Terraforming the moon underground:

We have been living on a very thin crusted planet that is essentially
unstable and clearly unsurvivable at roughly an average of 15 km below
our feet, with deep 8+ Seismic events taking place all the time.
Whereas the innards of our relatively cool moon should be quite
survivable down at last 150 km if not technically robotic TBM
accessible down 1000 km (nearly right up against its semi-liquid 1175
km diameter of lower mantel)

Terraforming the innards of our moon is also about creating unlimited
off-world habitats that are safer than here on Earth, not to mention
having unlimited clean energy and likewise a darn good export of
energy related products, not to mention a whole lot better yet once
our moon is relocated as to being actively station-kept within the
halo of Earth L1.

Of course all the usual gauntlet of rusemasters and FUD-masters are
going to continually pitch a fit over any of this, but then so would
GW Bush, Dick Cheney, Hitler and their oligarch peers.

Establishing a surface base of TBM logistics on the moon should be a
relatively simple task, by selecting a small diameter but otherwise
sufficiently deep crater would enable the best initial outcome with
offering as much natural surrounding protection from the shade and
physical shield derived by keeping the base camp site well below the
crater rim.

A pinpoint landing within a small crater shouldn’t be any problem for
the new and improved fly-by-rocket landers capable of deploying 10+
lunar tonnes of TBM related payload per mission (that’s 60 terrestrial
tonnes).

Perhaps the item which impacted Earth and created our Arctic ocean
basin along with having given us our seasonal tilt and 2/3s of our
tidal considerations, is currently orbiting Earth. In case you
haven't noticed, that moon/planetoid Selene happens to have a nicely
matching 2500 km diameter crater in its amply robust crust, to have
nailed our planet and kept itself mostly intact (minus its thick layer
of ice and having obtained that extremely large diameter crater).

Sirius(b) likely started off as an impressive 9 Ms star, so I think
we'll need to redo our math if attempting to discover its age as based
upon consuming itself 81 times faster than our sun, which puts its red
giant phase starting 123.5 million years ago, and it may have
fluctuated with multiple helium flashovers before its most recent
white dwarf phase kicked in for the final time.

As best I can tell, our solar system has been captured by the much
greater original mass of Sirius(a+b+c), which started off as perhaps
worth a combined 12.5 MS as of not more than 256 million years ago (or
perhaps even as of roughly the timeline of when our ice-age cycles
started 128 million years ago). Try keeping in mind that the star
making nebula/molecular cloud which produced those Sirius stars was
likely worth 2.5e37 kg, and for a good hundred thousand some odd years
was situated nearby enough to have included our solar system. If that
ever happened again, we’d be cooked by having been surrounded by so
much ionized gas, and especially if all of that ionized molecular/
nebula gas was producing nearby stars like those of Sirius.

Having a terraformed moon as our failsafe lifeboat could prove very
handy should another nearby cosmic event take place, not to mention
what having our moon actively parked within the Earth L1 halo orbit
could do wonders for cooling off mother Earth regardless of how much
be artificially pollute and attempt to warm it up.



On Apr 28, 4:23*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
It’s interesting whenever a Usenet/newsgroup topic or subsequent
replies favor anything on behalf of a developing technology or applied
physics for benefiting the lower 99.9% caste and for otherwise
protecting or salvaging our global environment in multiple ways, in
that only those intent upon topic/author stalking and bashing for the
sake of discrediting others for all they can muster, seem to show up
like those funny little cars with a dozen or more clowns jumping out
in order to spin, obfuscate and FUD everything for all it’s worth, as
well as in order to discredit anyone that isn’t fully oligarch
approved. *On the other hand, whenever something is represented for
improving the wealth and authority of oligarchs that seldom if ever
have to work an honest day in their life, whereas any topics and
replies on their butt-covering behalf seem to get mainstream media and
even international attention, as well as much of their interpretation
of science, physics and especially history getting mainstream
published and into our K-12 textbooks as though it were the one and
only undeniable word of God with by the way doesn’t even believe in
hell.

So, it obviously pays big-time if you’re an oligarch or even one of
their brown-nosed minions, because life is very good when the lower
99.9% of us always get to pay for everything that directly and
indirectly benefits them in spite of the consequences or how much
negative Karma gets created along the way. *In fact, seems the more
bad Karma the better for justifying their military industrial complex
that’s problematic and spendy as hell.

Obviously the intent of keeping our K-12s and others away from using
any public social/media or unmoderated Usenet/newsgroups is very high
on their priority of information damage control, as if Hitler’s SS
Nazi oligarch goons as nicely protected by our “Operation Paperclip”
are still in charge, as having always been protected by our “Operation
Paperclip” policy which secretly extracted them and having given new
American IDs with special privileges and few if any restrictions as
long as they continued working their magic for benefiting our own
oligarchs.

No wonder my topics about privately off-world exploiting of the moon
and the most accessible nearby planet are each being treated as
socially taboo/nondisclosure rated issues, as well as having been
worth forbidding K-12s and others to read or much less contribute any
context or even to ask questions. *So, my topics must have hit a few
too many status-quo nerves along the way, because the ongoing
banishment and/or having been topic/author stalked and bashed for all
they can muster seems to be their only hope of keeping mainstream
media and K-12s from reading and interacting within our unmoderated
Usenet/newsgroup topics.

Most school and other public funded intranets automatically block or
filter out unmoderated Usenet/newsgroups, and otherwise most K-12s are
simply not educated well enough to go around those media filters.
However, at some point the oligarch tight grip on their private parts
isn’t going to be sufficient, and once again Karma revenge is going to
rear its ugly head in another 9-11 or worse kind of way, even though
trillions are being spent to either avoid such Karma or because of
previous Karma that still isn’t paid for. *In other words, there’s no
shortage of public loot, as long as it’s going mostly into the
oligarch mainstream of sustaining their military industrial complex
instead of exploiting anything off-world like our moon or the
extremely nearby planet Venus.

