Brad Guth is......

In recent additions to my MAZDA like "Internal Rocket Rotary
Combustion Engine (IRRCE sfc = 15+KW/kg)", there seems we also have a
wee bit of lunar He3 to burn off.
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-h2o2-irrce.htm


"Venus still offers life; via moon He3 could turn the trick"
I've got a few more words of wisdom to offer on behalf of the ARTEMIS
PROJECT (lunar He3) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-lse-he3.htm


The following isn't entirely related to energy so much as it relates
to truth or consequences. Such as for this topic that's about myself
is obviously made up of those anti-humanity folks, that couldn't care
if the entire world was destroyed by their resident warlord. Perhaps
you folks can get your future funding from the same source as Bush,
Salem Laden.

Making policy look like happenstance, and/or vice versa, is key to
snookering folks. http://guthvenus.tripod.com/moon-04.htm


Though as for we humans need not, and perhaps should not venture
ourselves much beyond Venus L2 (VL2). Wouldn't want to contaminate a
perfectly good planet with our inferior DNA nor lack of morals,
especially of this group that's bashing honest research just out of
spite. Besides, their stealth donkey-carts could be far more lethal
than what our WMD donkey-carts can manage.

As far as human physiology being adaptable to pressure. Under such
pressure things are not nearly as hot as we've been told, and you wont
need but a fraction of a percent of O2. Of course, that degree of
adaptation might have to be at a modus rate of a few bars per day.
Http://guthvenus.tripod.com/venus-air.htm

I have a few other recent/ongoing comments on H2O2/C12H26 and of He3:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-irrce.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-hybrid-irc.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-cm-ccm-01.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-lm-1.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/radio-maybe.htm

How about honest folks considering the likes of combusting
h2o2/c12h26?

How about honestly considering frozen h2o2; as for how safe is that?

I forgot, none of you actually gives a flying puck about anything
that's not supporting your pagan God and resident warlord.

On 29 Dec 2003 07:48:19 -0800, (Brad Guth) wrote:



I forgot, none of you actually gives a flying puck about anything
that's not supporting your pagan God and resident warlord.


No Brad, few people give a "flying puck" about stupid claims made by
an uneducated Internet Bigwig who has no idea what he is talking
about...

Go get a little bit of education then come back..

You're a moron..

http://spaceprojects.tk

"spaceprojects.tk" wrote in message
news
No Brad, few people give a "flying puck" about stupid claims made by
an uneducated Internet Bigwig who has no idea what he is talking
about...

Remember, Brad, Spirit is on *Mars*, and Opportunity is about to land on
*Mars*. You've confused Mars with Venus in the past.

"Scott Hedrick" wrote in message ...
"spaceprojects.tk" wrote in message
news
No Brad, few people give a "flying puck" about stupid claims made by
an uneducated Internet Bigwig who has no idea what he is talking
about...

Remember, Brad, Spirit is on *Mars*, and Opportunity is about to land on
*Mars*. You've confused Mars with Venus in the past.

Too bad the only news from Mars remains old news, at least there's NO
new science to being had, unless it's the science of blowing another
billion.

Not that you'd care to know this following;
Not only is the moon an absolutely bone dry sort of moon, but of a
very unclumping sort of moon dirt (actually that moon dirt should have
been nearly everything except moon dirt) that's supposedly dark basalt
and thereby sufficiently dence to being highly reactive, and not
because of any dark color, as that aspect is only making it +250°F
upon average (actually much hotter for anything that's not
sufficiently pure white and or bright aluminum reflective), but due to
it's molecular density is what reacting with whatever solar and cosmic
influx, thereby creating loads of those nasty hard x-rays. Being
highly reactive isn't the same as for being photon reflective, thus
the average lunar reflective index of 11% should still hold true,
except for all those Apollo photos that can't seem to locate any such
basalt composites, much less of darker meteorite shards.
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/moon-04.htm

