Terraforming the moon underground:

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?

Reading this topic is extremely dangerous to your health.

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?

Does anyone have a fly-by-rocket lander as having been prototype
proven?

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?

Without our moon we’d have roughly a third the ocean tides we now
have, and there’d still be our seasonal tilt and those pesky storm
tidal surges but nothing nearly as nasty, plus those twice a day solar
generated tides would become as extremely regular as any atomic clock
minus those minor rotational friction and tidal locking factors
associated with orbiting the sun that’s only getting hotter and more
unpredictable as it ages. Placing our moon within the halo orbit of
Earth L1 would give us a constant tidal alignment cycle plus roughly
half the existing tidal variances and thereby half of the tidal surge
issues we currently have to deal with. This alone could be worth a
trillion dollars per year, as based upon greatly reduced coastal
erosions, greatly reduced storm surge damage and otherwise when
greatly improved coastal and river delta usage as productivity issues
are taken into account, because our coastal infrastructures wouldn’t
be so easily traumatized and/or damaged beyond the point of no return
each year.

A lot of our coastal infrastructure simply can not get affordably
accomplished because of the greatly added cost of having to deal with
our existing tidal and storm-surge issues, and wherever it gets
established is always considerably more complex and spendy in order to
deal with and stand up against nature.

Given that the enormous gravity of our moon contributes the vast
majority of our global morphing, as a slow physical modulation and its
unavoidable internal heating of our planet from those unavoidable
frictions caused by tidal interactions continually flexing the
relatively thin crust, thereby keeping our crustal plates moving and
causing us nothing but grief by way of inducing and/or triggering
earthquakes, as well as increased geothermal heat and volcanic issues
made a whole lot worse, as such could be easily considered as worth
another trillion dollars per year.

In other words, with humans becoming more coastal dependent than ever,
and our demanding infrastructures growing by leaps and bounds, as is
our moon is capable of creating a couple trillion dollars worth of
grief each and every year for us, especially when at least some
measurable degree of global warming from it’s IR and always tidal
heating in addition to the subsequent climate severity issues that can
be directly linked, not to mention what gaining a 3% spot of shade
would go a long ways towards cooling our planet and eventually
recreating those essential volumes of glacial ice that by rights
should stabilize global weather patterns once we had our moon
repositioned and actively station-keeping within our Sun Earth L1.

Of course doing absolutely nothing about utilizing our moon as for
geoengineering multiple solutions for the greater good of our planet
has always been the mainstream status-quo method of forcing the lower
99.9% caste to essentially pay for everything that could otherwise be
prevented and/or moderated to suit quite nicely in our advantage, and
perhaps best of all is that we’d still have not exploited anything
about the naked surface or the cozy innards of our moon, which would
probably make our NASA/Apollo wizards and oligarchs very happy
campers. If you happen to be a failsafe insider and happily
mainstream boxed kind of person that doesn’t bother to contemplate or
ponder anything, thus unwilling to consider what future generations
and the whole biodiversity of our planet is going to need, then by all
means you have made the right decision about not ever relocating our
moon to L1.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”, GuthVenus


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?

Off-world metallicity exploitation has nothing to do with the small
amount of metals that remain within our sun, but instead having to do
with those metals tossed away at the time our sun was creating its
planets, numerous moons and perhaps millions of asteroids. It’s also
about our doing something positive/constructive with our moon and even
the extremely nearby planet Venus before it’s too late.

Earth without our moon would have roughly a third the ocean tides we
now have, and there’d still be our seasonal tilt along with those
pesky tidal storm surges but nothing nearly as nasty, plus those twice
a day solar generated tides would have been as regular as any atomic
clock (minus those minor rotational friction and tidal locking
factors) associated with orbiting the sun that’s only getting hotter
and more unpredictable as it ages. Placing our moon within the halo
orbit of Earth L1 would give us a constant tidal alignment cycle plus
roughly half the existing tidal variances and thereby half of the
tidal surge issues we currently have to deal with. This consideration
alone could be worth a trillion dollars per year, as based upon
greatly reduced coastal erosions, greatly reduced storm surge damage
and otherwise when greatly improved coastal and river delta usage as
increased productivity issues are taken into account, because our
coastal infrastructures wouldn’t be so easily traumatized and/or
damaged beyond the point of no return each year.

