GUTH Venus is way too hot for even Bad Astronomy

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
om

It's a little bit like The Wizard of Oz, sorry folks, whereas it seems
that we haven't quite gotten around to having walked on our extremely
big old and otherwise nearby moon that's so physically massive in ratio
to Earth, as well as being so physically dark and nasty (hardly Apollo
passive guano island like and xenon lamp spectrum illuminated at that),
but so what's the difference if one more silly lie begets another and
another?

Our moon may have to remain as a mostly robotic wonderland, as otherwise
merely a nasty realm that's accessible via a safe looking glass from the
moon's L1, whereas otherwise it's somewhat physically DNA/RNA taboo.
Although, Venus isn't off limits unless you're a certified moron, and
VL2 is certainly space station doable as is. Venus shouldn't ever
require any terraforming on our behalf, just damn good CO2--CO/O2 air
conditioning and structural composite basalt as insulation that's worth
R-1024/m.

If not in person, I hope to hell we don't summarily screw up Venus via
robotics to the extent that we've accomplished so much dastardly
commercial forms of collateral damage by way of having pillaged, trashed
and the ongoing energy raping of mother Earth without so much as a speck
of remorse.

I obviously care most about Venus, as our moon seriously sucks, whereas
the planet Venus is otherwise more than obviously where all the serious
action of other intelligent life is at, especially since Pluto got the
royal shaft, as seemingly Ceres is getting a similar official NASA fid,
and Mercury is simply too off-world as well as past the point of return
(similar to Mars).

At least VL2 is more than cool enough, as to being POOF/(space depot)
doable, and every 19 months it gets to within 100 fold the distance of
our moon. If that isn't the best ever Russian/POOF good news, or what,
then nothing is.

While rather quickly roasting our wieners on Venus (a few seconds ott to
do the trick), how much energy do you folks suppose a good air
conditioning system as part of your CO2--CO/O2 process is going to
demand?

Remember, at that sort of environment pressure you'll not require more
than a 1% O2 factor, and the remainder should be of H2. Thus having 99%
H2 and 1% O2 at 96 Bar is about all the atmospheric displacement of that
otherwise crystal clear and dry CO2 that's otherwise relatively harmless
that you'll ever need. Also remember that you'll be continually
fighting off the lesser gravity of 90.5%, and otherwise having all of
that pesky 64+ kg/m3 of buoyancy to fend off. Of course, if you only
had half a village idiot brain, as such you might as well utilize such
factors as to your benefit.

Say if this were an application per 1000 m3/(interior 10 x 20 x 5 meter
abode), and if that Venusian habitat volume were insulated at R-1024/m2;
what's the thermal energy budget of keeping your cache of beer and vodka
icy cold?

That's roughly a surface/foundation area of 264 m2, a portion of what
should be roughly a 828 m2 exterior that's in part exposed to the hotter
than hell surface that's getting rid of 20 J/m2, and otherwise fending
off the somewhat toasty atmosphere that's always cooler than the
geothermally forced surface. Therefore, without question it's nearly
always hot outside and there's just the structural composite basalt
insulated barrier of R-1024/m that's giving way to an inward flux of
thermal conduction that's worthy of having 0.00097656/m2 (0.0977% which
I believe is roughly less than 0.45 K/m2/hr) of that bone dry heat to
deal with, which seems by all manner of known physics as being rather
manageable, if not a touch overkill.

BTW; Venus has all the raw elements and the energy for locally
processing whatever into the required items of surviving Venus (except
for having enough ice cold beer and pizza). All that's required is the
small factor of applied intelligence or simply deductive common sense
should otherwise more than do the trick.

Is there something other that's specific about accomplishing Venus that
you'd like to review or constructively contribute, such as on behalf of
those nifty composite rigid airships?