On Apr 11, 9:17*am, Brad Guth wrote: Pay no special attention to those hiding behind curtains and
pretending as always being faith-based and/or politically correct,
because it's their mostly public-funded and/or faith-based job to
topic/author stalk and to otherwise FUD everything to death. *Hitler
had the exact same “Paperclip” team of rusemasters and FUD-masters, as
professional clowns working and/or manipulating the locals into a
mainstream status-quo mindset, which unfortunately far too many bought
into instead of taking any logical stance against their totally
bat**** crazy peers.

Of course this mainstream status-quo policy of obfuscation and denial
is what brought us a mutually perpetrated cold-war era and the
negative Karma likes of 911 (make that positive Karma if you are an
oligarch of our military industrial complex), each of which wasted
decades and costing us trillions of our hard earned dollars, as well
as having systematically squandered all sorts of talent, expertise and
resources that we'll never get back, and which force other nations to
follow suit.

Venus is pretty much as hot and nasty as we’ve all been indoctrinated
about. *However, this not necessarily the case of each and every
location, such as mountainous and polar area can be considerably
cooler though still extremely hot by human standards that we’re
accustomed to. *With applied physics and reasonable technology, the
surface of Venus can be dealt with, at least robotically, and
otherwise via composite rigid airships it can be further exploited
while easily protecting the airship crew. *Of course you have to think
both really big and perhaps even small in order to fully appreciate
the potential of what exploiting such a nearby planet has to offer,
because it’s the in-between that’s not easily accomplished if you can
only think of terrestrial methods that get to deal with on Earth.

Our physically dark and naked moon is just another metallicity
treasure trove of valuable resources (including much clean energy),
just sitting out there and causing us mostly grief and otherwise
contributing very little terrestrial benefit, unless added IR, X-rays
and gamma plus loads of tidal surging and increased seismic trauma is
desirable.

On Feb 18, 6:56*am, Brad Guth wrote:

It's probably close to averaging a cozy 0 F (255 K) at no greater than
10 meters deep, and it shouldn't have any problems reaching 70 F (day
or night) at 100 km deep or possibly as shallow as 10 km (depending on
the core energy). *The R-factor of lunar regolith (lose basalt rock
and loads of crystal dry dust that’s at minimum 10 meters deep) is
none too shabby, and otherwise the geothermal conductance and/or heat
transfer coefficient (aka geothermal gradient) of its paramagnetic
basalt crust of 3.5 g/cm3 density shouldn't be significantly any
different than here on Earth, except that our terrestrial basalt isn't
nearly as paramagnetic or much less offering carbonado, and the core
heat of Earth being 7000+ K as opposed to only 1000 K of our moon.
Supposedly there is only a wee little bit of lunar granite to deal
with, but the samples thus far are inconsistent in their composition.

A new interpretation is that all-inclusively the geothermal outflux of
Earth (including geothermal vents and volcanic contributions) is
getting rid of roughly 128 mw/m2, whereas our moon is supposedly only
getting rid of as little as 16 mw/m2 (an 8th as much).

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_gradient
*“Geothermal gradient is the rate of increasing temperature with
respect to increasing depth in the Earth's interior.”

The "Igneous Petrology" of our moon and Venus should each be unique
and considerably different than Earth.

“The composition of igneous rocks and minerals can be determined via a
variety of methods of varying ease, cost, and complexity. The simplest
method is observation of hand samples with the naked eye and/or with a
hand lens. This can be used to gauge the general mineralogical
composition of the rock, which gives an insight into the composition.”

Unfortunately, the rocks returned from our moon were entirely similar
to those of terrestrial rocks. *Of course there’s all sorts of actual
paramagnetic basalt moon rock to be found on Earth, because there
should be at least a thousand teratonnes of it, whereas naturally most
of which ended up in oceans and otherwise as having meteor and obvious
melt indications that are entirely quite different than local volcanic
spewed basalts.

“A more precise but still relatively inexpensive way to identify
minerals (and thereby the bulk chemical composition of the rock) with
a petrographic microscope. These microscopes have polarizing plates,
filters, and a conoscopic lens that allow the user to measure a large
number of crystallographic properties.”

Contributor “Wretch Fossil” actually has a very good “petrographic
microscope” and multiple resources plus talent of interpreting such to
go along with it. *Sadly this technology and its expertise of
interpreting is being ignored by those of authority that do not want
outsiders having a public say about anything. *So, once again, it
really doesn’t matter whatever level of modern applied technology and
expertise we have to offer, because it’s only going to be topic/author
stalked and systematically trashed by those of Usenet/newsgroup
authority that have multiple mainstream issues at risk.

TBMs cutting their tunnels into the interior of our moon should prove
both interesting and rewarding in terms of extracting rare and
valuable elements, not to mention creating the very cozy and safe
habitat potential that’s opened up for multiple uses. *Unfortunately
this method can not be applied on such a geodynamically active planet
like Venus that has such a thin crust and way more primordial core
energy outflux of perhaps 20.5 w/m2 as contributing way more
geothermal energy than any other planet or moon has to offer, although
older and cooler planets or any number of their moons (except for Io
that’s averaging 2 w/m2) should be somewhat similar to terraforming
the cozy interior of our moon.
*http://www.mps.mpg.de/solar-system-s...etary_interior...