A lot of our coastal infrastructure simply can not get affordably
accomplished or otherwise maintained because of the greatly added cost
of our having to deal with those existing tidal and storm-surge
issues, and wherever it gets established is always considerably more
complex and extra spendy in order to deal with and having it stand up
against the natural forces of nature that’s primarily tidal surge
related.

Given that the enormous gravity of our moon contributes the vast
majority (2/3) of our global morphing, as imposing a slow physical
modulation and its relentless internal heating of our planet from
those unavoidable internal and crust related frictions caused by these
considerable tidal interactions continually flexing our whole planet
with its relatively thin crust, thereby keeping our crustal plates
moving and causing us nothing but grief by way of moon caused
tectonics inducing and/or triggering earthquakes, as well as having
increased its continuous contribution of geothermal heat and those
pesky volcanic issues made a whole lot worse, as such could be easily
considered as worth another trillion dollars per year.

In other words, with humans becoming more coastal and river delta
dependent as well as more concentrated than ever, and our ever
demanding infrastructures growing by leaps and bounds, thereby as is
our moon remains capable of creating a couple trillion dollars worth
of grief each and every year for us, especially costly when at least
some measurable degree of global warming from it’s IR and always tidal
heating in addition to the subsequent climate severity issues that can
be directly linked, not to even mention the greater value of what
gaining a 3% spot of shade would go a long ways towards cooling our
planet and eventually recreating those essential volumes of glacial
ice that by rights should stabilize global weather patterns once we
had our moon repositioned and actively station-keeping within our Sun
Earth L1.

Those of you that still can’t conceive of relocating and actively
station-keeping our moon within Earth L1 may of course disregard this
notion of geoengineered solution(s) as just another Muslim terrorist
or communist plot because, that’s what our resident oligarch redneck
FUD-masters are going to insist, and we already know that you don’t
have the skills nor the independent will to ever go against anything
your faith-based or political peers have to say.

Of course doing absolutely nothing about utilizing our moon, as for
geoengineering multiple solutions for the greater good of our planet
has always been the mainstream status-quo methodology, of their dogma
forcing the lower 99.9% caste to essentially pay for everything that
could otherwise be prevented and/or moderated to suit quite nicely in
our advantage, and perhaps best of all is that we’d still have not
exploited anything about the naked surface or the cozy innards of our
moon, which would probably make our NASA/Apollo wizards and oligarchs
very happy campers, mostly because they really don’t like anything to
change for the better unless it strictly benefits themselves.. If you
happen to be a failsafe insider and happily mainstream boxed kind of
person that doesn’t bother to contemplate or ponder anything outside
of your box, thus unwilling to consider what future generations and
the whole biodiversity of our planet is going to need, then by all
means you have made the right decision about not ever relocating our
moon to L1.

http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”, GuthVenus


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?

Once TBMs are doing their underground thing, of tunneling and
excavating our moon, it's all good.


On May 5, 2:09*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
Off-world metallicity exploitation has nothing to do with the small
amount of metals that remain within our sun, but instead having to do
with those metals tossed away at the time our sun was creating its
planets, numerous moons and perhaps millions of asteroids. *It’s also
about our doing something positive/constructive with our moon and even
the extremely nearby planet Venus before it’s too late.

Earth without our moon would have roughly a third the ocean tides we
now have, and there’d still be our seasonal tilt along with those
pesky tidal storm surges but nothing nearly as nasty, plus those twice
a day solar generated tides would have been as regular as any atomic
clock (minus those minor rotational friction and tidal locking
factors) associated with orbiting the sun that’s only getting hotter
and more unpredictable as it ages. *Placing our moon within the halo
orbit of Earth L1 would give us a constant tidal alignment cycle plus
roughly half the existing tidal variances and thereby half of the
tidal surge issues we currently have to deal with. *This consideration
alone could be worth a trillion dollars per year, as based upon
greatly reduced coastal erosions, greatly reduced storm surge damage
and otherwise when greatly improved coastal and river delta usage as
increased productivity issues are taken into account, because our
coastal infrastructures wouldn’t be so easily traumatized and/or
damaged beyond the point of no return each year.

A lot of our coastal infrastructure simply can not get affordably
accomplished or otherwise maintained because of the greatly added cost
of our having to deal with those existing tidal and storm-surge
issues, and wherever it gets established is always considerably more
complex and extra spendy in order to deal with and having it stand up
against the natural forces of nature that’s primarily tidal surge
related.