Assembled lunar panoramic photo: is it real, or is it Memorex?
"Taken by Apollo 16 commander John Young, this pan of Flag and Plum
craters shows Lunar Module Pilot Charlie Duke, twice as he moved while
the pan was being captured!" http://moonpans.com/a16flag.htm

If you're looking for truth in all the right places, unfortunately
there's NO such luck in the above photo, as just going by the skewed
illumination reflection index alone is so freaking way off, and
there's still absolutely insufficient meteorites and their shards
strewn about what should have been a rather sharp mixture of
relatively dark basalt composite like lunar substances and of equally
if not darker meteorite surfaces, along with at least a few dim stars,
though the likes of Sirius isn't hardly a dim star, much less that of
Venus. Take another look-see at those Mars images, and do remember
that Mars actually offers an atmosphere that eliminates a great number
of those micro-meteorites from ever reaching the surface in the first
place, and of those that penetrate aren't impacting at nearly the
velocity of what contacts our lunar surface, that being because of the
Mars atmosphere offering but 1% of Earth, but on the other hand
10,000% greater atmosphere than what our moon has to offer.

BTW: if you so happen to need a solar reflective index to work from,
try using any of those moon suits at being roughly 80%, or of certain
pristine ultra white parts of the lander at 85%, which clearly makes
their lunar surroundings that we're seeing as roughly 55% being a wee
bit skewed, not to mention having those shadows trekking off in nearly
45° from each other, which simply places the illumination source
relatively close by. If such an expanse of the lunar surface actually
reflected that much, the likes of you and I couldn't safely look at it
from Earth, especially at night, without getting those blinding spots
affecting our vision.

Of course, if going by what these privet photo rusemasters are capable
of doing, there's actually not all that much left for the imagination,
as essentially anything can be morphed and/or skewed into looking
exactly like whatever you want, thus what we see has absolutely
nothing whatsoever to do with reality, as everything becomes someones
contrived illution, even though just having those raw images should
way more than knock your socks off, as is. So why should there even be
any need to otherwise influence the outcome?

I don't really know what all the photographic fuss is all about, since
the original film supplier was KODAK and the majority of those still
cameras were Hasselblad, as these are by far the real experts. Now
even though these Apollo photos are supposedly the ultimate
photographic achievement to date (ten fold bar none), it seems that
neither KODAK nor Hasselblad wants to boost about, much less discuss
any aspects of them. This seems rather odd since the only folks that
should know photographic jack, are these two highly respected
companies. You'd also think of any tightly rolled film that could have
withstood the thermal extremes plus radiation and come through
entirely unscaved would still be touted as for being absolute
photographic rocket science on steroids, especially since we can't
seem to manage nearly as well right here on Earth, and the same
factors should apply to those wonderful Hasselblad cameras, and of
their thin metal construction, along with synthetic composites
throughout, yet the +/- 250°F never gave a bit of trouble nor induced
distortions, and over that much thermal range of 500°F worth, still
seems like a rather neat trick.

Just thermally speaking; on the moon it's either hot or it's not, and
we're not talking about any hour or even minutes between such cycles,
but mere seconds from the film or whatever roasting at +260°F to
becoming something -240°F if not colder, and of cycling in that manner
perhaps dozens of times per hour afer houur on end, as they moved
those cameras and their film packs about the lunar surface. Again
that's one heck of a neat sort of trick for the likes of plastic film,
especially of tightly rolled format film, not to mention for the
camera it's within, and it only gets worse off if we're speaking of
some 70 mm wide view capturing camera, as that's half again the cross
sectional area per frame. Personally, I never knew of film that was so
freaking tolerant, much less immune to such horrific levels of
radiation, as even ASA-25 film would have detectably recorded such
radiation, though the amount of photographic deterioration might have
been minimal, though regardless of film speed, that -240°F would have
likely cracked such film upon rolling it through the camera, and
otherwise the +250°F would have swollen and/or buckled the same
(either causing irregular focus issues).

