|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is alive and kicking our NASA's butt
Guth Venus is way more alive than Usenet
http://mygate.mailgate.org/mynews/re...=smart&p=1/443 http://groups.google.com/group/rec.o...add59b61fb9f50 - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is alive and kicking our NASA's butt
How unfortunate, that the ESA Venus EXPRESS truth and nothing but the
truth can't even be Usenet shared without blowing yet another mainstream status quo fuse. Must be because of what the likes of John Ackerman had to say as of provided within his "Alternative View of Venus", and of what a few others before and after having suggested that the planetology of Venus isn't nearly as old as we'd been informed by our very own NASA. I guess unlike our NASA's hocus-pocus moon, the regular laws of physics and of planetology factors are working exactly as they should on behalf of Venus. Sorry to say that the digital radar obtained composite image of what's easily interpreted as including what's looking so intelligently artificial about Venus, that as such it still (after nearly 7 years) stands the test of time and of surviving more peer review flak than you or I could have imagined. - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is alive and kicking our NASA's butt
The moon is a little bit further from Earth with each passing year.
If the Chinesees expect to land a rice-muncher on it, they'd better hurry. It will be out of reach soon. "Brad Guth" wrote in message news:1980f8d381c348f62a64122ad50006f2.49644@mygate .mailgate.org... How unfortunate, that the ESA Venus EXPRESS truth and nothing but the truth can't even be Usenet shared without blowing yet another mainstream status quo fuse. Must be because of what the likes of John Ackerman had to say as of provided within his "Alternative View of Venus", and of what a few others before and after having suggested that the planetology of Venus isn't nearly as old as we'd been informed by our very own NASA. I guess unlike our NASA's hocus-pocus moon, the regular laws of physics and of planetology factors are working exactly as they should on behalf of Venus. Sorry to say that the digital radar obtained composite image of what's easily interpreted as including what's looking so intelligently artificial about Venus, that as such it still (after nearly 7 years) stands the test of time and of surviving more peer review flak than you or I could have imagined. - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is alive and kicking our NASA's butt
"BluntForceTraumaT"
wrote in message The moon is a little bit further from Earth with each passing year. If the Chinesees expect to land a rice-muncher on it, they'd better hurry. It will be out of reach soon. And you actually think China is that dumb and dumber, and as otherwise as dumbfounded as yourself? Why go for the naked anticathode moon that's so freaking lethal in more ways than you can shake a fist full of flaming sticks at, when instead they'll simply grab the holy grail of high ground by way of taking over LL-1 - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is alive and kicking our NASA's butt
"BluntForceTraumaT" wrote in message ... The moon is a little bit further from Earth with each passing year. hmmm, i'm impressed that you knew that twink. good work! |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is alive and kicking our NASA's butt
"captain." wrote in message
news:0lvMg.787$bf5.127@edtnps90 hmmm, i'm impressed that you knew that twink. good work! How absolutely silly of yourself, and proof-positive of what rusemasters you folks actually are. Before we blindly leap ourselves onto our moon (for the first time), perhaps we should think again. You folks have got to be absolutely kidding about utilizing the physically dark surface of our extremely dusty and highly reactive moon, especially for much of anything that's on behalf of optical astronomy. At best, the LL-1 zone (60,000 km away from the moon) is relatively clean of debris and perhaps far enough away from that nasty moon of our's in order to humanly survive the combined solar/cosmic/moon TBI dosage, but that's only if well enough shielded by a few meters of water. Our moon's surface is highly if not entirely exposed to solar wind driven electrostatics and otherwise being that of a naked anticathode environment that's rather solar/cosmic and locally DNA lethal (far worse off than anything Van Allen belt related), plus continually and unavoidably running itself into stuff at 30+ km/s, and otherwise gravity attracting upon all that's nearby, is perhaps good for the sorts of robust robotics of those tough little SAR image receiving modules, but otherwise hardly suited for that of anything optical or otherwise end-user-friendly unless it's going deep underground. Do any of you folks even realize what absolutely terrific resolution a given focal length of 384,000 km can do on behalf SAR imaging? (I didn't think so) Such pure robotics on behalf of accomplishing such extended SAR/VLA imaging is actually based upon extremely efficient deployments of what should not represent 10% of a given Apollo mission, and/or perhaps not even involving 1% the mass per SAR image receiving module, and without folks ever having to endure the trauma as to what that sort of nasty lunar surface environment would otherwise be nailing countless strands of human DNA per second. Of course the regular laws of physics and I could be entirely wrong. In which case, how much DNA trauma and/or physical impact trauma can a human or that of anything optical withstand? - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is alive and kicking our NASA's butt