Given that the enormous gravity of our moon contributes the vast
majority (2/3) of our global morphing, as imposing a slow physical
modulation and its relentless internal heating of our planet from
those unavoidable internal and crust related frictions caused by these
considerable tidal interactions continually flexing our whole planet
with its relatively thin crust, thereby keeping our crustal plates
moving and causing us nothing but grief by way of moon caused
tectonics inducing and/or triggering earthquakes, as well as having
increased its continuous contribution of geothermal heat and those
pesky volcanic issues made a whole lot worse, as such could be easily
considered as worth another trillion dollars per year.

In other words, with humans becoming more coastal and river delta
dependent as well as more concentrated than ever, and our ever
demanding infrastructures growing by leaps and bounds, thereby as is
our moon remains capable of creating a couple trillion dollars worth
of grief each and every year for us, especially costly when at least
some measurable degree of global warming from it’s IR and always tidal
heating in addition to the subsequent climate severity issues that can
be directly linked, not to even mention the greater value of what
gaining a 3% spot of shade would go a long ways towards cooling our
planet and eventually recreating those essential volumes of glacial
ice that by rights should stabilize global weather patterns once we
had our moon repositioned and actively station-keeping within our Sun
Earth L1.

Those of you that still can’t conceive of relocating and actively
station-keeping our moon within Earth L1 may of course disregard this
notion of geoengineered solution(s) as just another Muslim terrorist
or communist plot because, that’s what our resident oligarch redneck
FUD-masters are going to insist, and we already know that you don’t
have the skills nor the independent will to ever go against anything
your faith-based or political peers have to say.

Of course doing absolutely nothing about utilizing our moon, as for
geoengineering multiple solutions for the greater good of our planet
has always been the mainstream status-quo methodology, of their dogma
forcing the lower 99.9% caste to essentially pay for everything that
could otherwise be prevented and/or moderated to suit quite nicely in
our advantage, and perhaps best of all is that we’d still have not
exploited anything about the naked surface or the cozy innards of our
moon, which would probably make our NASA/Apollo wizards and oligarchs
very happy campers, mostly because they really don’t like anything to
change for the better unless it strictly benefits themselves.. *If you
happen to be a failsafe insider and happily mainstream boxed kind of
person that doesn’t bother to contemplate or ponder anything outside
of your box, thus unwilling to consider what future generations and
the whole biodiversity of our planet is going to need, then by all
means you have made the right decision about not ever relocating our
moon to L1.

*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”, GuthVenus

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?

Once TBMs are doing their underground thing, of tunneling and
excavating the relatively soft innards of our moon, it's all good.

On May 5, 2:09*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
Off-world metallicity exploitation has nothing to do with the small
amount of metals that remain within our sun, but instead having to do
with those metals tossed away at the time our sun was creating its
planets, numerous moons and perhaps millions of asteroids. *It’s also
about our doing something positive/constructive with our moon and even
the extremely nearby planet Venus before it’s too late.

Earth without our moon would have roughly a third the ocean tides we
now have, and there’d still be our seasonal tilt along with those
pesky tidal storm surges but nothing nearly as nasty, plus those twice
a day solar generated tides would have been as regular as any atomic
clock (minus those minor rotational friction and tidal locking
factors) associated with orbiting the sun that’s only getting hotter
and more unpredictable as it ages. *Placing our moon within the halo
orbit of Earth L1 would give us a constant tidal alignment cycle plus
roughly half the existing tidal variances and thereby half of the
tidal surge issues we currently have to deal with. *This consideration
alone could be worth a trillion dollars per year, as based upon
greatly reduced coastal erosions, greatly reduced storm surge damage
and otherwise when greatly improved coastal and river delta usage as
increased productivity issues are taken into account, because our
coastal infrastructures wouldn’t be so easily traumatized and/or
damaged beyond the point of no return each year.

A lot of our coastal infrastructure simply can not get affordably
accomplished or otherwise maintained because of the greatly added cost
of our having to deal with those existing tidal and storm-surge
issues, and wherever it gets established is always considerably more
complex and extra spendy in order to deal with and having it stand up
against the natural forces of nature that’s primarily tidal surge
related.