How about we review on behalf of defending yourself from those
exoskeletal Cathars that can't seem to take no for an answer? (you're
not alone, you know)

Would you folks like to talk about the Russian VL2 POOF platform/depot,
or how about laser interplanetary communications (much the same as
NASA's deep space network), except for making those less spendy local
interplanetary calls that shouldn't take hardly any energy to accomplish
with a quantum binary packet mode of 425 nm FM/(+/-25 nm) photons doing
their extremely efficient thing.
-
Brad Guth


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

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:cb19b4acba223c54583d51965415e295.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

As of lately, the Usenet MIB borg collective of MI/NSA spooks and moles
are certainly hard at trying to terminate my poor old PC. Gee whiz, I
can't but wonder why I'm worth all that much trouble, unless it's
because I'm sharing too much of the truth and nothing but the truth.

Perhaps all the flak is because of our 100,000 some odd +/- year or +/-
century encounters with the Sirius star/solar system, that had been of
more frequent orbital encounters in our multiple ice age cycle past,
whereas of lately we've had that pesky moon of our's to deal with as of
the last ice age this planet will ever see. Take away our moon and
Earth gets cold. Relocate our moon at Earth's L1 and we extensively
cool off mother Earth in spite of whatever we've managed to do to our
frail environment (perhaps creating a touch too much shade, which is
still better off than not having enough shade).

Unfortunately, ESAs Venus EXPRESS mission is no longer alive, as sadly
MI/NSA~NASA has pretty much nailed their science coffins shut. Having
thus far excluded their robust PFS instrument from sharing in the
geothermal truth about Venus is actually mainstream's faith-based status
quo doing exactly what they do best. However, we don't have to believe
their every word, nor do be have to take their damage control ultimatums
as though being the word of God.

As geothermally heated from the active core on up, and thereby as
humanly nasty as Venus is, it still has our polluted and energy raped
Earth beat by a long shot at offering hundreds of fold more locally
available energy/m2, that's actually environmentally clean (soot free as
well as near zero NOx, and of this taking of energy is even free of any
artificial CO2 potential), otherwise Venus energy is perfectly renewable
to boot.

Unfortunately, the relatively newish planetology and geothermally active
nature of Venus is still intellectually as well as scientifically and
especially faith based off-limits, as remaining sequestered in official
taboo/nondisclosure mode, where it's having to remain as stealth as were
all of those Muslim or Islamic WMD. In other words, science and even
physics simply can not share the truth about Venus, out of fear of their
careers getting terminated, if not worse.

JFK had honestly attempted to put a stop to such Skull and Bones cult
like authority, which only got himself terminated in a very personal and
lethal way. Here's that JFK Speech on Secret Societies and Freedom of
the Press http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LlEqtaWpKEU.

I happen to totally agree with the intent of honest renewable energy
topics, of promoting as much as possible "Solar, not nuclear", in that a
composite of solar PV, stirling and wind turbine per energy tower can in
fact deliver a clean and perfectly safe footprint of energy density
that's worth 37.5 kw/m2 (37.5 kjhr/m2), that's likely to advance to the
50 kw/m2 level in the near future. Along with a national power grid
infrastructure, the areas best suited for this form of renewable energy
extraction can pick up as much as 75% of our future needs, along with
15% hydroelectric, 10% nuclear (meaning near zero coal and oil).
Nations without hydroelectric or nuclear potential would obviously have
to make due with supplementing LNG and perhaps h2o2 in order to obtain
their maximum benefit with the least pollution from whatever fossil or
biofuel alternatives.

However, the nuclear alternatives at perhaps their best all-inclusive
birth to grave 375 whr/m2 or 375 jhr/m2 are not going down without a
tough and bloody as hell fight, to each of our mutually polluted and GW
deaths if need be. I also agree that perhaps the best this global
energy shortage fiasco can mange is for going along with our utilizing
nuclear alternatives for the relatively safely (far better off than coal
and oil) methods of accomplishing 10% of our global energy needs. So,
I'm not and never have been your Mr. Anti-Nuclear. After all, there are
more than a few nations of less than heathen status that probably can't
be fully entrusted with nuclear energy, but if we keep making coal and
oil spendy or otherwise unavailable, the only viable alternative may
come down to WW-III.