*http://commercialspace.pbworks.com/f/Public+ILN.pdf

*The likely two thirds (6.6e17~6.6e18 tonnes) worth of lose surface
basalt rock and dust including whatever 4+ billion years worth of
accumulated deposits, as remaining crystal dry on the naked surface of
our physically dark moon (not including the other good third portion
as having been dislodged and deposited on Earth) is a direct result of
the thousands of significant impacts, and especially as a result of
whatever created its South polar crater of 2500 km diameter, that
which all by itself should have contributed a minimum of 3e17 m3 or
possibly a maximum contribution of 1e18 m3 if including the planet
sized impactor contributions. *Given the limited surface area of the
moon as being 3.8e13 m2 doesn’t exactly allow all that much surface
area for accommodating such volume of lose crater made fallout, and
perhaps due to much of its own basalt metallicity making its density
worth on average 3.5 tonnes/m3 unless offset by loads of accumulated
carbon buckyballs. *In that kind of hard vacuum, there really
shouldn’t be all that much porosity to any of its solidified basalt or
carbonado.

Liquefied basalt as returning fallout from such truly horrific impacts
that should have extensively solidified and possibly fused upon
contact with the relatively cool basalt surface, as such should have
been quite obvious and highly distinctive if such exposed lunar
bedrock samples had been return to Earth. *Sadly, no such samples or
even unique meteorites ever materialized from our NASA/Apollo era,
that found our naked moon as instead so unusually reflective and UV, X-
ray and gamma inert as well as hardly the least bit dusty, and what
little crystal dry dust there was seemed to offer terrific surface
tension and clumping for their footing and traction like no place
else.

Even taking the utmost conservative swag-estimate of 3.8e16 m3 worth
of lose rock, debris and accumulated dust, is still suggesting an
average surface depth of one km, which of course our Apollo era found
no such indications, as though that moon is relatively new to us. *Of
course, if that moon had created our Arctic ocean basin as of 11,712
years ago, would actually explain quite a bit.

How’s that for a worthy topic of terraforming the innards of our naked
moon that’s practically dust free and mostly solid as any rock
according to our Apollo wizards?

On 5/16/2013 11:54 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
On May 16, 7:10 pm, David Staup wrote:
On 3/21/2013 4:47 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

Just because redneck GOP FUD-masters like yourself that can not manage
to terraform anything for the better (not even Earth), doesn't mean
that I can't terraform the innards of our moon, or even exploit Venus.

go for it goofy...you claim you can do it.....show us!

talk is cheap......show us

Thanks for all the help. (as in less than zero)

Did you always treat your mother in this same way?

you little wimp...that's the best you can do?

On 5/22/2013 10:51 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
On May 22, 5:51 pm, David Staup wrote:
On 4/21/2013 7:36 PM, Brad Guth wrote:







On Apr 21, 4:04 pm, David Staup wrote:
On 4/21/2013 5:53 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

Terraforming the moon underground: (mining plus creating safe habitats
inside of that extremely tough crust) is not nearly as insurmountable
as you might think.

Besides the mainstream naysay gauntlet against folks ever exploiting
the extremely nearby planet Venus for all it’s worth, it's as though
there is also something oddly mainstream taboo/forbidden or
nondisclosure associated with any notions of independently exploiting
the likely soft innards of our physically dark and paramagnetic moon.
Go figure that we’re either being intentionally snookered or simply
misdirected by our oligarch peers.

Once TBMs(tunnel boring machines) are situated and working
sufficiently deep underground (other than remote logistics issues that
at first should be daunting), what's the likely geological difference
between our moon and Earth?

Inside the paramagnetic basalt crust of our moon is probably not going
to be all that much different than tunneling inside of Earth’s granite
and much less paramagnetic basalt, especially once our TBMs get
sufficiently into and below that extremely tough paramagnetic basalt
and carbonado tough crust of 3.5+ g/cm3 that our NASA/Apollo era had
documented as offering a much lower density as well as perfectly inert
(not the least bit paramagnetic or hardly even mineral or other metal
worthy) and otherwise as mostly monochromatic as well as hardly even
the least bit dusty on top, and there certainly wasn’t any problems
with the failsafe technology of their fly-by-rocket landers that can
be manually flown and easily scaled to suit pretty much any payload
tonnage. However, the greatly reduced gravity should by rights yield
a very soft or porous kind of moon innards, along with offering gas
formed geode pockets and possibly layers of mineral brines (even a
potential of hydrocarbons in addition to encountering a great deal of
fused crust sequestered helium), in that once sufficiently underneath
is when TBMs should whiz right through at a fraction of the difficulty
found in dealing with the inner bedrock of Earth.

No doubt the resident redneck FUD-masters and their oligarchs of
authority in charge of mainstream damage-control, by having to
continually topic/author stalk and otherwise sequester such
independent notions about exploiting our moon, are probably going to
need many extra Depends(aka adult diapers) in order to effectively
deal with their usual damage-control exploits of topic/author stalking
and trashing of this topic. Sorry about that.

Fortunately, we only have to be realistic in order to appreciate what
the inverted density or softer innards of our moon should have to
offer, not to mention my other notions of creating the LSE-CM/ISS and
of otherwise relocating the orbit of our moon as to actively station-
keeping it within Earth L1. At least Stanley Kubrick would be so
proud, not to mention most every global domination villain on Earth,
including those of our Paperclip Nazis that supposedly got us safely
to/from our moon without a scratch.

Figuring conservatively that fewer than 10% access my topics and
replies via Google Groups or Groups+, makes my global Usenet/newsgroup
audience worth at least 32,210 per week.