Given that the enormous gravity of our moon contributes the vast
majority (2/3) of our global morphing, as imposing a slow physical
modulation and its relentless internal heating of our planet from
those unavoidable internal and crust related frictions caused by these
considerable tidal interactions continually flexing our whole planet
with its relatively thin crust, thereby keeping our crustal plates
moving and causing us nothing but grief by way of moon caused
tectonics inducing and/or triggering earthquakes, as well as having
increased its continuous contribution of geothermal heat and those
pesky volcanic issues made a whole lot worse, as such could be easily
considered as worth another trillion dollars per year.

In other words, with humans becoming more coastal and river delta
dependent as well as more concentrated than ever, and our ever
demanding infrastructures growing by leaps and bounds, thereby as is
our moon remains capable of creating a couple trillion dollars worth
of grief each and every year for us, especially costly when at least
some measurable degree of global warming from it’s IR and always tidal
heating in addition to the subsequent climate severity issues that can
be directly linked, not to even mention the greater value of what
gaining a 3% spot of shade would go a long ways towards cooling our
planet and eventually recreating those essential volumes of glacial
ice that by rights should stabilize global weather patterns once we
had our moon repositioned and actively station-keeping within our Sun
Earth L1.

Those of you that still can’t conceive of relocating and actively
station-keeping our moon within Earth L1 may of course disregard this
notion of geoengineered solution(s) as just another Muslim terrorist
or communist plot because, that’s what our resident oligarch redneck
FUD-masters are going to insist, and we already know that you don’t
have the skills nor the independent will to ever go against anything
your faith-based or political peers have to say.

Of course doing absolutely nothing about utilizing our moon, as for
geoengineering multiple solutions for the greater good of our planet
has always been the mainstream status-quo methodology, of their dogma
forcing the lower 99.9% caste to essentially pay for everything that
could otherwise be prevented and/or moderated to suit quite nicely in
our advantage, and perhaps best of all is that we’d still have not
exploited anything about the naked surface or the cozy innards of our
moon, which would probably make our NASA/Apollo wizards and oligarchs
very happy campers, mostly because they really don’t like anything to
change for the better unless it strictly benefits themselves.. *If you
happen to be a failsafe insider and happily mainstream boxed kind of
person that doesn’t bother to contemplate or ponder anything outside
of your box, thus unwilling to consider what future generations and
the whole biodiversity of our planet is going to need, then by all
means you have made the right decision about not ever relocating our
moon to L1.

*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”, GuthVenus

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?

Terraforming the innards of our moon makes a whole lot more sense than
modifying the heavy atmospheric environment of Venus. Of course we
could have been doing positive/constructive things with each of these
nearby orbs as of more than a decade ago.

Venus can be alive in ways other than conventional life as we know it,
because its atmosphere offers indications of microbial environments
suitable as to offering an ocean of complex life which has been
systematically ignored and otherwise banished by most scientists, and
especially by those afraid of being excluded or banished from the
next round of research grants or extensions.

Photolysis of H2SO4 1 as the Source of Sulfur Species in the Venus
Mesosphere
http://yly-mac.gps.caltech.edu/Repri...517%20copy.pdf


https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...npBNvQ& pli=1

This doesn’t mean that its microbes have evolved into intelligent
life, and it also doesn’t exclude as to what truly intelligent other
life could manage to do or function within such a toasty thick
atmospheric protected planet like Venus has to offer.

Being that our moon remains as taboo/nondisclosure rated, you’d think
that by far the most nearby planet that gets to within 100 LD of us
every 19 month cycle should be taken seriously, especially when such
unusual geometrics and even infrastructure kinds of patterns have been
so obvious for nearly 16 years, but oddly never once having been
mainstream pointed out to us or given any official internal review,
other than having applied total obfuscation and denial of being in
denial as the NASA status-quo policy of applied banishment and FUD
towards anyone or anything independently related to the planet Venus.

Venus is most definitely not a terrestrial Goldilocks suitable planet
for any human nudist camps, although most any 5th grade ET Goldilocks
shouldn't have any problems with exploiting such a toasty treasure
trove of raw and extremely valuable elements that should be worth
their weight in gold, platinum and a few other heavy elements to
export.