BTW; for this and most any other topic argument sake, the laws of
energy still represents that 3600 joules = 3600 whr = 1 kw or 1 kwhr or
1 kjhr because, a jhr is still worth 3600 joules. There's nothing
hocus-pocus about it, other than it's the truth and nothing but the
truth, which in modern times of big-energy polluting, pillaging and
raping mother Earth to death obviously doesn't count for squat.

These Usenet big-energy folks that are the best at infomercial spewing
and for usually being directly or indirectly industry paid-for as
naysayers against all that's renewable and clean, are into playing their
silly word or syntax games, thereby avoiding the honest intent or jest
of the original topic, and thus focused upon stalking and trashing
whomever and of whatever the pro green/renewables of constructive
contributions have to share, treated as though we're their big-energy
approved toilet-paper.

BTW No.2; Global Warming is for real, and it's real in more ways than
one. At least we can honestly say that it's partially (10%~25%) caused
by humanity, and that there are direct and indirect environmental
consequences of our past, present and future actions. However, because
of the vast amount of required energy, the continued thawing of Earth
since the last ice age this planet will ever see, is not entirely our
fault.

Rather oddly, but not hardly a surprise if going by these extra special
infomercial days of promoting all that's pro big-energy and of having to
protect their puppet government(s) mainstream status quo butt, plus
seeing those usual cover thy butt-loads of faith based damage control on
steroids, whereas this following topic of perfectly honest science seems
as though rather Mailgate/Usenet taboo/nondisclosure rated, therefore it
must be offering us too much of the truth and nothing but the truth.

Mailgate/Usenet indext listed as; Message not available:
"Temperature on global warming turned up" / by William Elliot

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...4e1a7a3d8636ec

The regular laws of physics and I'm strongly suggesting that as much as
90% of our inside and out GW fiasco is derived from our recently
obtained moon, which isn't discounting the 10% impact as caused by
humanity (at best I'd buy into a 75%/25% ratio). In other words, if we
all departed this Earth and let nature take its planetology course, this
Earth would continue to thaw from the last ice age this planet will ever
see. As long as we have that pesky moon of ours, ice age trapped
methanes and CO2 will in fact keep "Bubbling Through Seafloor Creates
Undersea Hills", though at a reduced rate if the human factor were
entirely eliminated.
http://www.mbari.org/news/news_relea...aull-plfs.html
You folks do realize that Earth isn't getting itself any bigger, whereas
if anything it's ever so gradually shrinking, exactly as it should.
Imagine that, another truth being told that we're not supposed to know
about, just like we're not supposed to realize that our magnetosphere
has been losing its worth at 0.05%/year.

Clearly our nifty orbiting mascon/moon is in fact so 'one of a kind'
unusually massive and nearby, so much so extra special that as such it
can't but help to transfer and thereby induce an amount of thermal
energy into our environment by way of tidal forces (inside and out),
plus whatever's unavoidably contributed from all of those reflected and
secondary worth of IR/FIR photons that have little if any trouble
getting through to the surface that getting a little extra sooty and
otherwise polluted by the day, which includes less snow and ice coverage
that means upon average a lower global albedo, that in turn represents
an even better sol and moon energy absorber that in turn keeps our
nighttime atmosphere more cloud covered due to the increased levels of
h2o in our atmosphere.