Google Groups: Your 7-day activity
14 discussions replies
29 direct replies to your messages
3221views of your messages
14 views of your profile

Not sure if this reported activity is necessarily a good or bad thing,
but none the less it seems to reflect that others are finding some of
what I have to offer as either worth their while or at least
entertaining. Perhaps there’s not too many teachers or instructors
that would have nearly the same audience to brag about, and especially
those of my devoted FUD-masters as having an audience of roughly zero
once excluding others of their own redneck FUD-master kind that must
always brown-nose their oligarch peers, or else risk losing their
funding.

chuckle....

have you EVER considered.....
that the reason you never get any serious responses..
is the absurdity of your thoughts....

Not really, but I do understand that ruse-masters and FUD-masters like
yourself are a dime a dozen.

Are you suggesting that exploiting our moon or even its L1 as our
oasis/gateway and for accommodating the LSE-CM/ISS plus many other
considerations, are not worth considering?

Are you suggesting that saving Earth as a whole, its environment plus
countless lives and perhaps more than a trillion dollars per year, as
well as otherwise employing millions of us, is not such a good idea?

How exactly are you calculating that I "never get any serious
responses"?

Google Groups:
Your 7-day activity
14 discussions replies
32 direct replies to your messages
3240 views of your messages
15 views of your profile

What sort of 7-day activity report does Google Groups report about
your Usenet/newsgroup account?

Dude all those replies are from YOU LOL

You don't even understand how Google Groups works. That's rather
pathetic, because most Usenet/newsgroup readers are not even using
Google Groups version of accessing our topics, so chances are that
tenfold as many have actually viewed my stuff.

Your 7-day activity
1 discussion started
185 discussions replies
66 direct replies to your messages
6088 views of your messages
6 views of your profile

LOL..you funny goofy

pathetic...but funny

idiotic ....but funny

single digit IQ....but funny

need I go on?

On 5/26/2013 9:47 AM, David Staup wrote:

You don't even understand how Google Groups works. That's rather
pathetic, because most Usenet/newsgroup readers are not even using
Google Groups version of accessing our topics, so chances are that
tenfold as many have actually viewed my stuff.

Your 7-day activity
1 discussion started
185 discussions replies
66 direct replies to your messages
6088 views of your messages
6 views of your profile

LOL..you funny goofy

pathetic...but funny

idiotic ....but funny

single digit IQ....but funny

need I go on?


Please do. I love when people make fun of Brad Goth.



--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo

On May 26, 6:47*am, David Staup wrote:
On 5/22/2013 10:51 PM, Brad Guth wrote:







On May 22, 5:51 pm, David Staup wrote:
On 4/21/2013 7:36 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

On Apr 21, 4:04 pm, David Staup wrote:
On 4/21/2013 5:53 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

Terraforming the moon underground: (mining plus creating safe habitats
inside of that extremely tough crust) is not nearly as insurmountable
as you might think.

Besides the mainstream naysay gauntlet against folks ever exploiting
the extremely nearby planet Venus for all it s worth, it's as though
there is also something oddly mainstream taboo/forbidden or
nondisclosure associated with any notions of independently exploiting
the likely soft innards of our physically dark and paramagnetic moon.

The crust of Venus is probably a third as thick as that of Earth, and
there's no viable TBM technology that can withstand the internal
environments of going deep within Earth or much less that of Venus.
However, our extremely robust moon is altogether another issue that's
entirely TBM worthy, at least down to as deep as 1000 km should not be
insurmountable, and otherwise down to 150 km should be entirely human
habitat worthy.


On May 26, 5:58*am, Brad Guth wrote:
We have been living on a very thin crusted planet that is essentially
unstable and clearly unsurvivable at roughly an average of 15 km below
our feet, with deep 8+ Seismic events taking place all the time.
Whereas the innards of our relatively cool moon should be quite
survivable down at last 150 km if not technically robotic TBM
accessible down 1000 km (nearly right up against its semi-liquid 1175
km diameter of lower mantel)

Terraforming the innards of our moon is also about creating unlimited
off-world habitats that are safer than here on Earth, not to mention
having unlimited clean energy and likewise a darn good export of
energy related products, not to mention a whole lot better yet once
our moon is relocated as to being actively station-kept within the
halo of Earth L1.

Of course all the usual gauntlet of rusemasters and FUD-masters are
going to continually pitch a fit over any of this, but then so would
GW Bush, Dick Cheney, Hitler and their oligarch peers.

Establishing a surface base of TBM logistics on the moon should be a
relatively simple task, by selecting a small diameter but otherwise
sufficiently deep crater would enable the best initial outcome with
offering as much natural surrounding protection from the shade and
physical shield derived by keeping the base camp site well below the
crater rim.

A pinpoint landing within a small crater shouldn’t be any problem for
the new and improved fly-by-rocket landers capable of deploying 10+
lunar tonnes of TBM related payload per mission (that’s 60 terrestrial
tonnes).

Perhaps the item which impacted Earth and created our Arctic ocean
basin along with having given us our seasonal tilt and 2/3s of our
tidal considerations, is currently orbiting Earth. *In case you
haven't noticed, that moon/planetoid Selene happens to have a nicely
matching 2500 km diameter crater in its amply robust crust, to have
nailed our planet and kept itself mostly intact (minus its thick layer
of ice and having obtained that extremely large diameter crater).

Sirius(b) likely started off as an impressive 9 Ms star, so I think
we'll need to redo our math if attempting to discover its age as based
upon consuming itself 81 times faster than our sun, which puts its red
giant phase starting 123.5 million years ago, and it may have
fluctuated with multiple helium flashovers before its most recent
white dwarf phase kicked in for the final time.

As best I can tell, our solar system has been captured by the much
greater original mass of Sirius(a+b+c), which started off as perhaps
worth a combined 12.5 MS as of not more than 256 million years ago (or
perhaps even as of roughly the timeline of when our ice-age cycles
started 128 million years ago). * Try keeping in mind that the star
making nebula/molecular cloud which produced those Sirius stars was
likely worth 2.5e37 kg, and for a good hundred thousand some odd years
was situated nearby enough to have included our solar system. *If that
ever happened again, we’d be cooked by having been surrounded by so
much ionized gas, and especially if all of that ionized molecular/
nebula gas was producing nearby stars like those of Sirius.

Having a terraformed moon as our failsafe lifeboat could prove very
handy should another nearby cosmic event take place.

On May 23, 7:17*am, Brad Guth wrote: In case some of you didn't realize it, "Terraforming the moon
underground" means digging into it, and TBM means tunnel boring
machine.

On Apr 11, 9:17*am, Brad Guth wrote:

Pay no special attention to those hiding behind curtains and
pretending as always being faith-based and/or politically correct,
because it's their mostly public-funded and/or faith-based job to
topic/author stalk and to otherwise FUD everything to death. *Hitler
had the exact same “Paperclip” team of rusemasters and FUD-masters, as
professional clowns working and/or manipulating the locals into a
mainstream status-quo mindset, which unfortunately far too many bought
into instead of taking any logical stance against their totally
bat**** crazy peers.

Of course this mainstream status-quo policy of obfuscation and denial
is what brought us a mutually perpetrated cold-war era and the
negative Karma likes of 911 (make that positive Karma if you are an
oligarch of our military industrial complex), each of which wasted
decades and costing us trillions of our hard earned dollars, as well
as having systematically squandered all sorts of talent, expertise and
resources that we'll never get back, and which force other nations to
follow suit.

Venus is pretty much as hot and nasty as we’ve all been indoctrinated
about. *However, this not necessarily the case of each and every
location, such as mountainous and polar area can be considerably
cooler though still extremely hot by human standards that we’re
accustomed to. *With applied physics and reasonable technology, the
surface of Venus can be dealt with, at least robotically, and
otherwise via composite rigid airships it can be further exploited
while easily protecting the airship crew. *Of course you have to think
both really big and perhaps even small in order to fully appreciate
the potential of what exploiting such a nearby planet has to offer,
because it’s the in-between that’s not easily accomplished if you can
only think of terrestrial methods that get to deal with on Earth.

Our physically dark and naked moon is just another metallicity
treasure trove of valuable resources (including much clean energy),
just sitting out there and causing us mostly grief and otherwise
contributing very little terrestrial benefit, unless added IR, X-rays
and gamma plus loads of tidal surging and increased seismic trauma is
desirable.

On Feb 18, 6:56*am, Brad Guth wrote:

It's probably close to averaging a cozy 0 F (255 K) at no greater than
10 meters deep, and it shouldn't have any problems reaching 70 F (day
or night) at 100 km deep or possibly as shallow as 10 km (depending on
the core energy). *The R-factor of lunar regolith (lose basalt rock
and loads of crystal dry dust that’s at minimum 10 meters deep) is
none too shabby, and otherwise the geothermal conductance and/or heat
transfer coefficient (aka geothermal gradient) of its paramagnetic
basalt crust of 3.5 g/cm3 density shouldn't be significantly any
different than here on Earth, except that our terrestrial basalt isn't
nearly as paramagnetic or much less offering carbonado, and the core
heat of Earth being 7000+ K as opposed to only 1000 K of our moon.
Supposedly there is only a wee little bit of lunar granite to deal
with, but the samples thus far are inconsistent in their composition.

There are still no early (10,000+ BC) human created depictions of our
moon to any reasonable scale or magnitude of other much less important
items as having been rather nicely detailed in their carvings and
paintings, which leads me to perceive or deductively interpret that
early humans of our last ice age (prior to 11,712 years ago) simply
weren’t alive or perhaps didn't have that big old moon to depict, and
otherwise their extra cold and icy Earth seemed to have very little if
any significant seasonal tilt to offer, because there's also no
indications pertaining to seasons or animal migrations due to seasonal
changes. In other words the path of their sun was essentially always
in the exact same location year round, and apparently there as no
humanly perceived difference in summer daytime as opposed to their
winter daytime, even though those caves were situated not all that far
down(south) from the glacial ice-age terrain.

You’d have to think that basic survival instincts would most likely
have taken notice of seasons and especially of any enormous and
vibrant moon by which to hunt and gather by, not to mention easily
finding their way back home at night, and/or having extended their
range and scope of hunting and gathering by moonlight.

Apparently, most K-12s and higher educated have been thoroughly
indoctrinated to only accept that early humans were not only badly
nearsighted and perhaps even cross-eyed, because the only way they
could manage to ever depict our big old and extremely vibrant moon
(easily enough visible by day and otherwise extremely vibrant by
night) was to make little dots or scratch marks to represent it, even
though tenfold smaller resolution details of plants and animals was of
no problem whatsoever to depict.

Even with my sorry old eyes, I can see those phases of Venus, so
imagine with having a perfectly crystal dry and clear (pollution free)
atmosphere of their cool ice-age era, as to how much clearer and
distinctive their naked eye-view of Venus should have been, as perhaps
represented by those itsy bitsy markings that some of us interpret as
representing our moon.