The extremely buoyant nature of its atmosphere seems almost too good
to pass up, especially for anyone with any speck of airship
engineering and operational expertise, but then most of our best
educated Americans and other peers of our NASA and DARPA are either
totally dumbfounded and without a clue as to how any level of
intelligence or applied physics could ever make a planet like Venus
suitable for any of us, or perhaps they simply intend to maintain as
much mainstream denial and FUD as it takes in order to disqualify
whatever independent outsiders might have to say.

Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
as to viewing this one small but rather interesting mountainous area
of Venus, using your independent deductive expertise as to enlarge or
magnify this extensively mountainous terrain of Venus that I’ve
focused upon, really shouldn’t be asking too much. Most of modern
PhotoZoom and numerous other photographic software variations tend to
accomplish this enlargement process automatically (including iPhone
and Safari image zooming), although some extra applied filtering and
thereby image enhancing for dynamic range compensations (aka contrast)
can further improve upon the end result (no direct pixel modifications
should ever be necessary, because it’s all a derivative from the
original Magellan radar imaging of 36 confirming radar scans/pixel,
that can always be 100% verified).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...18595926178146

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif

https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...8634/BradGuth#
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”, GuthVenus


On May 5, 2:09*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
Off-world metallicity exploitation has nothing to do with the small
amount of metals that remain within our sun, but instead having to do
with those metals tossed away at the time our sun was creating its
planets, numerous moons and perhaps millions of asteroids. *It’s also
about our doing something positive/constructive with our moon and even
the extremely nearby planet Venus before it’s too late.

Earth without our moon would have roughly a third the ocean tides we
now have, and there’d still be our seasonal tilt along with those
pesky tidal storm surges but nothing nearly as nasty, plus those twice
a day solar generated tides would have been as regular as any atomic
clock (minus those minor rotational friction and tidal locking
factors) associated with orbiting the sun that’s only getting hotter
and more unpredictable as it ages. *Placing our moon within the halo
orbit of Earth L1 would give us a constant tidal alignment cycle plus
roughly half the existing tidal variances and thereby half of the
tidal surge issues we currently have to deal with. *This consideration
alone could be worth a trillion dollars per year, as based upon
greatly reduced coastal erosions, greatly reduced storm surge damage
and otherwise when greatly improved coastal and river delta usage as
increased productivity issues are taken into account, because our
coastal infrastructures wouldn’t be so easily traumatized and/or
damaged beyond the point of no return each year.

A lot of our coastal infrastructure simply can not get affordably
accomplished or otherwise maintained because of the greatly added cost
of our having to deal with those existing tidal and storm-surge
issues, and wherever it gets established is always considerably more
complex and extra spendy in order to deal with and having it stand up
against the natural forces of nature that’s primarily tidal surge
related.

Given that the enormous gravity of our moon contributes the vast
majority (2/3) of our global morphing, as imposing a slow physical
modulation and its relentless internal heating of our planet from
those unavoidable internal and crust related frictions caused by these
considerable tidal interactions continually flexing our whole planet
with its relatively thin crust, thereby keeping our crustal plates
moving and causing us nothing but grief by way of moon caused
tectonics inducing and/or triggering earthquakes, as well as having
increased its continuous contribution of geothermal heat and those
pesky volcanic issues made a whole lot worse, as such could be easily
considered as worth another trillion dollars per year.

In other words, with humans becoming more coastal and river delta
dependent as well as more concentrated than ever, and our ever
demanding infrastructures growing by leaps and bounds, thereby as is
our moon remains capable of creating a couple trillion dollars worth
of grief each and every year for us, especially costly when at least
some measurable degree of global warming from it’s IR and always tidal
heating in addition to the subsequent climate severity issues that can
be directly linked, not to even mention the greater value of what
gaining a 3% spot of shade would go a long ways towards cooling our
planet and eventually recreating those essential volumes of glacial
ice that by rights should stabilize global weather patterns once we
had our moon repositioned and actively station-keeping within our Sun
Earth L1.

Those of you that still can’t conceive of relocating and actively
station-keeping our moon within Earth L1 may of course disregard this
notion of geoengineered solution(s) as just another Muslim terrorist
or communist plot because, that’s what our resident oligarch redneck
FUD-masters are going to insist, and we already know that you don’t
have the skills nor the independent will to ever go against anything
your faith-based or political peers have to say.