Of course, as for this next "moon or bust" time around, as for
taxpayers sending our very own warlord "GW Bush" to the moon, our NASA
is going to be starting off from near scratch, as so far there's
absolutely nothing that's been documented from our past nor of what's
in current inventory that has ever worked as a purely rocked engine
performing lander, much less having potential for getting mankind
to/from any ET surface, much less of the nastier lunar surface. Christ
almighty, half the time we still can't even get our miniature probes
down onto another surface as planned, and even when we do, stuff
breaks.

Even though Boeing can't seem to keep their V-22 Osprey in the air,
I'm entirely confident that with appropriate application of airframe
mass gyros, of having 10:1 modulated rocket engines, and all sorts of
proven fly-by-wire sensors and multiple computers of today, there's a
darn good chance that Boeing's Phantom Works can pull this one off,
even though the overall mass per astronaut kg may have to be nearly
twice greater, making their fully outfitted and lunar environment
survivable 2-man crew replacement lander touching down at something
greater than 10,000 lbs rather than 6,000 lbs.

I've got just a couple hundred thousand other words to offer about our
resident warlord taking us back to the moon, as I feel somewhat most
strongly like following within his educational "high standards and
accountability" foot steps, that's only being recently superseded by
his "so what's the difference" policy.

For starters, it's all about time and/or timing, whereas actually for
the first time we'd be actually doing humanity a terrific sort of
favor, especially if we can get our fearless leader to ride in one of
those original Apollo landers and strut about for 36 hours in one of
those Apollo moon suits, as that way we'd stand our best chance ever
of getting rid of the *******, once and for all.

Otherwise I'm all for investing into whatever it takes in establishing
ourselves and of the LSE-CM/ISS on the moon, before others take
possession of all that nifty He3, and subsequently homestead upon the
one and only accommodation for the lunar space elevator.

Unlike anything Mars, I squarely believe the moon well return a profit
within the first year, with many benefits that'll include astronomy,
though of interplanetary communications is by far the sort of outreach
that's been needed for the past three decades. Of privet enterprise
potential is of what others make of it, nothing more, nothing less.

These pages are more or less focused upon mortal creationism than not;
of what the heck happened when the likes of Sirius illuminated our
nighttime.
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/moon-venus-sirius.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/sirius-co2.htm
(latest entry) http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-sirius-trek.htm

BTW; There's simply more than a darn good chance of there being other
life of some sort existing on Venus:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm

David Sereda (ideas and notions of UV energy), for best impact on this
one, you really need to barrow his video tape: http://www.ufonasa.com

Good but difficult warlord readings: SADDAM HUSSEIN and The SAND
PIRATES
http://mittymax.com/Archive/0085-Sad...andPirates.htm

The latest round of insults to this Mars/Moon/Venus class action
injury:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-what-if.htm

Some other recent file updates:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-gwb-moon.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-interplanetary.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-illumination.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-moon-02.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/moon-04.htm

Regards, Brad Guth / IEIS~GASA

After trimming the manure from Brad Guth's post, this was all that was left:

"Scott Hedrick" wrote in message
...
"spaceprojects.tk" wrote in message
news
No Brad, few people give a "flying puck" about stupid claims made by
an uneducated Internet Bigwig who has no idea what he is talking
about...

Remember, Brad, Spirit is on *Mars*, and Opportunity is about to land on
*Mars*. You've confused Mars with Venus in the past.

"Guth/IEIS~GASA" wrote in message
om...
|
| Not that you'd care to know this following;
| Not only is the moon an absolutely...

Let me know when you're ready to discuss this instead of regurgitating it on
cue.

| Assembled lunar panoramic photo: is it real, or is it Memorex?
| "Taken by Apollo 16 commander John Young, this pan of Flag and Plum
| craters shows Lunar Module Pilot Charlie Duke, twice as he moved while
| the pan was being captured!" http://moonpans.com/a16flag.htm

Do you understand how those pans were taken?

| ...you and I couldn't safely look at it
| from Earth, especially at night, without getting those blinding spots
| affecting our vision.