Good grief, if you can see the details of your thumbnail at arms
length, you sure as hell can manage to artistically carve or paint
those contrasty surface patterns of our moon with at least similar
resolution to that of your thumb, that is unless your genetics has you
badly nearsighted and/or cross-eyed or perhaps because of having
chopped your thumbs off, and otherwise this moon observation gets
especially weird whenever that moon is either orbiting nearby
(362,570 km) or getting viewed anywhere near the horizon that usually
magnifies our perceived view of that moon, along with terrestrial
items coming into play is what gives our naked eye view the added
magnification illusion, even though it’s probably only at times
getting slightly distorted and otherwise discolored by the thicker
amount atmospherics we have to look through.

At any rate, if you can see your badly smashed or bitten thumbnail
details at arms-length, and have managed to transfer any of its
observed condition over to a cave wall carving/depiction or painting
(many of such items of cave art examples having depicted much smaller
details than necessary for that of our moon), then whatever was their
insurmountable visualization problem with not being able to reasonably
depict our big old vibrant moon and even at times its oddly colorful
(reddish/orange) moon (not to mention its bold and impressive crescent
phases) shouldn’t be those of only little specks or notches, because
the eye of a beast has been frequently depicted, and that’s a lot
smaller item of more detail than any naked eye view of our moon that
should have been worth at least as good as 16 km out of a diameter
3476 km, which is hardly asking too much, especially when tenfold
worse or 160 km details would have still given us a very good moon
depiction resolution that would have positively nailed it.

When old cave art of 10,000+ BC is uncovered that depicts our very big
old dynamically contrasty moon, and its extremely obvious phases of
illumination, is when I’ll have to accept that they always had such a
terrific moon and were just too stupid to ever have utilized its
enormous survival benefits to those of such a nasty ice-age era.


On May 23, 7:17*am, Brad Guth wrote:
In case some of you folks didn't realize it, "Terraforming the moon
underground" means digging into it, and "TBM" means tunnel boring
machine.

On Apr 11, 9:17*am, Brad Guth wrote:


Pay no special attention to those hiding behind curtains and
pretending as always being faith-based and/or politically correct,
because it's their mostly public-funded and/or faith-based job to
topic/author stalk and to otherwise FUD everything to death. *Hitler
had the exact same “Paperclip” team of rusemasters and FUD-masters, as
professional clowns working and/or manipulating the locals into a
mainstream status-quo mindset, which unfortunately far too many bought
into instead of taking any logical stance against their totally
bat**** crazy peers.

Of course this mainstream status-quo policy of obfuscation and denial
is what brought us a mutually perpetrated cold-war era and the
negative Karma likes of 911 (make that positive Karma if you are an
oligarch of our military industrial complex), each of which wasted
decades and costing us trillions of our hard earned dollars, as well
as having systematically squandered all sorts of talent, expertise and
resources that we'll never get back, and which force other nations to
follow suit.

Venus is pretty much as hot and nasty as we’ve all been indoctrinated
about. *However, this not necessarily the case of each and every
location, such as mountainous and polar area can be considerably
cooler though still extremely hot by human standards that we’re
accustomed to. *With applied physics and reasonable technology, the
surface of Venus can be dealt with, at least robotically, and
otherwise via composite rigid airships it can be further exploited
while easily protecting the airship crew. *Of course you have to think
both really big and perhaps even small in order to fully appreciate
the potential of what exploiting such a nearby planet has to offer,
because it’s the in-between that’s not easily accomplished if you can
only think of terrestrial methods that get to deal with on Earth.

Our physically dark and naked moon is just another metallicity
treasure trove of valuable resources (including much clean energy),
just sitting out there and causing us mostly grief and otherwise
contributing very little terrestrial benefit, unless added IR, X-rays
and gamma plus loads of tidal surging and increased seismic trauma is
desirable.

On Feb 18, 6:56*am, Brad Guth wrote:

It's probably close to averaging a cozy 0 F (255 K) at no greater than
10 meters deep, and it shouldn't have any problems reaching 70 F (day
or night) at 100 km deep or possibly as shallow as 10 km (depending on
the core energy). *The R-factor of lunar regolith (lose basalt rock
and loads of crystal dry dust that’s at minimum 10 meters deep) is
none too shabby, and otherwise the geothermal conductance and/or heat
transfer coefficient (aka geothermal gradient) of its paramagnetic
basalt crust of 3.5 g/cm3 density shouldn't be significantly any
different than here on Earth, except that our terrestrial basalt isn't
nearly as paramagnetic or much less offering carbonado, and the core
heat of Earth being 7000+ K as opposed to only 1000 K of our moon.
Supposedly there is only a wee little bit of lunar granite to deal
with, but the samples thus far are inconsistent in their composition.

A new interpretation is that all-inclusively the geothermal outflux of
Earth (including geothermal vents and volcanic contributions) is
getting rid of roughly 128 mw/m2, whereas our moon is supposedly only
getting rid of as little as 16 mw/m2 (an 8th as much).

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_gradient
*“Geothermal gradient is the rate of increasing temperature with
respect to increasing depth in the Earth's interior.”

The "Igneous Petrology" of our moon and Venus should each be unique
and considerably different than Earth.

“The composition of igneous rocks and minerals can be determined via a
variety of methods of varying ease, cost, and complexity. The simplest
method is observation of hand samples with the naked eye and/or with a
hand lens. This can be used to gauge the general mineralogical
composition of the rock, which gives an insight into the composition.”

Unfortunately, the rocks returned from our moon were entirely similar
to those of terrestrial rocks. *Of course there’s all sorts of actual
paramagnetic basalt moon rock to be found on Earth, because there
should be at least a thousand teratonnes of it, whereas naturally most
of which ended up in oceans and otherwise as having meteor and obvious
melt indications that are entirely quite different than local volcanic
spewed basalts.