This following topic link is still a tough mainstream nut to crack, much
less sell, as it's representing a serious load of perfectly weird
notions based entirely upon the regular laws of physics, that's having
to do with our creating a surplus of shade for Earth, by way of
relocating our moon to Earth's L1. (easier said than done)

Next Space Station: 7.35e22 kg at Earth's L1

http://mygate.mailgate.org/mynews/sc...=smart&p=1/211

http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...990d88e00958f4

Earth's L1 for accommodating something of the robust mass of our moon,
that also has the LSE-CM/ISS of 256e6 tonnes of our interplanetary
gateway to deal with, is essentially a planetoid parallel parking zone
that's roughly 4 fold further away than its current 384,400 km orbital
status, thus 1.5376e6 km representing 1/16th the mutual attracting or
holding force of gravity, as well as having cut the amount of tidal
energy that's getting applied back into Earth's environment should be of
a similar reduction. However, once fully aligned with the sun while
parked within this halo orbit of Earth's L1 should actually not allow
that combined sol+moon tidal energy to at most drop to half of
whatever's currently taking place. I haven't fully polished off the
physics math in order to prove all of this, but I do believe it'll end
up being somewhere between this third amount less and perhaps half of
what tides we're currently dealing with, which is actually quite a
significant reduction in tidal energy transfer, that by rights should
also tend to cool off our terrestrial environment (inside and out).

Of course the 24 hour rotation of Earth in relationship to Earth's L1 is
no longer the same as our moon's existing 1.023 km/s. In one weird
sense we'd have to speed that moon of our's up to 112 km/s, which is
actually worth 6e23 joules, and that's seemingly going to be a tough
notion to accomplish because, it's existing 1.023 km/s of 2e20
centripetal joules worth of orbital energy is clearly insufficient for
that of L1, of which can't exactly be derived out of thin air unless
having been continually pulled along and subsequently established by a
sufficient other centripetal force, for getting our moon out to Earth's
L1 in the first place.

Here's some more of this weird math, suggesting what it'll take.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/cf.html#cf
r = 1.5376e9 meters
M = 7.35e22 kg
V = 112e3 m/s
Centripetal force: Fc = 5.996254e23 N = 6.11448e22 kgf
6.11448e22 kgf * 9.80665 = 5.996e23 joules Earth--L1
However Sol--Earth L1 is what takes that centripetal energy back
-5.996e23 joules Sol--L1 = 0.0 joules (near zero G)

However, since our moon is already keeping up with Earth is why there's
no real delta-v increase in its orbital velocity. In fact, it's having
to slightly reduce its average orbital velocity that'll become primarily
in relationship to Sol, as having become our binary associated L1
planetoid, representing our solar shade instead of being a pesky moon
that's causing us all sorts of grief.

In spite of all the usual status quo flak of Usenet's anti-think-tank
and naysayism that's typically of a faith based mindset, of borg like
individuals going postal in order to keep each and every one of their
infomercial lids on tight, whereas giving Earth some badly needed shade
while improving upon the usage of our moon's L1, at the very same time
as having moderated those global warming tidal forces by at least a
third, is what's actually quite doable in spite of whatever their
all-knowing god has to say.

BTW; my LSE-CM/ISS or at the very least a scientific (Earth facing)
tethered science platform or space depot may likely become another
requirement, that is unless having a slightly rotating L1 planetoid
isn't a problem. However, any possible rotation may remain as nullified
since the moon's original L2 tethered mass of 1e12 kg will likely still
exist at some reduced amount of mass, now modified as per acting on
behalf of representing the planetoids's (Sol facing) L1 tethered science
platform(s). In spite of my best dyslexic encrypted efforts, this
moon--planetoid thing is certainly damn confusing, isn't it.

If you have similar or obviously better math, I'd like to hear about
that. However, if you only wish to topic/author stalk and bash upon
whatever in order to continually whine about the matter of your having
to keep everything exactly as it was, such as when your Earth was flat
and everything else was still in orbit around your faith-based solitary
existence, then don't bother. The same goes if your conditional laws of
physics only applies to terrestrial matters, or on behalf of supporting
those matters orchestrated by and thus approved by the status quo which
you must worship at all cost.