Of course doing absolutely nothing about utilizing our moon, as for
geoengineering multiple solutions for the greater good of our planet
has always been the mainstream status-quo methodology, of their dogma
forcing the lower 99.9% caste to essentially pay for everything that
could otherwise be prevented and/or moderated to suit quite nicely in
our advantage, and perhaps best of all is that we’d still have not
exploited anything about the naked surface or the cozy innards of our
moon, which would probably make our NASA/Apollo wizards and oligarchs
very happy campers, mostly because they really don’t like anything to
change for the better unless it strictly benefits themselves.. *If you
happen to be a failsafe insider and happily mainstream boxed kind of
person that doesn’t bother to contemplate or ponder anything outside
of your box, thus unwilling to consider what future generations and
the whole biodiversity of our planet is going to need, then by all
means you have made the right decision about not ever relocating our
moon to L1.

*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”, GuthVenus

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 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?

Terraforming the innards of our moon makes a whole lot more sense than
modifying the heavy and acidic atmospheric environment of Venus. Of
course we could have been doing positive/constructive things with each
of these nearby orbs as of more than a decade ago, instead of
promoting global inflation on behalf of our oligarch overlords that
pretty much get to do as they please regardless of whomever we elect
or appoint.

Our moon should represent a mining treasure-trove of rare elements on
its naked surface as well as within its crust and especially of those
sequestered below, whereas Venus is likely spitting out more valuable
stuff per month than we can mine/excavate per year on Earth. In
either case we can continue to ignore and/or forget about whatever our
moon and Venus has to offer, and instead focus on continued
exploitations of good old mother Earth for all she’s worth.

However, Venus can be alive in ways other than conventional life as we
know it, because its robust atmosphere offers indications of microbial
environments suitable as to offering an ocean of complex life which
has been systematically ignored and otherwise banished by most
scientists, and especially by those afraid of being excluded or
banished from the next round of research grants or extensions.

Photolysis of H2SO4 1 as the Source of Sulfur Species in the Venus
Mesosphere
http://yly-mac.gps.caltech.edu/Repri...517%20copy.pdf


https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...npBNvQ& pli=1

This doesn’t mean that its sulfur tolerant microbes have evolved into
intelligent life, and it also doesn’t exclude as to what truly
intelligent other life could manage to do or manage to function within
such a toasty thick atmospheric protected planet like Venus has to
offer.

Junk DNA may be sufficient for Venusian microbes:
http://www.livescience.com/31939-jun...ry-solved.html
“The findings suggest junk DNA really isn't needed for healthy plants
— and that may also hold for other organisms, such as humans.”

Being that our moon remains as taboo/nondisclosure rated, you’d think
that by far the most nearby planet that gets to within 100 LD of us
every 19 month cycle should be taken seriously, especially when such
unusual geometrics and even infrastructure kinds of patterns have been
so obvious for nearly 16 years, but oddly never once having been
mainstream pointed out to us or given any official internal review,
other than having applied total obfuscation and denial of being in
denial as the NASA status-quo policy of applied banishment and FUD
towards anyone or anything independently related to the planet Venus.

Venus is most definitely not a terrestrial Goldilocks suitable planet
for any human nudist camps, although most any 5th grade ET Goldilocks
shouldn't have any problems with exploiting such a toasty treasure
trove of raw and extremely valuable elements that should be worth
their weight in gold, platinum and a few other heavy elements to
export.

The extremely buoyant nature of its atmosphere seems almost too good
to pass up, especially for anyone with any speck of airship
engineering and operational expertise, but then most of our best
educated Americans and other peers of our NASA and DARPA are either
totally dumbfounded and without a clue as to how any level of
intelligence or applied physics could ever make a planet like Venus
suitable for any of us, or perhaps they simply intend to maintain as
much mainstream denial and FUD as it takes in order to disqualify
whatever independent outsiders might have to say.

Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
as to viewing this one small but rather interesting mountainous area
of Venus, using your independent deductive expertise as to enlarge or
magnify this extensively mountainous terrain of Venus that I’ve
focused upon, really shouldn’t be asking too much. Most of modern
PhotoZoom and numerous other photographic software variations tend to
accomplish this enlargement process automatically (including iPhone
and Safari image zooming), although some extra applied filtering and
thereby image enhancing for dynamic range compensations (aka contrast)
can further improve upon the end result (no direct pixel modifications
should ever be necessary, because it’s all a derivative from the
original Magellan radar imaging of 36 confirming radar scans/pixel,
that can always be 100% verified).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...18595926178146

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif

https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...8634/BradGuth#
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”, GuthVenus

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 as
much natural surrounding protection from the shade and physical shield
derived by keeping the base camp site well below the crater rim.


