that either fit or they do not fit into
their respective category.

There are certain things the laws of physics and those of planetology
and/or the geology of nature allows to happen, and there are other laws
or rules as to what can be artificially or rather intelligently modified
in order to suit the needs of those in charge of a given location.

Taking a given image and then automatically naysay excluding whatever is
the least bit weird or unusual simply because it doesn't happen to fit
within your mindset as to whatever a artificial/intelligent modification
might involve, isn't going to yield a proper degree of understanding as
to what is artificial or natural.

In other words, you folks can't honestly claim to see one item of
relative minimal size as representing a perfectly natural geology caused
terrain of lava or rock formation and/or that of a 'fluid arch' as
interpreted from each of their pixel patterns, while otherwise excluding
those much larger and/or more robust and certainly complex looking items
as having equal or greater numbers of their pixels that interpret as
representing a very artificial/intelligent looking set of patterns that
simply can't coexist in nature. But that's exactly what naysayers
and/or rusemasters do, whereas they exclude upon whatever rocks thy boat
because that's all they've done for all of their silly lives, even if it
means taking us into another war over stealth/invisible WMD's that never
existed in the first place.

BTW; 99.9% of this Usenet is very much pro GW Bush or rather pro
whatever available puppet is accomplishing their dastardly deeds,
whereas those saying otherwise have most often proven by way of their
past and current actions that they too are in favor of sustaining their
little part of this mainstream status quo at all cost. Therefore, it's
not hardly a wonder that those in charge of keeping such lids on tight
are also within this same 99.9% category as those in charge of this
social/religious/political fiasco that has recently caused so much
collateral damage and carnage of the innocent, w/o remorse and with no
apparent end in sight. (AKA birds of a feather flock together)

BTW No.2; there's no question that Venus is a hot and nasty environment
of mostly extremely active geothermal considerations.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

"TeaTime" wrote in message


I can see both your posts above, Brad and I've been conversing with you
openly and asking sensible questions. I haven't attempted to naysay your
basic ideas, only discuss the finer details. I can't see where you're
getting the author moderation thing from - your posts are here aren't they?

As it turns out, since they couldn't manage to terminate my poor old PC,
instead they turned to corrupting my local ISP, and it was that method
which did the intended job of messing most everything up, and thus
having remotely cut me off.

Would you like to know the name of that ISP which claims being totally
dumbfounded?

Pretty silly of those MIB that you like so much.
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Come on folks, cat got your tongue? where's the beef?

Got that nifty 60:1 ratio of GLOW rocket/payload that'll put such nifty
tonnage into safely orbiting our moon, with payload and fuel to spare?
-
Brad Guth


--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG