The Usenet Swarm of Naysayism

Perhaps it's merely the naysayism black hole of GOOGLE/NOVA Usenet
that's having a bad decade, along with those oily Muslims thinking it
was a seriously bad sort of idea being relatively poor and otherwise
of such low impact upon our global environment.

Swarmisim is actually what Atheism and many other faith-based cults
are all about, along with our frail DNA lacking any remorse for having
perpetrated such horrific lies upon lies. Therefore, we should each
collectively swarm to our black heart's content, especially since
there's only a few centuries of grief remaining, if that much.
-
"whoever controls the past, controls the future" / George Orwell
-
Brad Guth

It seems the Usenet swarm of naysayisn hasn't any Muslim input.

Why are Muslims without their fair share of flak to toss at the likes
of myself?
-
Brad Guth

Why are such faith-based folks (aka pretend atheist) nearly always so
upset about sharing the truth?

Are Muslims just as anti-ET, as otherwise anti towards sharing the
discovery of other intelligent life?
-
Brad Guth

The swarm mindset of continual naysayism is clearly at the black heart
of what's getting in the way of honest physics and otherwise of
excluding the best available science that so much as dares to rock a
Zion boat.

Why exactly are such devout faith-based folks (aka pretend atheist)
nearly always so upset about sharing the truth?

Are Muslims just as anti-ET, as otherwise anti-truth and especially
anti towards sharing the discovery of other intelligent life (such as
on Venus)?

Why is advanced or even weird evolution and/or of applied technology
so forbidden on Venus?

Why the hell is our moon's L1 zone or pocket so gosh darn taboo/
nondisclosure or need-to-know rated?

Are NASA's cold-war Third Reich Zions actually that afraid of their
own cloak and dagger shadows?
-
Brad Guth

Saying nasty things about Jews just proves how dumb and ignorant you
are. Jews have above average intelligence. They have won more Nobel
prizes in science for their small number. We are only about 16 million
worldwide. Zionism is the Jewish Liberation answer to antiSemitsm. We
have survived ancient Romans, Greeks, Hittites, Nazis,
communism...America welcomed Jews and God has blessed America. ~Lainie~

~*Lainie~*The StarGazer*~


My Astronomy Website:
http://community.webtv.net/LAINIE121/doc



http://community.webtv.net/LAINIE121/WONDERSOFTHEWORLD

Is it any wonder that we're in the no-win fix we're in?

The usenet infinite black hole of all-knowing naysayism has an event
horizon, whereas everything good or bad goes in, but absolutely
nothing positive or even the least bit constructive ever comes out,
except more of the same old infomercial spewed crapolla that simply
doesn't rock their good ship LOLLIPOP.

Have any of you smart folks got a clue, as to why exactly is this
extensively Yiddish anti-think-tank of a naysay Usenet from hell so
gosh darn deathly afraid of its own shadow? Or, is it just a genetic
formulated fear of our moon and the planet Venus they're so deathly
afraid of?

What other than Yiddish religion is so absolutely paranoid about our
discovering or much less interacting with other intelligent or even
unintelligent life?

"Scientists ponder plant life on extrasolar planets"
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.a...d820b126792d97

I can't but totally agree with the above SETI topic, in that depending
upon the spectrum of available energy that's given and perceived as
light (much of which remains outside the threshold of human vision),
the forms of plant/microbe/animal life should have adapted, as do our
terrestrial diatoms for having taken the fullest advantage of the
given energy spectrum that's in charge of illuminating a given duiatom
friendly environment, including everything from UV starshine to that
of a brown dwarf's nearly black IR/FIR radiating sunlight (aka 'hot
rock') should do just fine as long as their local, solar, moon and
cosmic dosage of gamma and hard-Xrays are within the scope of whatever
such ET DNA or whatever alternative to terrestrial DNA can manage to
cope with.

How about our best of science wizards pondering on behalf of other
intelligent life that's either evolved or having been one way or
another transported onto intrasolar planets or moons, meaning the
likes of Venus or a few of those interesting Saturn or Jupiter moons
seems every bit as worthy as for any little frozen to death Ceres
dwarf of a planet, and otherwise certainly a whole lot better off than
anything Mars could sustain without imported resources.

At most a planet that's hosting intelligent other life needs merely a
brown dwarf of a sun, or at least having a Saturn+ or Jupiter+ class
of a mother planet from which to draw energy from. In the case of
Venus being of such a newish worth of planetology, chances are that it
could have survived an extended interstellar trek pretty much all by
itself, perhaps bringing along its own icy moon and whatever
collection of complex life that's capable of having survived where
most terrestrial forms of life from Earth simply would never have
survived, much less having evolved into the sorts of life as we know
it.

Just because a given planet or moon is not 100% suited to our butt
naked and so often dumbfounded usage as is, doesn't exclude such other
viable orbs from having their own populations of weird or even
somewhat terrestrial forms of survival intelligent other life to
behold, much like there being complex life within terrestrial ice or
having been surviving within certain places similar to being as hot as
hell on Earth, as well as within testy environments under the depths
of an ocean that would just as easily crush your typical submarine
that's accommodating us wussy humans, along with terminating our
extremely frail DNA that hasn't hardly evolved for the better since
the last ice age this planet is ever going to see, that is as long as
we're going to keep putting up with that massive and fast moving moon
of ours that's cruising so close to our home world that's 98.5% fluid
and thus unavoidably affected by those horrific tidal forces at play.

As I'd said countless times before, a humanly visual spectrum of
sunlight alone doesn't insure life, but it certainly makes our lives a
whole lot more interesting being able to see, rather than limited by
braille or via other than our highly evolved and/or intelligently
designed sensory capability of sight. Just think of how freaking
difficult it would be to falsely accuse Muslims of having WMD, much
less of our going into Iraq as based upon a braille method of taking
control over all of that Muslim oil, as having been our primary
objective in the first place. If we're in the dark (sort of speak),
such as illuminated by only UV or IR photons, as for such a blind
species we'd be hard pressed to cultivate such arrogance, greed and
faith-based bigotry.

Even our moon's nearby L1 would become a rather pointless
accomplishment if we only had those pesky UV and IR photons to work
with, and hadn't evolved to being able to visualize anything via such
spectrums. However, in a typical terrestrial or even physically dark
moon like environment, whereas at least UV energy does cause a great
amount of secondary/recoil photons to form, thus such secondary black-
light having created near-blue illumination might be more than
sufficient for a nocturnal sensitive form of human vision (including
Kodak film), much like what the lower visual extremes could easily
exist on Venus that has more geothermal IR/FIR photons than it knows
what to do with (of course intelligence wise, you'd still have to be
smarter than a hot rock).

Are you smarter than a hot rock?
-
Brad Guth

Why do we suppose GOOGLE's Usenet server is still selectively
disfunctional, and otherwise reporting lies to us instead of simply
archiving the various topic replies as supposedly having been taken
in?
-
Brad Guth

Of this GOOGLE/NOVA Usenet server going down the drain for the count,
as losing and/or having excluding many viable topic contributions is
par for the infomercial spewing course of exactly what happens
whenever too many Yids get upset, as unhappy campers.

Apparently the ongoing naysayism about banishing all that's in any way
related to our moon, of its L1, of Venus L2 (aka VL2 POOF City) and
Venus itself is still the mainstream status quo agenda of the day.

The recent interpretation on behalf of Mars having subfrozen water
that's covered by a nifty blanket of fluffy CO2 crystals isn't exactly
a good sign of such an environment hosting potential life, or even any
sign that our best applied technology can manage to utilize that local
cache of subfrozen water to any significant local advantage that isn't
of far more trouble than it's worth.

Unless there's something/anything locally geothermal worthy, having
megatonnes worth of such subfrozen ice isn't hardly worth all that
much, especially since that Mars environment is thus far without
hardly any salt, and for otherwise it's somewhat easily pulverised
plus solar and cosmic radiated to death.

As having recently shared with "siafu", in that I can only lead the
horse to water. However, if that silly horse refuses to drink, what
can I say.

There's other intelligent life existing/coexisting on Venus:
I've convinced all that use the regular laws of physics on an equal
basis of terrestrial or off-world applications, and otherwise of
having convinced anyone that has in any way honestly utilized an image
in order to deductively interpret as to whatever's natural as opposed
to what's potentially artificial looking. If you folks don't believe
in sticking with the regular laws of physics, or simply fail to
believe in pictures anymore than that horse which fails to drink, then
what can anyone possibly have to say?

That nifty Magellan radar image of what's looking so intelligent and
physically rational was obtained at 43 degrees, which makes it nearly
3D worthy to start off with, and of the composite image of having 36
radar looks per pixel is certainly a little more than truth worthy,
though obviously lacking in raw pixel details smaller than 225 meters,
however there's 75 meters per pixel as being easily extracted from
this composite made from the three original 75 meter resolution image
files. Therefore, at best I'm only interpreting as to whatever's of a
sufficiently large scale, while otherwise giving my best SWAG as to
whatever's of anything smaller that became extracted from the
PhotoShop enlargement process. How about yourself?

Oddly, or perhaps it's Usenet damage-control business as usual,
whereas it seems that none of you naysay folks have ever once
contributed an equal or better photographic image along with your
subsequent interpretations as to whatever's perfectly natural
looking. You silly folks can't even give that nifty "Fluid Arch" or
any portion of the other perfectly natural looking surroundings a fair
shot in the dark of your deductively interpreting on behalf of sharing
anything of any importance. For other than your obvious naysay
formulated mindset, why is that?
- Brad Guth

The recent science interpretation on behalf of Mars having subfrozen
water that's covered by a nifty blanket of fluffy CO2 crystals isn't
exactly offering us a good sign of such an environment hosting
potential life, or even any healthy sign that our best applied
technology can otherwise manage to utilize that local cache of
subfrozen water to any significant local advantage that isn't of far
more spendy trouble than it's worth.

Unless there's something/anything locally geothermal worthy, as for
having megatonnes worth of such subfrozen ice isn't hardly worth all
that much, especially since that mostly frozen to death Mars
environment is thus far without hardly any salt, and for otherwise
it's still somewhat easily pulverised by whatever's physically
incoming, plus getting summarily solar, moon and cosmic radiated to
death.

As having recently shared with "siafu" of Wikipedia, in that I can
only lead the horse to water. However, if that silly horse refuses to
drink, what can anyone or much less myself possibly say.

There's other intelligent life existing/coexisting on Venus:
I've convinced all that use the regular laws of physics on an equal
basis of terrestrial or off-world applications, and otherwise of
having convinced most anyone that has in any similar way honestly
utilized an image in order to deductively interpret as to whatever's
natural as opposed to whatever's potentially artificial looking. If
the establishment swarm of naysayism does not believe in sticking with
the regular laws of physics, or simply fails to believe in pictures
anymore so than that horse which fails to drink, then what can anyone
possibly have to say?

That nifty Magellan radar image of having recorded what's looking as
though physically intelligent and rather community infrastructure
rational was obtained at 43 degrees, which makes it nearly 3D worthy
to start off with, and of that composite image of essentially having
36 radar looks per pixel is certainly a little more than truth worthy
(though obviously lacking in raw pixel details smaller than 225
meters), however there's 75 meters per pixel as being easily extracted
from within this composite image that was made from the three original
75 meter resolution image files. Therefore, at best I'm only
deductively interpreting as to whatever's of a sufficiently large
scale, while otherwise having given my best SWAG as to whatever's of
anything smaller that became extracted via the observationology of
deductive interpretation from the subsequent PhotoShop enlargement
process, that which others as typically having been claiming as being
all-knowing and/or of such wizard status should have been capable of
doing at least one better. How about yourself?

Oddly, or perhaps it's Usenet mainstream damage-control (aka cover thy
butt) business as usual, whereas it seems that none of you naysay
folks in the supposed know of all there is to know have ever once
contributed an equal or better photographic image, along with your
subsequent interpretations as to whatever's perfectly natural
looking. You silly folks can't even give your honest opinion as to
that nifty "Fluid Arch" or that of any portion of all the other
perfectly natural looking surroundings, as offering us your best
effort of any fair shot in the dark of your deductively interpreting
expertise, on behalf of sharing much of anything of any planetology
importance. For other than your obvious swarm like naysay formulated
mindset, why is that?
-
"whoever controls the past, controls the future" / George Orwell
-
Brad Guth

Of what I and so many others have to continually put up with is at
best an amazing naysayism gauntlet on steroids, at worse mainstream
status quo damage-control that's clearly more or less intended for the
Yiddish/Zionism butt protecting benefit than not. Anyone into
thinking that religion isn't in charge of most everything that counts,
is either a damn fool or part of the grand ruse/sting of the century.

On Jul 15, 10:27 am, The Ghost In The Machine
wrote:
In sci.physics, BradGuth

wrote
on Sun, 15 Jul 2007 16:59:59 -0000
.com:

The Ghost In The Machine,
Why exactly is this extensively Yiddish anti-think-tank of a naysay
Usenet from hell so gosh darn deathly afraid of its own shadow? Or,
is it just our moon and the planet Venus they're so deathly afraid of?

What other than Yiddish religion is so absolutely paranoid about our
discovering or much less interacting with other intelligent life?

I'm not sure why Yiddish gets singled out here, and in
any event it is entirely possible for other worlds to
have intelligent life -- which may have been exported
here in the distant past. However, the likelihood is not
all that high, and if they did export life here, they did
it so carefully that there is no unambiguous evidence of
extrasolar intervention.

Those pesky Yiddish rusemasters of their holy grail realm, that
usually claim as being such all-knowing wizards, simply have by far
the most faith-based swarm of their terrestrial limited God and
subsequent mindset at risk of losing their grip on damn near
everything under the sun, and then some.

Otherwise I agree, and to further impose that humanity as a somewhat
large scale version of intelligent panspermia by way of sheer
happenstance or via intelligent design arrived on Earth within the
last few ice age cycles (I'm thinking primarily populated shortly
after the last ice age this world is ever going to see, that is as
long as we keep that pesky moon so freaking nearby), is pushing this
ET migration or terraforming notion about as far as one of my lose
cannons can muster. Of utilizing an icy proto-moon would have made
for a very well qualified interstellar craft(aka Noah's Ark) or
temporary home away from home.

I think because of the relative young Earth, that such evidence of our
highly complex DNA is just about everywhere you'd care to look openly
at the variations that exist within our species, and taking yet
another look-see at what we're clearly missing from whatever local
evolution, that obviously took place considerably prior to our
somewhat recent lithobraking arrival.


There is also the little issue of how such life, if it
is more complex than a virus, survives being taken below
freezing for extended intervals. Best I can do there is a
very well-insulated carrier (something along the lines of
a Dewar flask) and a heat source, possibly fission power.

The geothermal core of our icy proto-moon is obviously more than good
enough as providing a geothermal energy resource along with countless
raw minerals and even more than likely a sufficient supply of U238,
that's if need be good to go for countless thousands of interstellar
migration years. That thick salty ice itself is also making the best
ever shield against cosmic radiation, and otherwise protecting thy ET
butt on behalf of diverting or fending off most of whatever's
physically nasty that goes bump in the night as your icy orb leaves
one large Oort cloud in its dust, and having to migrate through yet
another pesky Oort cloud gauntlet of lethal debris on its way to
becoming our moon, not to mention the eventual lithobraking encounter
with Earth.


Such would leave quite a bit of evidence, were we to know
precisely where to look...though there is the possibility of
it being dunked in our oceans and scattered to all corners
(after a few billion years).

To a born-again Yiddish naysay mindset, whereas absolutely no amount
of evidence is ever sufficient, as in no matters what. Stuffing
Venusian spores or even an ET up a Yid's butt wouldn't qualify as
sufficient evidence.


"Scientists ponder plant life on extrasolar planets"
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.a...m/thread/59ab7...

I can't but totally agree with the above SETI topic, in that depending
upon the spectrum of available energy as light (much of which is
outside the threshold of human vision), the forms of plant/microbe/
animal life should have adapted,

They did. Early life was anoxygenic/anaerobic in nature.

And as such it's hardly in any way limited to Earth. If anything, our
somewhat lethal sun, plus our naked anticathode moon and of Earth's
highly fluid dynamics makes imported or even locally evolved life more
than a wee bit iffy, especially with our having to survive all of
those previous ice ages and then obtaining such a whopping seasonal
tilt, and now our having to continually thaw out from the last ice age
this badly polluted and humanly over-populated world is ever going to
see. Countless species (of greater importance than humanity) having
long since vanished, with lots more due to expirer before our
dumbfounded eyes.


as do our terrestrial diatoms for
taking the fullest advantage of the given energy spectrum that's in
charge of illuminating a given environment, including everything from
UV starshine to that of a brown dwarf's black IR/FIR radiating sun
(aka 'hot rock') should do just fine as long as their local, solar,
moon and cosmic dosage of gamma and hard-Xrays are within the scope of
whatever such ET DNA or whatever alternative can manage to cope with.

How about our best of science wizards pondering on behalf of other
intelligent life that's either evolved or having been one way or
another transported onto intrasolar planets or moons, meaning the
likes of Venus or a few of those interesting Saturn or Jupiter moons
seems every bit as worthy as for any little frozen to death Ceres
dwarf of a planet, and otherwise certainly a whole lot better off than
anything Mars could sustain without imported resources.