Let me know when you're ready to discuss photometry.

| it seems that
| neither KODAK nor Hasselblad wants to boost about, much less discuss
| any aspects of them.

Not according to Kodak or Hasselblad. Just try to get them to shut up about
it.

| You'd also think of any tightly rolled film that could have
| withstood the thermal extremes plus radiation and come through
| entirely unscaved would still be touted as for being absolute
| photographic rocket science on steroids

That would be true if the conspiracy theorists' predictions of thermal and
radiological stress had any basis whatsoever in reality.

| Just thermally speaking; on the moon it's either hot or it's not

Nope. Try basic thermodynamics.

| camera it's within, and it only gets worse off if we're speaking of
| some 70 mm wide view capturing camera

That's the diagonal field of view.

| I've got just a couple hundred thousand other words to offer...

I'm sure you do. Unfortunately your verbal compost is tiresome, since you
don't actually seem able to discuss any of it.

--
|
The universe is not required to conform | Jay Windley
to the expectations of the ignorant. | webmaster @ clavius.org

"Jay Windley" wrote in news:bvm5g8$u3o$1
@terabinaries.xmission.com:

| camera it's within, and it only gets worse off if we're speaking of
| some 70 mm wide view capturing camera

That's the diagonal field of view.

In photography, lengths in mm usually refer to the focal length of the
lens. It's not the width of the lens.

--
Coridon Henshaw - http://www3.telus.net/csbh - "I have sadly come to the
conclusion that the Bush administration will go to any lengths to deny
reality." -- Charley Reese

chenshawREMOVE@(TH+ESE wrote:

"Jay Windley" wrote in news:bvm5g8$u3o$1
@terabinaries.xmission.com:

| camera it's within, and it only gets worse off if we're speaking of
| some 70 mm wide view capturing camera

That's the diagonal field of view.

In photography, lengths in mm usually refer to the focal length of the
lens. It's not the width of the lens.

Not when you're referring to the size of the film stock.

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D.
Reformed Aerospace Engineer
Remove invalid nonsense for email.

Herb Schaltegger lid wrote in message ...
chenshawREMOVE@(TH+ESE wrote:

"Jay Windley" wrote in news:bvm5g8$u3o$1
@terabinaries.xmission.com:

| camera it's within, and it only gets worse off if we're speaking of
| some 70 mm wide view capturing camera

That's the diagonal field of view.

In photography, lengths in mm usually refer to the focal length of the
lens. It's not the width of the lens.

Not when you're referring to the size of the film stock.

I was referring to either a double-wide 35mm format or simply that of
the 5cm X 7cm format, of which I don't believe they had such.

The part about an assembly of those 50mm images was exactly what it
was, though why did they feel so compelled to skew the lunar surface
into being so unusually near white, and without hardly any meteorites
and shards?

This following rant is getting somewhat off the lunar topic, though
not entirely.

Folks have got to stop focusing upon the likes of Mars. I mean, my
God, Mars has been frozen solid and of otherwise irradiated to death
for thousands of years, not to mention pulverised in the past and of
what's ongoing by those pesky meteorites. So far, all that's been
recently learned is exactly what we already knew.

And so what if we located some remains of even an advanced
civilization that once upon a time survived on Mars. It's way too
freaking spendy just getting there, and we've NOT a workable solution
for retrieving one kilogram, much less a tonne worth of anything from
another planet. Remember folks, there's still not independent proof
that we've managed to retrieve one gram directly from our own moon, at
the very least we have NOT even a working prototype instrument lunar
lander, much less a pilotted craft. In other words, you folks need to
get a grip and/or another life, either that or an alternative Borg
collective that has not been infected by the sorts of NSA/DoD Trojan
Horse virus affecting all of what our NASA is involved with.