"Brad Guth" wrote in message news:ef1e6bcc620f386c664f803c5a55fcba.49644@mygate .mailgate.org... "captain." wrote in message news:0lvMg.787$bf5.127@edtnps90 hmmm, i'm impressed that you knew that twink. good work! How absolutely silly does absolute silliness have a numerical value? of yourself, and proof-positive of what rusemasters you folks actually are. well yes, the twinker and myself are behind the plot to convince the public that the moon is migrating outwards with each passing year. we almost had you all fooled. Before we blindly leap ourselves onto our moon (for the first time), perhaps we should think again. You folks have got to be absolutely kidding about utilizing the physically dark surface of our extremely dusty and highly reactive moon, especially for much of anything that's on behalf of optical astronomy. aren't you the guy who thinks there should be a colony on venus? now that's crazy! At best, the LL-1 zone (60,000 km away from the moon) is relatively clean of debris and perhaps far enough away from that nasty moon of our's in order to humanly survive the combined solar/cosmic/moon TBI dosage, but that's only if well enough shielded by a few meters of water. Our moon's surface is highly if not entirely exposed to solar wind driven electrostatics and otherwise being that of a naked anticathode environment that's rather solar/cosmic and locally DNA lethal (far worse off than anything Van Allen belt related), plus continually and unavoidably running itself into stuff at 30+ km/s, and otherwise gravity attracting upon all that's nearby, is perhaps good for the sorts of robust robotics of those tough little SAR image receiving modules, but otherwise hardly suited for that of anything optical or otherwise end-user-friendly unless it's going deep underground. Do any of you folks even realize what absolutely terrific resolution a given focal length of 384,000 km can do on behalf SAR imaging? (I didn't think so) we'll look into it right away sir!@ Such pure robotics on behalf of accomplishing such extended SAR/VLA imaging is actually based upon extremely efficient deployments of what should not represent 10% of a given Apollo mission, and/or perhaps not even involving 1% the mass per SAR image receiving module, and without folks ever having to endure the trauma as to what that sort of nasty lunar surface environment would otherwise be nailing countless strands of human DNA per second. Of course the regular laws of physics and I could be entirely wrong. In which case, how much DNA trauma and/or physical impact trauma can a human or that of anything optical withstand? - Brad Guth it's not something that i consider on a daily basis. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is alive and kicking our NASA's butt
Venus has certainly been a little different and perhaps a whole lot more
rare on behalf of having accommodated life than Earth (at least I've never once insisted that it's entirely or much less extensively populated with it's own kind), such as in many ways it's a whole lot better off considering it has unlimited and 100% renewable energy to burn (sort of speak), whereas it also hasn't a highly reactive anticathode of a nasty moon to deal with, and there's certainly not much chance of their having an ice-age because of not having that moon, and it has also been next to forever since they've had their last nasty storm, or much less having to survive horrific impacts or having any of those pesky floods to deal with. Earth is a very rare planet (I say, so what's the difference; being rare is a darn good thing) http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...63 05f2699d53 Panspermia via an icy proto-moon seems perfectly doable for having biologically terraformed planets other than Earth (much like wandering ETs or perhaps God having planted remote crops), as well as the random happenstance via local chemical interactions and/or the goodwill of ET intelligent designers adding to the soup of complex life as they trek there way through town. http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s327749.htm "Sitting here, waiting for someone to 'phone' us up is a waste of time." "The presence of land on our planet is a direct result of an extremely rare kind of collision with asteroids during its formation, Dr Hoffman says. This collision led to the formation of our unique type of moon, which is made of materially formerly part of the primitive Earth's outer crust." I totally agree with "Dr Hoffman", whereas it seems as though a 4000 km icy proto-moon should rather easily qualify as an effective terraforming impactor, especially if it's offering somewhat of a salty ice along with having loads of well protected DNA sequestered within. Jordan; 1) Hoffman is quite right that many Terrestrial planets may be much wetter than the Earth. (What he does not mention is that many may also be much drier: note that Mars, the most Earthlike planet in _ our_ Solar System, is by Earth standards a barren desert). However ... 2) Hoffman is reaching with his argument that a much wetter planet could not support an advanced technological civilization. It is true that _our_ path to advanced technology required extensive amounts of dry land, but it does not logically follow that our path is the only one possible. It is quite possible that, on some aquatic world a hundred light-years from here, an advanced alien civilization is noting that most planets geologically like theirs have much less water, and hence would lack the globe-spanning ocean that is required for _their_ path to advanced technology Jordan, With regards to "Earth is a very rare planet", that's actually a very good topic constrictive contribution that I have no arguments with. So why exactly are you otherwise such a anti-Venusian bigot? Good old Earth/moon http://www.spacedaily.com/news/life-01x1.html "The Earth is not unique because if its oceans. Any planet in the right part of the habitable zone will have those. What is unique about the Earth is that it has LAND. If the moon had not carried away most of the crust, there would be no ocean basins, no land, and no chance for life to evolve on land." Good points that do not happen to exclude upon our salty ice covered proto-moon itself as simply having impacted Earth, perhaps more than once, plus offering those unavoidable secondary shards of massive lunar icebergs, thereby depositing it's teratonnes of salty ice and otherwise having caused serious collateral damage to each of us, and otherwise causing a serious platonic butt-load of global trauma for mother Earth, such as having created the artic ocean basin. Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon http://groups.google.com/group/rec.o...9a78fedc7b9031 Not so old Venus http://www.spacedaily.com/news/life-01x2.html Unfortunately, this old infomercial article is absolutely chuck full of the usual mainstream status quo of infomercial-science, of the typical conditional-physics worth of damage-control which seriously sucks and blows at sharing just about anything but the truth. It's as though the regular laws of physics and of planetology do not apply to Venus, especially not to such a newish orb that's well into the process of becoming a habitable world for the rest of us once we've finished with having pillaged and raped mother Earth to death. There's more honest to God and otherwise replicated as scientifically positive reasons for Venus having sustained other intelligent life, as having been existing/coexisting upon Venus than not. Of course, if you're a collaborating Third Reich minion that's status quo or bust, then none of this means anything to yourself or those of your kind because, apparently there's none other than us humans in the entire universe, much less would others be any smarter than us or having become physiologically more advance, or perhaps at best mere heathens. BTW; Venus has teratonnes worth of easily available water plus unlimited renewable energy, thus Venusian ice cold beer is not all that unlikely, nor all that likely without good demand. Dry and even Venusian toasty land that's hosing more than it's fair share of lave and mud flows does NOT represent a world without it's fair and/or at least sufficient share of renewable water. Not all other worlds are as overly populated with the likes of such dumbfounded heathen humans that haven't an honest bone within their highly bigoted bodies. Not all other worlds are populated by such greedy and arrogant *******s that would knowingly perpetrate decades of cold-wars for their next unearned buck. Not all other worlds are based upon incest mutations of de-evolution and of having promoted religious faith-based social/political cultisms that if need be would put those of their own kind on a stick, and then blame others for having taken such actions. - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is alive and kicking our NASA's butt
Venus by MAGELLAN: Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles / Brad Guth / Guth
Venus From my limited Usenet experience that hasn't thus far been exactly all that resourceful, nor having been all that end-user friendly unless you happen to own a full-body flak suit, you'd certainly be hard pressed to learn all that much of anything by way of the usual anti-think-tank of what this naysay Usenet of NASA's infomercial-science represents, and/or by way of NASA's own wag-thy-dog standards of having excluded whatever evidence suits their agenda. But in spite of their obvious ESA/(Venus Express) and "Guth Venus" banishments, there's all sorts of new and improved science that's arriving about Venus, all of which further supports the geothermal nature of our extremely nearby and rather toasty Venus as being one seriously geophysically active and unavoidably hot place for the likes of us wussy and somewhat dumbfounded humans to live in the buff. However, the facts of that thick and terribly buoyant soup of an atmosphere as being so extra toasty by day, and otherwise cooling itself off rather nicely by night (extracting roughly 15% more thermal energy than solar contributed) does not significantly alter the geothermally heated surface situation by day or night, as being from where the vast bulk of that environmental CO2 and thermal energy has been derived from. For all that it's honestly worth, Venus is still within the newish planetology phase of having been radiating it's core energy and otherwise continually outgassing and thereby unavoidably contributing to it's robust atmospheric mass, as well as towards the heating of that Venusian atmosphere, as having been primarily roasting or rather geothermally baking itself from the bottom up, along with those highly reflective clouds receiving the solar influx of 2650 joules/m2 by day, thereby adding further insult to injury. ESA's thermal imaging and other planetology science results from their Venus Express, with lots more to come. http://sci.esa.int/science-e/www/obj...objectid=39432 For starters, and besides whatever's having been interpreted from various high quality and otherwise very truth worthy radar obtained images, we've also had some fairly old but good science as to appreciating the surface geothermal anomaly differentials, of what's clearly representing an active environment as having 225~240 K, as well as contributing as to whatever a good amount of surface elevation could factor without involving anything that's specifically active lava, bringing that overall thermal differential to a rather nifty 320 K. http://www.lpi.usra.edu/science/kief...oebe_fig2b.gif By any known standards of physics, considering the nearly 10% density of water that the surface atmosphere of mostly CO2 represents, whereas such available thermal differentials as well as for the added 4+bar/km of pressure differential is not exactly representing a wussy amount of easily available energy. Once the Venus EXPRESS PFS instrument is rebooted/activated and contributing in depth of better thermal imaging resolution that should penetrate down to the surface, whereas this is when we'll get another good batch of updated science as pertaining towards the mapping of all those multiple hot spots or active volcanic zones of geothermal lava and/or of various surface mud flows, plus those high pressure gas vents that are most likely contributing (according to John Ackerman's "Alternative View of Venus") their fair share of S8(monoclinic sulfur), and possibly the PFS will be of sufficient resolution as to re-identify the active area associated with the 'Fluid Arch'. All that I'm saying is that Venus is simply not offering the exact same surface temperature upon each and every square meter of that newish (much less old than Earth) planetary environment, and there's certainly absolute loads of what's local and of essentially unlimited/renewable energy that's available to work with. There's also absolutely nothing technical that's entirely insurmountable on behalf of other intelligent life having existed/coexisted, whereas there's only the ongoing mindset of bigotry, greed and arrogance of Usenet naysayism that's continually hard at work of their status quo wagging-thy-dogs to death, of otherwise imposing as much collateral damage and carnage upon the innocent without ever a stitch of remorse to boot is unfortunately pretty much what we should expect. The image of what easily interprets as a Venusian township or complex community of those extremely large and I think impressive looking structures, reservoirs and of what I interpret as having a rigid airship and of that associated bridge as having created their perfectly rational configuration of a worthy Venusian infrastructure, along with having their nearby township's local tarmac that's also offering a fairly complex item of good size, isn't a joke. But since most Usenet folks and official damage-control rusemasters tend to refuse to believe my image processing and otherwise impose banishment upon all subsequent interpretations, or for that matter of tormenting whatever anyone else happens to perceive as being potentially artificial about Venus gets their official Usenet topic/author stalking, bashing and/or banishment along with as much of their mainstream status quo flak as this pathetic Usenet from naysay hell can muster (yet they'll believe each and every NASA/Apollo image w/o question and/or without a stitch of physics or any other hard-science in support thereof) is why I'm starting this topic off by posting the raw NASA/Magellan image links, which so happens to contain the bulk of those terrific items of interest, that which I've spoken of and having requested honest contributions from all others, that's hopefully going to become worthy of my having shared this discovery for the past seven years. Here's the original of the Magellan radar imaging composite, of representing roughly 225 meter and 36 image confirming looks/pixel: http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif If this radar digital image was simply too complex for your expertise, or simply too much for your computer to manage, I'll gladly tell you how to easily minimize the task of processing as little as 5% of the total frame, or at most 10% should more include the entire area of interest