“A more precise but still relatively inexpensive way to identify
minerals (and thereby the bulk chemical composition of the rock) with
a petrographic microscope. These microscopes have polarizing plates,
filters, and a conoscopic lens that allow the user to measure a large
number of crystallographic properties.”

Contributor “Wretch Fossil” actually has a very good “petrographic
microscope” and multiple resources plus talent of interpreting such to
go along with it. *Sadly this technology and its expertise of
interpreting is being ignored by those of authority that do not want
outsiders having a public say about anything. *So, once again, it
really doesn’t matter whatever level of modern applied technology and
expertise we have to offer, because it’s only going to be topic/author
stalked and systematically trashed by those of Usenet/newsgroup
authority that have multiple mainstream issues at risk.

TBMs cutting their tunnels into the interior of our moon should prove
both interesting and rewarding in terms of extracting rare and
valuable elements, not to mention creating the very cozy and safe
habitat potential that’s opened up for multiple uses. *Unfortunately
this method can not be applied on such a geodynamically active planet
like Venus that has such a thin crust and way more primordial core
energy outflux of perhaps 20.5 w/m2 as contributing way more
geothermal energy than any other planet or moon has to offer, although
older and cooler planets or any number of their moons (except for Io
that’s averaging 2 w/m2) should be somewhat similar to terraforming
the cozy interior of our moon.
*http://www.mps.mpg.de/solar-system-s...etary_interior...

*http://commercialspace.pbworks.com/f/Public+ILN.pdf

*The likely two thirds (6.6e17~6.6e18 tonnes) worth of lose surface
basalt rock and dust including whatever 4+ billion years worth of
accumulated deposits, as remaining crystal dry on the naked surface of
our physically dark moon (not including the other good third portion
as having been dislodged and deposited on Earth) is a direct result of
the thousands of significant impacts, and especially as a result of
whatever created its South polar crater of 2500 km diameter, that
which all by itself should have contributed a minimum of 3e17 m3 or
possibly a maximum contribution of 1e18 m3 if including the planet
sized impactor contributions. *Given the limited surface area of the
moon as being 3.8e13 m2 doesn’t exactly allow all that much surface
area for accommodating such volume of lose crater made fallout, and
perhaps due to much of its own basalt metallicity making its density
worth on average 3.5 tonnes/m3 unless offset by loads of accumulated
carbon buckyballs. *In that kind of hard vacuum, there really
shouldn’t be all that much porosity to any of its solidified basalt or
carbonado.

Liquefied basalt as returning fallout from such truly horrific impacts
that should have extensively solidified and possibly fused upon
contact with the relatively cool basalt surface, as such should have
been quite obvious and highly distinctive if such exposed lunar
bedrock samples had been return to Earth. *Sadly, no such samples or
even unique meteorites ever materialized from our NASA/Apollo era,
that found our naked moon as instead so unusually reflective and UV, X-
ray and gamma inert as well as hardly the least bit dusty, and what
little crystal dry dust there was seemed to offer terrific surface
tension and clumping for their footing and traction like no place
else.

Even taking the utmost conservative swag-estimate of 3.8e16 m3 worth
of lose rock, debris and accumulated dust, is still suggesting an
average surface depth of one km, which of course our Apollo era found
no such indications, as though that moon is relatively new to us. *Of
course, if that moon had created our Arctic ocean basin as of 11,712
years ago, would actually explain quite a bit.

How’s that for a worthy topic of terraforming the innards of our naked
moon that’s practically dust free and mostly solid as any rock
according to our Apollo wizards?

The mainstream of physics and science wants to exclude, banish and/or
obfuscate as to allowing any possibility of captured moons, planetoids
or planets. Apparently those laws of physics are conditional, and all
science has to be mainstream moderated before any of it becomes
viable, and the same status-quo gauntlet applies for any exploitation
of our moon or Venus.

On May 28, 10:11*am, Brad Guth wrote:
There are still no early (10,000+ BC) human created depictions of our
moon to any reasonable scale or magnitude of other much less important
items as having been rather nicely detailed in their carvings and
paintings, which leads me to perceive or deductively interpret that
early humans of our last ice age (prior to 11,712 years ago) simply
weren’t alive or perhaps didn't have that big old moon to depict, and
otherwise their extra cold and icy Earth seemed to have very little if
any significant seasonal tilt to offer, because there's also no
indications pertaining to seasons or animal migrations due to seasonal
changes. *In other words the path of their sun was essentially always
in the exact same location year round, and apparently there as no
humanly perceived difference in summer daytime as opposed to their
winter daytime, even though those caves were situated not all that far
down(south) from the glacial ice-age terrain.

You’d have to think that basic survival instincts would most likely
have taken notice of seasons and especially of any enormous and
vibrant moon by which to hunt and gather by, not to mention easily
finding their way back home at night, and/or having extended their
range and scope of hunting and gathering by moonlight.

Apparently, most K-12s and higher educated have been thoroughly
indoctrinated to only accept that early humans were not only badly
nearsighted and perhaps even cross-eyed, because the only way they
could manage to ever depict our big old and extremely vibrant moon
(easily enough visible by day and otherwise extremely vibrant by
night) was to make little dots or scratch marks to represent it, even
though tenfold smaller resolution details of plants and animals was of
no problem whatsoever to depict.

Even with my sorry old eyes, I can see those phases of Venus, so
imagine with having a perfectly crystal dry and clear (pollution free)
atmosphere of their cool ice-age era, as to how much clearer and
distinctive their naked eye-view of Venus should have been, as perhaps
represented by those itsy bitsy markings that some of us interpret as
representing our moon.