On the other honest topic constructive hand, even if your subjective
interpretations and subsequent ideas or whatever best swag is way off in
another dimension, it's not going to be all that upsetting to my kind of
open mindset way of thinking, that's more often outside the box than not
to start with. If you simply can not manage to safely think for
yourself without blowing yet another mainstream status quo or whatever
faith based gasket, then perhaps not all is lost when our resident LLPOF
warlord(GW Bush) has a perfectly good paying, non-thinking as well as
non-caring job without ever involving a speck of remorse, for you and
others of your kind.
-
Brad Guth


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

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:cb19b4acba223c54583d51965415e295.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

Instead of our wasting our best talents and expertise upon whatever
notions, losing precious time and scant energy resources upon
terraforming our moon as is, which is actually technically doable
(especially from the LSE-CM/ISS perspective of what China could easily
accomplish on our behalf), whereas we could simply relocate that big old
sucker to Earth L1, and thereby call our global warming fiasco to a
freaking halt once and for all, along with having created shade to burn
(sort of speak).

We'd obviously give up having such a downright reactive pesky mascon of
a moon that's a little too massive and too darn close for our own good,
and instead we'd have for ourselves a nifty planetoid that's efficiently
cruising within Earth's L1, that is unless we decide otherwise.

This 7.35e22 kg planetoid of 3476 km diameter would also help block or
fend off a few of those nasty halo CMEs that are getting more frequent
and more lethal as our ongoing demise of our magnetosphere continues to
fail us and that of our frail DNA at -0.05%/year.

Best of all, our good old once upon a time moon of having shared such
warm and fuzzy amounts of global warming via tidal forced energy, would
still be within easy range of our fly-by-rocket access that'll soon
enough become a proven technology, as well as everything mission related
made a whole lot safer for walking on that full earthshine illuminated
deck of what's physically chuck full of dark and nasty cosmic and a few
otherwise invaluable solar substances (such as He3), though still a
touch salty and otherwise extremely electrostatic dusty (tens of meters
deep in places), and yet the LSE-CM/ISS tether dipole element could
still be allowed to reach if need be to within 4r of Earth. The 256e6
tonne and 1e9 m3 CM/ISS as our do-everything gateway abode/depot itself
is certainly much better off, and of the anchor tethers would have
become POOF suitable as for accommodating whomever is seriously rich and
hasn't all that much quality time to live anyway.
-
Brad Guth


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

"Bookman" wrote in message


We see that you're still exchanging private parts and various body
fluids with Fart Deco.
-
Brad Guth


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

"Brad Guth" wrote in message
news:bb75c49679d5454f5dfc514ab2a0266d.49644@mygate .mailgate.org

Since folks here in Usenet land of anti-think-tank naysayism can't
manage to behave themselves, much less focus upon the original topic at
hand; here's yet another constructive GS(global shading) contribution,
of related work in progress:

Though not impossible, it is simply not all that likely that Earth's
moon emerged from within mother Earth, whereas more likely as having
materialized from an incoming glancing sucker punch, such as by that of
a Sirius Oort cloud icy item, as for Earth having received a nasty blow
(say having created an arctic ocean basin like impression, along with
causing that seasonal tilt), by a very icy proto-moon (possibly of 4,000
km).

For example; If the orbital distance were made half and thus the
velocity would have to double because the mutual gravity of attraction
would have become 4X, therefore we'd have introduced 16 fold more inside
and out worth of centripetal/tidal energy to deal with, and I'm not all
that sure mother Earth would have stayed glued together at that level of
horrific gravitional and internal tidal forced trauma, much less for
cutting that orbital distance by yet another half (making its previous
orbit at 96,100 km and velocity of 4.092 km/s) would have to impose yet
another 16 fold factor, or rather suggesting 256 fold worse global
warming trauma than what we currently are suffering from the existing
tidal and thereby unavoidable GW affects as is.