that can then be rather quickly processed into as large of an image file as your computer can manage to cope with, although there's no good reason to push this small portion of not more than 10% into a multi megabyte format, that is unless it's your intentions of proving how massive and/or distorted your version of an image can be accomplished. MAGELLAN: Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles low res: http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/ht...115s095_1.html LIFE identified on Venus http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...78f97e66897298 At least "Duncan Young" was at the time being honestly constructive, though without his supposed expertise ever once having contributed a supportive radar image on behalf of his unsubstantiated argument that all is perfectly natural. Although I'd been cut off from GOOGLE Usenet at the time, so that further topic contributions were not being accepted, and by the time I'd noticed it seemed too late. The others as having contributed to this one and of so many other similar topics were clearly of NASA's damage-control or MIB rusemasters, and thereby totally pointless for accomplishing anything the least bit constructive. Clearly these folks have a great many of their infomercial butts to cover, and at public expense they're really good at it. My argument has always been that taking 36 looks/pixel beats 4 looks/pixel whenever it comes down to being of the most truth worthy of interpreting such radar pixels. Unfortunately, those 36 looks/pixel brings the working image resolution down to 225 m/pixel instead of the niftier 75 m/pixel, but that's only good news on behalf of honest observationology if what we're looking for is of a reasonably large configuration or stature to start off with, and since we still have the surrounding terrain that is always there to behold as our basis of reference, reinforcing as to what's otherwise looking perfectly natural about Venus as opposed to what looking as most likely artificial. If I'm still not asking too much (though obviously I have been), please take another unbiased/(open mindset) 1:1 look-see, and tell me whatever it is that you honestly think, and please do bother share as to the observationology and/or planetology basis of whatever's encharge of your best SWAG or investigative mindset. If you can't manage or otherwise refuse to accomplish the digital PhotoShop enlargements, in which case I'll provide my best efforts as to sharing the step by step of whatever photographic digital enlargement/(zoom-in) process has to offer, and then I'll share the enlargement results of what I've managed to accomplish, which unfortunately isn't going to be 10% as good as what our nondisclosure NIMA team of cloak and daggers has had to offer, and my efforts shouldn't even be nearly as good as whatever yourself and of your newer software of whatever PhotoShop can deliver. Unfortunately, my proor old PC is continually under the utmost of GOOGLE/Usenet attacks, of being on the receiving end their best spermware/****ware, therefore I often get diverted and/or remote shut-down in mid stream, and then I have to restart entirely from scratch. It's really funny and quite pathetic at the same time, that such silly MI/NSA~NASA MIB damage control efforts are continually wasted on little old me. (no wonder they can't find Usama bin Laden) - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Venus is alive and kicking our NASA's butt
Topic update:
Venus has certainly been a little different and perhaps a whole lot more planetology rare on behalf of having accommodated intelligent other life than Earth (at least other than in jest, I've never once insisted that it's either entirely or much less extensively populated with it's own kind), such as in many ways it's actually a whole lot better off considering it has such unlimited and 100% renewable energy to burn (sort of speak), whereas it also hasn't a highly reactive anticathode of a nasty moon to deal with, and there's certainly not much chance of their having an ice-age because of not having that moon, and it has also been next to forever since they've had their last nasty storm, or much less having to survive horrific impacts or having any of those pesky floods to deal with. Earth is a very rare planet (I'd say, so what's the difference; being rare is a darn good thing) http://groups.google.com/group/sci.s...63 05f2699d53 Panspermia via an icy proto-moon still seems perfectly doable for having biologically terraformed planets other than Earth (much like wandering ETs or perhaps God having planted remote crops), as well as the random happenstance via local chemical interactions and/or the goodwill of ET intelligent designers adding to the soup of complex life as they trek there way through town. http://www.abc.net.au/science/news/stories/s327749.htm "Sitting here, waiting for someone to 'phone' us up is a waste of time." "The presence of land on our planet is a direct result of an extremely rare kind of collision with asteroids during its formation, Dr Hoffman says. This collision led to the formation of our unique type of moon, which is made of materially formerly part of the primitive Earth's outer crust." I'd have to totally agree with "Dr Hoffman", whereas it seems as though a 4000 km icy proto-moon should rather easily qualify itself as an effective Earthly terraforming impactor, especially if it's offering somewhat of a salty ice along with having loads of well protected DNA sequestered within. Jordan; 1) Hoffman is quite right that many Terrestrial planets may be much wetter than the Earth. (What he does not mention is that many may also be much drier: note that Mars, the most Earthlike planet in _ our_ Solar System, is by Earth standards a barren desert). However ... 