On May 12, 12:51*pm, Brad Guth wrote:
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?

Terraforming the innards of our moon makes a whole lot more sense than
modifying the heavy and acidic atmospheric environment of Venus. *Of
course we could have been doing positive/constructive things with each
of these nearby orbs as of more than a decade ago, instead of
promoting global inflation on behalf of our oligarch overlords that
pretty much get to do as they please regardless of whomever we elect
or appoint.

Our moon should represent a mining treasure-trove of rare elements on
its naked surface as well as within its crust and especially of those
sequestered below, whereas Venus is likely spitting out more valuable
stuff per month than we can mine/excavate per year on Earth. *In
either case we can continue to ignore and/or forget about whatever our
moon and Venus has to offer, and instead focus on continued
exploitations of good old mother Earth for all she’s worth.

However, Venus can be alive in ways other than conventional life as we
know it, because its robust atmosphere offers indications of microbial
environments suitable as to offering an ocean of complex life which
has been systematically ignored and otherwise banished by most
scientists, and especially by those afraid of *being excluded or
banished from the next round of research grants or extensions.

Photolysis of H2SO4 1 as the Source of Sulfur Species in the Venus
Mesosphere
*http://yly-mac.gps.caltech.edu/Repri...0profie/zhang%....

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...:yly-mac.gps.c....

This doesn’t mean that its sulfur tolerant microbes have evolved into
intelligent life, and it also doesn’t exclude as to what truly
intelligent other life could manage to do or manage to function within
such a toasty thick atmospheric protected planet like Venus has to
offer.

*Junk DNA may be sufficient for Venusian microbes:
*http://www.livescience.com/31939-jun...ry-solved.html
*“The findings suggest junk DNA really isn't needed for healthy plants
— and that may also hold for other organisms, such as humans.”

Being that our moon remains as taboo/nondisclosure rated, you’d think
that by far the most nearby planet that gets to within 100 LD of us
every 19 month cycle should be taken seriously, especially when such
unusual geometrics and even infrastructure kinds of patterns have been
so obvious for nearly 16 years, but oddly never once having been
mainstream pointed out to us or given any official internal review,
other than having applied total obfuscation and denial of being in
denial as the NASA status-quo policy of applied banishment and FUD
towards anyone or anything independently related to the planet Venus.

Venus is most definitely not a terrestrial Goldilocks suitable planet
for any human nudist camps, although most any 5th grade ET Goldilocks
shouldn't have any problems with exploiting such a toasty treasure
trove of raw and extremely valuable elements that should be worth
their weight in gold, platinum and a few other heavy elements to
export.

The extremely buoyant nature of its atmosphere seems almost too good
to pass up, especially for anyone with any speck of airship
engineering and operational expertise, but then most of our best
educated Americans and other peers of our NASA and DARPA are either
totally dumbfounded and without a clue as to how any level of
intelligence or applied physics could ever make a planet like Venus
suitable for any of us, or perhaps they simply intend to maintain as
much mainstream denial and FUD as it takes in order to disqualify
whatever independent outsiders might have to say.

Be my guest and apply your very own photographic enlargement software,
as to viewing this one small but rather interesting mountainous area
of Venus, using your independent deductive expertise as to enlarge or
magnify this extensively mountainous terrain of Venus that I’ve
focused upon, really shouldn’t be asking too much. *Most of modern
PhotoZoom and numerous other photographic software variations tend to
accomplish this enlargement process automatically (including iPhone
and Safari image zooming), although some extra applied filtering and
thereby image enhancing for dynamic range compensations (aka contrast)
can further improve upon the end result (no direct pixel modifications
should ever be necessary, because it’s all a derivative from the
original Magellan radar imaging of 36 confirming radar scans/pixel,
that can always be 100% verified).

“GuthVenus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
*https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...Guth#slideshow....

*http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hi...c115s095_1.gif

*https://picasaweb.google.com/1027362...8634/BradGuth#
*http://translate.google.com/#
*Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG, Guth Usenet/”Guth
Venus”, GuthVenus