The mainstream argument(s) against my icy proto-moon argument, as to
what's not quite adding up soon becomes a real physics ****-off; How
much time did it take for that moon which supposedly emerged from within
Earth, to have reached the orbital altitude of 96,100 km, then having
migrated from 96,100 km out to where it's currently operating at 384,400
km? (thus far, none of those spendy computer simulations seem clean
enough)

If within the regular laws of physics and by way of scientific matter of
fact, suggesting that we do seem to have at our disposal 2e20 joules of
potential mascon tidal energy via the mutual Earth/moon gravity and the
ever ongoing centripetal force to deal with, as applied energy that's
coming or ongoing per each and every second, as such that's actually
imposing a rather great potential of interactive planet--moon energy
that's obviously existing and ongoing, or simply as coming or going as
to/from somewhere or otherwise having to coexist as real energy.

http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/cf.html#cf
AJ Gravity Equations Formulas Calculator

http://www.ajdesigner.com/phpgravity...tion_force.php
Just for our calculating the Earth/moon static or passive worth of
gravitational force:

object 1 mass (m1) = 5.9736e24 kilogram
object 2 mass (m2) = 7.349e22 kilogram
distance between objects (r) = 384.4e6 meters

grams of gravitational force(F) = 2.021492e22 g
The kg of gravitational force = 2.021492e19 kg

Here's some more of this weird physics math that doesn't quite fit the
status quo mold, suggesting as to what it'll create by way of our having
placed 7.35e22 kg at Earth's L1 if we excluded the sun itself, which of
course can't ever be the case.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/cf.html#cf
r = 1.5376e9 meters
M = 7.35e22 kg
V = 112e3 m/s (if in relation to Earth's 24 hr rotation)
Centripetal force: Fc = 5.996254e23 N = 6.11448e22 kgf
6.11448e22 kgf * 9.80665 = 5.996e23 joules Earth--L1

However, since the notion of having our moon relocated at Earth's L1 is
essentially having diverted such into no longer orbiting us, there's
actually zero centripetal interaction taking place (Earth is simply
rather nicely spinning for no apparent reason at the end of this mutual
and somewhat nullified sol/moon/Earth gravity string), whereas
Sol--Earth L1 is supposedly the primary gravity influence of what takes
back or rather nullifies all of the moon's gravity as well as having
eliminated the centripetal force of whatever's equivalent in joules
worth of implied energy:

As for the sol--moon orbital interaction, as having established a
7.35e22 kg planetoid of orbital Fc = 44.4975e25 joules

object 1 mass (m1) = 1.989e30 kilogram
object 2 mass (m2) = 7.35e22 kilogram
distance between objects (r) = 148060290 meters
gravitational force (F) = 4.5375282969184E+25 kgf
The kgf as energy.s = 4.5375283e25 * 9.80655 = 44.4975e25 joules

Obviously the opposing gravity force/energy relationship that's
involving mother Earth has to be taken into account. I simply haven't
gotten that far.

In other words, with our moon relocated out to Earth L1, we/Earth lose
out on the original 2e20 joules, replaced by the sol/moon combined
gravity and tidal influence that's going to become considerably less
imposing than what we'd had ongoing from having that horrific amount of
nearby orbiting mass of 7.35e22 kg and cruising at 1.023 km/s. However,
we/Earth get to deal with our fair share portion of the 44.4975e25
joules while that moon becomes our local planetoid that's cruising
within Earth's L1, as our binary partner on behalf of offering that much
needed shade.

Since we're talking about the existing Fc as a centripetal force per
second, therefore the conversion over to joules is also of one that's
based upon a second by second basis.

1 joule = 1 W.s (watt second)
3600 j = 1 W.h (watt hour)
1 watt hour of applied energy is therefore worth: 3600 joules
1 joule/sec as applied for an hour thereby also = 3600 joules

Each kgf (kg of applied force/m/s) = 9.80665 joules

There's roughly 2.0394e19 kgf of Fc (centripetal force) that's
continually second by second as ongoing opposing force between Earth and
our unusually massive and nearby orbiting mascon/moon.

