GUTH Venus is way too hot for even Bad Astronomy

You're absolutely right on, the truth stinks. I'm just glad I'm the
one that's up-wind of it all.

All that the "Bad Astronomer" needs to do, is provide your own
superior numbers and/or offer a web page that I can post a link into
(NASA moderated pictures of a clumping lunar surface that's reflecting
at nearly 50% isn't going to cut it, neither are those terrific still
photos of any frail test flight that's not likely as stable nor as
reliable as the V-22 Osprey, which can't fly either yet we've got
quality stills of it hovering before any crash and even a few movie
minutes before it crached while killing everyone onboard, even the
latest strike force vertical jet aircraft is unstable at best, that's
after throwing every possible level of modern fly-by-wire technology
that operating from a bloody cash of nearly CRAY computers that can't
miss a single bit out of millions of bits worth of instruction code
that we've got invested in the damn thing, which BTW we didn't have
back then) so, offer whatever it is that others and myself can compare
of whatever it is that you have to stipulate as opposed to my
uneducated arguments. In the mean time, I'll continue to read of what
others have to say and, I'll even do my best to understand it, even
though you seem to have far more ulterior motives at risk than you or
I can shake a flaming stick at.

In spite of others such as your pretentious club contributing squat
worth of specifics, certainly nothing but infomercials on behalf of
Club NASA, I believe I'm getting somewhat closer to understanding the
harsh environment of Earth L4 or L5, thereby I'm slowly gaining ground
upon what Venus L2 may have to offer, so that the following updated
page is becoming both "good news" and "bad news".

Here's my latest update and, as far as this village idiot can figure,
it's become somewhat worse off than I thought, at least the Van Allen
zone as representing any significant radiation buffer for Earth simply
isn't what the pro-Apollo cults have to say, even though it's a fairly
nasty place to spend any amount of time in a craft as ****-poorly
shielded as what the Apollo missions had to work with and, don't even
mention anything of TRW Space Data, as that's 27 times worse off.

http://guthvenus.tripod.com/space-radiation.htm

There's been another metric tonne worth of new information that I've
learned about the radiation environment at Earth L4/L5, not to mention
the greater risk imposed from secondary (X-Ray) dosage that's
attributed to solar minimum cosmic radiation interacting with the
likes of any shield and/or the lunar surface.

This is where the opposition (perhaps that's you) offers somewhat
intentional disinformation, as being tossed out like so much warm and
fuzzy flak at my position, where actually that's what's been giving me
insight and further motivation into learning what's more likely the
case than not, like what our atmosphere and of the void or space in
between Earth's atmosphere and 590 km has to offer, a factor of
roughly 274,000:1 in reducing radiation exposure as opposed to the Van
Allen zone attributing another mere 200:1 influx buffer.

For some odd reason(s), I was previously under the impression or
allusion, as kindly provided by all the pro-NASA as well as pro-Apollo
camps, that our Van Allen belts or zones were of the major benefit to
our survival, responsible for creating the bulk of Earth's shield,
achieving our current level of exposure and, if in fact the Van Allen
imposes a mere 200:1 benefit, that's certainly worth the effort, as
I'll take 1 mrem/day as opposed to 200 mrem/day any day of the week,
month or year, not to mention a lifetime that wouldn't be all that
long if we couldn't adapt/evolve into managing with such dosage.
Although, that also represents of what's existing beyond the Van Allen
zone of death is in fact considerably more irradiated hot and nasty
then we've been told, especially the likes of L4/L5 and of the moon
itself.

BTW; The moon landings are not any hoax, they just weren't manned,
because if they were there'd be a whole lot more radiation fogging of
film (especially of that thermally roasted and then subfrozen Kodak
film) and of measurably but survivable TBI dosage applied to those
otherwise radiation proof astronauts and, there'd also have been a
lunar SAR/VLA aperture receiving station (robotic) up and running as
of decades ago;
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/moon-sar.htm

Regards, Brad Guth "GUTH Venus"