2) Hoffman is reaching with his argument that a much wetter planet could not support an advanced technological civilization. It is true that _our_ path to advanced technology required extensive amounts of dry land, but it does not logically follow that our path is the only one possible. It is quite possible that, on some aquatic world a hundred light-years from here, an advanced alien civilization is noting that most planets geologically like theirs have much less water, and hence would lack the globe-spanning ocean that is required for _their_ path to advanced technology Jordan, With regards to "Earth is a very rare planet", that's actually a very good topic constructive contribution that I have no arguments with. So why exactly are you and of so many others of your kind such all-or-nothing as totally anti-Venusian bigots? Good old Earth/moon http://www.spacedaily.com/news/life-01x1.html "The Earth is not unique because if its oceans. Any planet in the right part of the habitable zone will have those. What is unique about the Earth is that it has LAND. If the moon had not carried away most of the crust, there would be no ocean basins, no land, and no chance for life to evolve on land." Those are additionally good points that do not happen to exclude upon our salty ice covered proto-moon itself as simply having impacted Earth, perhaps more than once, plus having offered those unavoidable secondary shards of massive lunar icebergs, thereby depositing it's teratonnes of salty ice and otherwise having caused serious collateral damage to each of us, and otherwise having caused a serious geophysical butt-load of global trauma for mother Earth, such as having created the arctic ocean basin and perhaps a few other significant impressions. Earth w/o Magnetosphere, w/o Moon http://groups.google.com/group/rec.o...9a78fedc7b9031 Our not so old Venus http://www.spacedaily.com/news/life-01x2.html Unfortunately, this old article is absolutely chuck full of the usual mainstream status quo of infomercial-science, of the typical conditional-physics worth of damage-control which seriously sucks and blows at sharing just about anything but the truth. It's as though the regular laws of physics and of planetology do not apply to Venus, especially not to such a newish orb that's well into the process of becoming a habitable world for the rest of us once we've finished with having pillaged and raped mother Earth to death. There's more honest to God and otherwise replicated as scientifically positive reasons for Venus having sustained other intelligent life, as for having been existing/coexisting upon Venus than not. Of course, if you're a collaborating Third Reich minion that's all status quo or bust, then none of this means anything to yourself or those of your kind because, apparently there's none other than us humans in the entire universe, much less would others be any smarter than us or having become physiologically more advance, or perhaps at best mere heathens that we might rather eat. BTW; Venus has teratonnes worth of easily available water plus unlimited renewable energy, thus Venusian ice cold beer is not all that unlikely, nor all that likely without good product demand. Dry and even Venusian style of extra toasty land that's hosting more than it's fair share of lava and mud flows does NOT represent itself as a world that's without it's fair and/or at least sufficient share of renewable water. Not all other worlds are as overly populated with the likes of such dumbfounded heathens as humans that haven't an honest bone within their highly bigoted bodies. Not all other worlds are populated by such born-again greedy and arrogant *******s that would knowingly perpetrate decades of cold-wars for obtaining their next unearned buck. Not all other worlds are based upon incest mutations of de-evolution and of having promoted religious faith-based social/political cultisms, that if need be would put those of their own kind on a stick, and then having to blame others for supposedly having taken such actions. - Brad Guth -- Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Venus is alive and kicking our NASA's butt | Brad Guth | Policy | 210 | April 12th 07 06:43 PM |
Venus/Moon ~ to Terraform, to DNA Seed, to Visit or NOT! | Brad Guth | Policy | 3 | August 12th 06 04:11 PM |
Venus/Moon ~ to Terraform, to DNA Seed, to Visit or NOT! | Brad Guth | Astronomy Misc | 3 | August 12th 06 04:11 PM |
Venus/Moon ~ to Terraform, to DNA Seed, to Visit or NOT! | Brad Guth | History | 1 | August 12th 06 09:22 AM |
Venus/Moon ~ to Terraform, to DNA Seed, to Visit or NOT! | Brad Guth | UK Astronomy | 1 | August 12th 06 09:22 AM |