At most a planet that's hosting intelligent other life needs merely a
brown dwarf of a sun, or at least having a Saturn+ or Jupiter+ class
of a mother planet from which to draw energy from. In the case of
Venus being of such a newish worth of planetology, chances are that it
could have survived an extended interstellar trek pretty much all by
itself, perhaps bringing along its own icy moon and whatever
collection of complex life that's capable of having survived where
most terrestrial forms of life from Earth simply would never have
survived, much less having evolved into the sorts of life as we know
it.

Ah, so this is interesting. Venus had a moon orbiting it when it came
over from Sirius, then?

Why the hell not? That one has been my best SWAG as of years ago, as
well as having been the previously existing SWAGs of more than a few
others. Obviously, you've never had an honest SWAG in your
infomercial snookered life, much less having shared or otherwise
promoted such.


How did Venus lose its Moon and we acquire it?

Gravity and physics-101, whereas Earth simply had more of that pesky
gravity to work with than Venus.

For visualizing this one in LeapFrog pop-up mode, we'll need to employ
that fully interactive 3D orbital simulator that's running each of its
precious CPUs to the wall, and then some. GOT SIMULATOR and
SUPERCOMPUTER?


Just because a given planet or moon is not 100% suited to our butt
naked and so often dumbfounded usage as is, doesn't exclude such other
orbs from having their own populations of weird or even somewhat
terrestrial forms of survival intelligent other life to behold, much
like there being complex life within terrestrial ice or having been
surviving within certain places similar to being as hot as hell on
Earth, as well as within testy environments under the depths of an
ocean that would just as easily crush your typical submarine that's
accommodating us wussy humans, along with terminating our extremely
frail DNA that hasn't hardly evolved for the better since the last ice
age this planet is ever going to see, that is as long as we're going
to keep putting up with that massive and fast moving moon of ours
that's cruising so close to our home world that's 98.5% fluid and thus
unavoidably affected by those horrific tidal forces at play.

Our world is not 98.5% fluid, unless you're counting the mantle.

As I'd clearly stipulated before, in relationship to the forces of our
ongoing solar and moon tidal energy, and of the all-inclusive Earth
(inside and out, including at least 64 km worth of our wussy
atmosphere), we are in fact roughly 98.5% fluid if not more so. The
amount of this Earth that's solid and cool enough to habitat upon
isn't worth 1.5% of the total package. (terribly sorry about that)

Apparently, to an official status quo rusemaster/naysayer, there's
simply no amount of off-world or even of terrestrial evidence is ever
sufficient, even if it's entirely within the regular laws of physics
and/or supported by the best available sicence.

-

On behalf of sharing a sufficiently positive/constructive topic
related contribution, which doesn't automatically exclude or otherwise
banish whatever's off-world.

Hannu Poropudas:
Q1. What Kind of Evolution Environment in Some Planet is Needed
for Vegetables to Develop Legs, Hands and Big Brains ?

You've got me, as even with the invention or whatever hocus-pocus
intelligent design or creation on behalf of those absolutely necessary
little diatoms, the need(s) of various plants to think outside of
their box, as to intelligently share ideas about whatever, as to
having evolved into the sorts of extremely hairy walking and
carnivorous monsters, and to systematically lie their little
evolutionary butts off is asking quite a lot of local evolution that's
entirely regulated by such an extremely time limited terrestrial
realm, and otherwise of hosting such complex life as being of such
limited evolution only since this young planet having been populated
by such unusually large and extremely weird animals that simply
couldn't possibly survive as of today.

Without any question, we once had many of those 8'+ individuals with
their extremely elongated skuls, and we still have more than a few of
those little Dropa/Dzopa folks that simply do not fit within our
terrestrial mold of purely local evolution. Evolution or that of
whatever intelligent design is simply not limited as to the realm of
this extensively fluid Earth.

ETs (you'd think smarter than most of us) seem to exist, although it
has been entirely typical of our often hocus-pocus LLPOF government to
either allow of others or otherwise to intentionally orchestrate
whatever disinformation infomercials, that'll clearly suit the
ulterior motives and hidden agendas on behalf of their faith-based
puppeteers.

I'm not the least bit convinced that Earth's relatively brief
existance of having hosted such a viable planetology on behalf of
sustaining its terrestrial evolution of all that's biological, is all
there is to know. Other nearby star systems seem to host a better
spectrum worth of their solar energy, on behalf of creating and
sustaining a viable DNA mutation and growth environment, and every bit
as likely for those environments having existed more than long enough
to having emerged as viable islands of ET DNA evolution within +/- a
billion years of our own.

I'll try to read through some of your research, as it seems worthy and
otherwise honestly contributed.
-
Brad Guth