Even the highly published notion of pondering over some Earth like
monster planet that's 150 light years distant is hardly worth going
for, much less flushing billions into some one-way probe that the next
ten thousand generations will not obtain squat worth of anything.
Worse yet would be having to expedite another spendy though apparently
expendable shuttle crew upon upgrading Hubble is simply morbid, and so
far out of whack that even Charles Manson would be proud, backed up by
the likes of Hitler and those Cathar exterminating Popes, with our
very own warlord GW Bush bringing up the rear with his educational
"high standards and accountability" and of that ultimate "so what's
the difference" policy.

If you insist upon spending billions and of wasting technology and
expertise on something that can't directly benefit humanity, at least
try looking at Sirius and of the 110,000 year cycle of life that's
establishing something that's way more likely as to reveil where our
creators and/or DNA came from, as that's but 8.64 ly. With only the
existing laser technology that we've had for a couple of decades,
those reply packets and/or streaming images (via laser and/or
microwave) could have been coming in as we speak. Meaning that we
might not have the proper laser spectrum detection knowhow to be
receiving by way of photons but, surely anyone looking at our
relatively dim solar system should have been more than capable of
detecting laser packets emitting from such a dumbfounded planet as
Earth.

Otherwise, try focusing yourself upon getting the lunar space elevator
(LSE-CM/ISS) up and running. Once this nifty elevator is established,
only then will the mining of lunar 3He become viable, among so many
other considerations, all of which can directly improve things for
humanity, and within an affordable as well as obtainable goal that's
way past due.

If you elect to think our moon is somehow "off limits" and/or "taboo",
then try out a little local area code calling to/from Venus, as that's
not only taking far less than a penny on any probe dollar, but focused
upon where other life NOT as we know it has to be existing in spite of
our ignorance, arrogance and greed, as there's something on Venus as
of at least 14 years ago that's not microbe, but more than likely
lizard folk like, and perchance even Cathar by nature. Remembering
that unlike Mars, on Venus it's not being irradiated to death nor
currently being pulverised by meteorites, and there's absolutely no
shortage of energy, and that with said energy all sorts of
insurmountable issues become surmountable. Remember also that the
thick and dense atmosphere of Venus is a super terrific positive
attribute, just the opposit of what our NASA and NASA moderated
publications have to say.

Of course, if your Borg implants have been flashing that "blue screen
of death" message, then perhaps you shouldn't bother yourself with the
truth, as that could prove CPU fatal.

Latest Sirius entry (Feb. 03, 2004):
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-sirius-trek.htm

BTW; There's still way more than a darn good chance of there being
other life of some sort existing on Venus:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm

Some good but difficult warlord readings: SADDAM HUSSEIN and The SAND
PIRATES
http://mittymax.com/Archive/0085-Sad...andPirates.htm

David Sereda (honest ideas and notions upon UV energy), for best
impact on this one, you'll really need to barrow his video tape:
http://www.ufonasa.com

The latest round of insults to this Mars/Moon/Venus class action
injury:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-what-if.htm

Some other recent file updates:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-gwb-moon.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-interplanetary.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-illumination.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-moon-02.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/moon-04.htm

Herb Schaltegger lid wrote in message ...
chenshawREMOVE@(TH+ESE wrote:

"Jay Windley" wrote in news:bvm5g8$u3o$1
@terabinaries.xmission.com:

| camera it's within, and it only gets worse off if we're speaking of
| some 70 mm wide view capturing camera

That's the diagonal field of view.

In photography, lengths in mm usually refer to the focal length of the
lens. It's not the width of the lens.

Not when you're referring to the size of the film stock.

I was referring to either a double-wide 35mm format or simply that of
the 5cm X 7cm format, of which I don't believe they had such.

The part about an assembly of those 50mm images was exactly what it
was, though why did they feel so compelled to skew the lunar surface
into being so unusually near white, and without hardly any meteorites
and shards?

This following rant is getting somewhat off the lunar topic, though
not entirely.