The second by second amount of centripetal force becomes:
2.0215e19 * 9.80665 = 19.824e19 joules

Per hour, that amount of second by second applied energy becomes worth:
2e20 j * 3.6e3 = 7.2e23 W.h (watts per hour), or 7.2e20 kw

At 7.2e20 / 5.112e14 m2 = 1.408e6 kw/m2

Obviously we're not getting ourselves mascon/moon roasted or otherwist
tramatised to death by way of that horrific amount of applied energy,
though a small portion of that mutual (inside and out) tidal induced
energy is unavoidably becoming thermal energy via friction (inside and
out). In addition to the Fc of 7.2e20 KW.h, there's also a touch of the
moon's IR/FIR as terrestrial influx, although because we're continually
being science data starved, as without having moon/L1 data, is why I've
not yet accounted for the reflected and secondary worth of such IR/FIR
energy that's received by Earth.

The slight portion of the mascon gravity that's offset by centripetal
force is what I'm suggesting is capable of global warming us inside and
out, as listing below:
0.1% = 1.408 kw/m2
0.01% = 140.8 w/m2
0.001% = 14 w/m2
0.0001% = 1.4 w/m2

However, since I'm on such a Usenet taboo or banishment status of a
need-to-know basis, and since I clearly do not already know all there is
to know, is why some of my math could be unintentionally skewed or even
dead wrong. Therefore, if your wizardly expertise should know any
better, perhaps you could simply share by telling us how much or how
little of that total amount of nearby mascon gravity and centripetal
force of applied tidal energy is actually keeping us a little extra warm
and toasty. My swag is leaning towards the 0.001% of the 7.2e20 KW.h,
as being worth 14 w/m2. Of course that's applied inside and out,
including a tidal forced atmosphere and otherwise all the way down to
the very core of Earth, and thereby affecting most everything in between
that's in any way fluid or capable of getting moved along by such
forces.

Therefore, take away our moon and subsequently a major portion of our
surface environment becomes rather extra snowy and icy cold to the
touch, not to mention rather albedo reflective to boot, perhaps even ice
age cold enough as to reestablish a few of those badly receding glaciers
and otherwise expand those polar caps. At least that's what the regular
laws of physics and of replicated science has been suggesting. That's
not my excluding or disqualifying the human GW factor of our global
dimming via soot and by having added those nasty elements (including
h2o) into our frail environment that's obviously anything but within
energy balance, that are directly and/or indirectly polluting our oceans
and atmosphere, like none other or even by what the entire collective of
known species other than human can accomplish (are we humans good at
raping and sucking the very life out of mother Earth, or what).
However, as bad off as that sounds, I simply do not place more than 25%
responsibility onto ourselves, and perhaps that's even worth as little
as 10% of the ongoing global warming demise that's plaguing us until we
manage to relocate that pesky moon of our's.

Too bad there's not one American supercomputer that's worthy of running
any of this analogy, at least not without blowing out their mainstream
status quo CPUs. Apparently only of what's Old Testament faith based,
or as hocus-pocus and/or cloak and dagger analogies can be run as fully
3D interactive computer simulations. As God forbid, you certainly
wouldn't want to rock thy good ship LOLLIPOP with the truth, now would
we.

Unfortunately, our ongoing demise of our highly protective
magnetosphere, at the rate of -0.05%/year, may eventually overtake the
GW factor, as being the more human DNA and of other forms of life
ultimate lethal demise of these two ongoing gauntlets, which added
together are going to represent more trauma than most such forms of life
as we know of can manage to evolve our way through, or otherwise survive
via applied technology.

Perhaps if the status quo gets its usual brown-nosed worth of big-energy
buttology certified way, whereas life on Venus (though naked humanly
hot) isn't looking quite as bad off as we've been faith-based mainstream
informed.
-
Brad Guth


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