Good grief, if you can see the details of your thumbnail at arms
length, you sure as hell can manage to artistically carve or paint
those contrasty surface patterns of our moon with at least similar
resolution to that of your thumb, that is unless your genetics has you
badly nearsighted and/or cross-eyed or perhaps because of having
chopped your thumbs off, and otherwise this moon observation gets
especially weird whenever that moon is either orbiting nearby
(362,570 *km) or getting viewed anywhere near the horizon that usually
magnifies our perceived view of that moon, along with terrestrial
items coming into play is what gives our naked eye view the added
magnification illusion, even though it’s probably only at times
getting slightly distorted and otherwise discolored by the thicker
amount atmospherics we have to look through.

At any rate, if you can see your badly smashed or bitten thumbnail
details at arms-length, and have managed to transfer any of its
observed condition over to a cave wall carving/depiction or painting
(many of such items of cave art examples having depicted much smaller
details than necessary for that of our moon), then whatever was their
insurmountable visualization problem with not being able to reasonably
depict our big old vibrant moon and even at times its oddly colorful
(reddish/orange) moon (not to mention its bold and impressive crescent
phases) shouldn’t be those of only little specks or notches, because
the eye of a beast has been frequently depicted, and that’s a lot
smaller item of more detail than any naked eye view of our moon that
should have been worth *at least as good as 16 km out of a diameter
3476 km, which is hardly asking too much, especially when tenfold
worse or 160 km details would have still given us a very good moon
depiction resolution that would have positively nailed it.

When old cave art of 10,000+ BC is uncovered that depicts our very big
old dynamically contrasty moon, and its extremely obvious phases of
illumination, is when I’ll have to accept that they always had such a
terrific moon and were just too stupid to ever have utilized its
enormous survival benefits to those of such a nasty ice-age era.

On May 23, 7:17*am, Brad Guth wrote: In case some of you folks didn't realize it, "Terraforming the moon
underground" means digging into it, and "TBM" means tunnel boring
machine.

On Apr 11, 9:17*am, Brad Guth wrote:

Pay no special attention to those hiding behind curtains and
pretending as always being faith-based and/or politically correct,
because it's their mostly public-funded and/or faith-based job to
topic/author stalk and to otherwise FUD everything to death. *Hitler
had the exact same “Paperclip” team of rusemasters and FUD-masters, as
professional clowns working and/or manipulating the locals into a
mainstream status-quo mindset, which unfortunately far too many bought
into instead of taking any logical stance against their totally
bat**** crazy peers.

Of course this mainstream status-quo policy of obfuscation and denial
is what brought us a mutually perpetrated cold-war era and the
negative Karma likes of 911 (make that positive Karma if you are an
oligarch of our military industrial complex), each of which wasted
decades and costing us trillions of our hard earned dollars, as well
as having systematically squandered all sorts of talent, expertise and
resources that we'll never get back, and which force other nations to
follow suit.

Venus is pretty much as hot and nasty as we’ve all been indoctrinated
about. *However, this not necessarily the case of each and every
location, such as mountainous and polar area can be considerably
cooler though still extremely hot by human standards that we’re
accustomed to. *With applied physics and reasonable technology, the
surface of Venus can be dealt with, at least robotically, and
otherwise via composite rigid airships it can be further exploited
while easily protecting the airship crew. *Of course you have to think
both really big and perhaps even small in order to fully appreciate
the potential of what exploiting such a nearby planet has to offer,
because it’s the in-between that’s not easily accomplished if you can
only think of terrestrial methods that get to deal with on Earth.

Our physically dark and naked moon is just another metallicity
treasure trove of valuable resources (including much clean energy),
just sitting out there and causing us mostly grief and otherwise
contributing very little terrestrial benefit, unless added IR, X-rays
and gamma plus loads of tidal surging and increased seismic trauma is
desirable.

On Feb 18, 6:56*am, Brad Guth wrote:

It's probably close to averaging a cozy 0 F (255 K) at no greater than
10 meters deep, and it shouldn't have any problems reaching 70 F (day
or night) at 100 km deep or possibly as shallow as 10 km (depending on
the core energy). *The R-factor of lunar regolith (lose basalt rock
and loads of crystal dry dust that’s at minimum 10 meters deep) is
none too shabby, and otherwise the geothermal conductance and/or heat
transfer coefficient (aka geothermal gradient) of its paramagnetic
basalt crust of 3.5 g/cm3 density shouldn't be significantly any
different than here on Earth, except that our terrestrial basalt isn't
nearly as paramagnetic or much less offering carbonado, and the core
heat of Earth being 7000+ K as opposed to only 1000 K of our moon.
Supposedly there is only a wee little bit of lunar granite to deal
with, but the samples thus far are inconsistent in their composition.

On 5/29/2013 1:14 PM, Brad Guth wrote:
The mainstream of physics and science wants to exclude, banish and/or
obfuscate as to allowing any possibility of captured moons


OK Goth. Let's just give you that one.
Let's just all pretend you are correct.

Now what?


--
"OK you ****s, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo

On May 26, 6:43*am, David Staup wrote:
On 5/16/2013 11:54 PM, Brad Guth wrote: On May 16, 7:10 pm, David Staup wrote:
On 3/21/2013 4:47 PM, Brad Guth wrote:

Just because redneck GOP FUD-masters like yourself that can not manage
to terraform anything for the better (not even Earth), doesn't mean
that I can't terraform the innards of our moon, or even exploit Venus..

go for it goofy...you claim you can do it.....show us!

talk is cheap......show us

Thanks for all the help. (as in less than zero)

Did you always treat your mother in this same way?

you little wimp...that's the best you can do?

I can do so much better, except you're not worth the effort, at least
not any more so than going after GW Bush, Dick Cheney or Hitler.