Folks have got to stop focusing upon the likes of Mars. I mean, my
God, Mars has been frozen solid and of otherwise irradiated to death
for thousands of years, not to mention pulverised in the past and of
what's ongoing by those pesky meteorites. So far, all that's been
recently learned is exactly what we already knew.

And so what if we located some remains of even an advanced
civilization that once upon a time survived on Mars. It's way too
freaking spendy just getting there, and we've NOT a workable solution
for retrieving one kilogram, much less a tonne worth of anything from
another planet. Remember folks, there's still not independent proof
that we've managed to retrieve one gram directly from our own moon, at
the very least we have NOT even a working prototype instrument lunar
lander, much less a pilotted craft. In other words, you folks need to
get a grip and/or another life, either that or an alternative Borg
collective that has not been infected by the sorts of NSA/DoD Trojan
Horse virus affecting all of what our NASA is involved with.

Even the highly published notion of pondering over some Earth like
monster planet that's 150 light years distant is hardly worth going
for, much less flushing billions into some one-way probe that the next
ten thousand generations will not obtain squat worth of anything.
Worse yet would be having to expedite another spendy though apparently
expendable shuttle crew upon upgrading Hubble is simply morbid, and so
far out of whack that even Charles Manson would be proud, backed up by
the likes of Hitler and those Cathar exterminating Popes, with our
very own warlord GW Bush bringing up the rear with his educational
"high standards and accountability" and of that ultimate "so what's
the difference" policy.

If you insist upon spending billions and of wasting technology and
expertise on something that can't directly benefit humanity, at least
try looking at Sirius and of the 110,000 year cycle of life that's
establishing something that's way more likely as to reveil where our
creators and/or DNA came from, as that's but 8.64 ly. With only the
existing laser technology that we've had for a couple of decades,
those reply packets and/or streaming images (via laser and/or
microwave) could have been coming in as we speak. Meaning that we
might not have the proper laser spectrum detection knowhow to be
receiving by way of photons but, surely anyone looking at our
relatively dim solar system should have been more than capable of
detecting laser packets emitting from such a dumbfounded planet as
Earth.

Otherwise, try focusing yourself upon getting the lunar space elevator
(LSE-CM/ISS) up and running. Once this nifty elevator is established,
only then will the mining of lunar 3He become viable, among so many
other considerations, all of which can directly improve things for
humanity, and within an affordable as well as obtainable goal that's
way past due.

If you elect to think our moon is somehow "off limits" and/or "taboo",
then try out a little local area code calling to/from Venus, as that's
not only taking far less than a penny on any probe dollar, but focused
upon where other life NOT as we know it has to be existing in spite of
our ignorance, arrogance and greed, as there's something on Venus as
of at least 14 years ago that's not microbe, but more than likely
lizard folk like, and perchance even Cathar by nature. Remembering
that unlike Mars, on Venus it's not being irradiated to death nor
currently being pulverised by meteorites, and there's absolutely no
shortage of energy, and that with said energy all sorts of
insurmountable issues become surmountable. Remember also that the
thick and dense atmosphere of Venus is a super terrific positive
attribute, just the opposit of what our NASA and NASA moderated
publications have to say.

Of course, if your Borg implants have been flashing that "blue screen
of death" message, then perhaps you shouldn't bother yourself with the
truth, as that could prove CPU fatal.

Latest Sirius entry (Feb. 03, 2004):
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-sirius-trek.htm

BTW; There's still way more than a darn good chance of there being
other life of some sort existing on Venus:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm

Some good but difficult warlord readings: SADDAM HUSSEIN and The SAND
PIRATES
http://mittymax.com/Archive/0085-Sad...andPirates.htm

David Sereda (honest ideas and notions upon UV energy), for best
impact on this one, you'll really need to barrow his video tape:
http://www.ufonasa.com

The latest round of insults to this Mars/Moon/Venus class action
injury:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-what-if.htm

Some other recent file updates:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-gwb-moon.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-interplanetary.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-illumination.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-moon-02.htm
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/moon-04.htm