Research Discussion: GuthBall's Venusians Moved To Mars ...

GuthBall's Venusians Moved To Mars ...
Posts: 42

Report Abuse

Use this form to report abuse or request takedown.
The requests are usually processed within 48 hours.

Page: 1 2 3 4 5   Next  (First | Last)

Hägar
2012-04-12 12:08:34 EST

http://news.yahoo.com/monolith-object-mars-could-call-214004772.html



Brad Guth
2012-04-13 00:52:48 EST
On Apr 12, 9:08 am, "Hägar" <hs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://news.yahoo.com/monolith-object-mars-could-call-214004772.html

That's a really interesting but small item compared to those multiple
items a hundred times larger on Venus.

Thumbnail images, including mgn_c115s095_1.gif (225 m/pixel)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
“Guth Venus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5630418595926178146
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5629579402364691314
Brad Guth / Blog and my Google document pages:
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet?hl=en
http://bradguth.blogspot.com/
http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddsdxhv_0hrm5bdfj
http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

Hägar
2012-04-13 08:45:57 EST

"Brad Guth" <bradguth@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:040550ef-76e5-4960-94aa-aff097393d94@to5g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 12, 9:08 am, "H\ufffdgar" <hs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://news.yahoo.com/monolith-object-mars-could-call-214004772.html

That's a really interesting but small item compared to those multiple
items a hundred times larger on Venus.


**************************************
Just more of your warmed-over, re-hashed, grainy Venusian images with
nothing on them to see ... unless you're mentally unstable, like you, then
there are remnants of an entire civilization to see, albeit invisible to
normal folks.



Brad Guth
2012-04-13 09:16:40 EST
On Apr 12, 9:08 am, "Hägar" <hs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://news.yahoo.com/monolith-object-mars-could-call-214004772.html

Planets, moons, asteroids and meteors have their metals, because
that’s what makes for their crust and those kinds of rocks and their
otherwise solidified composition of complex elements, instead of being
fluids or gaseous.

The extremely tall Mars monolith should be another good example of a
protruding rock of somewhat unusual formation or conceivable
placement.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47024373/ns/technology_and_science-science/

The Phobos monolith offers a similar item that’s quite unusual
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobos_monolith

The vast majority if terrestrial monoliths of any significantly
rectangular or geometric odd form have been intentionally created and
placed, whereas few if any natural monoliths are uniform enough to
qualify as being well shaped as rectangulars and protruding quite as
perpendicular as those identified on Mars and Phobos. Most of our
terrestrial monoliths are not isolated, whereas instead there’s a
nearby collection of natural formations with similar monolithic
configurations to pick from. Of course, visual imaging isn’t nearly
as reliable or image pixel truthworthy as radar imaging, and the low
solar angle of below 45 degrees can become a distraction or illusion
that can fool the best human interpretation.

Remember that Hagar and his fellow redneck ZNRs as having picked out
all sorts of Muslim WMD from our best spy camera imaging, that offered
at least ten fold better resolution than anything obtained of Mars or
Phobos. So, perhaps this is clearly another subjective science of
deductive observationology that our Hagar still isn’t qualified in.

http://www.enchantedrockstatenaturalarea.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/rocks.jpg
http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000uVz6oS8x0Y4/s/750/750/UTCR-067.jpg
http://davidinglima2.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/turret_arch.jpg
http://www.pictures1.temehu.com/p1/Acacus-natural-arch-Forzhaga.jpg
http://www.metrolic.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Arches-National-Park.jpg

Square or rectangular need not be the only monoliths:
http://costaricaspecialdealsonline.blogspot.com/2011/05/costa-rica-stone-spheres-addition-to.html

What’s entirely missing from those monoliths of Mars and Phobos is any
surrounding or community like infrastructure, or rational logistics
pertaining to mining or extracting whatever.

In spite of the mainstream gauntlet that’ll automatically by default
and obfuscation will oppose anything that’s new or improved, perhaps
yourself and others of any deductive image interpreting expertise can
try to add a little something from their very own observationology
talent to this growing list, of contributing to what an actively
thriving community of an intelligent mining operation should look
like, as if imaged from the perspective of an advanced spy satellite,
keeping in mind that the scale of such items on any given dimension
has to be worth at least 75 meters/pixel or preferably larger 225 m/
pixel in order to count, so for the most part we’re not trying to
interpret anything that’s smaller than 225 meters per geometric
dimension.

Thumbnail images, including mgn_c115s095_1.gif (225 m/pixel)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
“Guth Venus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5630418595926178146
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5629579402364691314
Brad Guth / Blog and my Google document pages:
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet?hl=en
http://bradguth.blogspot.com/
http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddsdxhv_0hrm5bdfj
http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

Hägar
2012-04-13 09:52:42 EST

"Brad Guth" <bradguth@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:285ab00c-017f-4514-8307-fb5ab76992c0@a8g2000pbe.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 12, 9:08 am, "H\ufffdgar" <hs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> http://news.yahoo.com/monolith-object-mars-could-call-214004772.html

Planets, moons, asteroids and meteors have their metals, because
that\ufffds what makes for their crust and those kinds of rocks and their
otherwise solidified composition of complex elements, instead of being
fluids or gaseous.

The extremely tall Mars monolith should be another good example of a
protruding rock of somewhat unusual formation or conceivable
placement.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47024373/ns/technology_and_science-science/

The Phobos monolith offers a similar item that\ufffds quite unusual
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobos_monolith


<< snip GuthBall drivel >>

But those extremely fuzzy and imagination dependent outlines on Venus that
only you can discern, are proof positive, in your feeble mental
constitution, that advanced intelligence created them, whereas that monolith
on Mars broke free from the cliff above, tumbled end-for-end for a good
distance and then landed perfectly upright in a 100% sand environment. So,
that monolith, presumably made of basalt or granite became "accidentally"
buried in the Martian desert sands for billions of years and erosion of the
cliff just now exposed it to us ... sounds so "2001 - A Space Odyssey" to
me.

Perhaps you're the ape with the bone ... you're mentally equipped for the
part ...



Brad Guth
2012-04-13 13:44:53 EST
On Apr 13, 6:52 am, "Hägar" <hs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> But those extremely fuzzy and imagination dependent outlines on Venus that
> only you can discern, are proof positive, in your feeble mental
> constitution, that advanced intelligence created them, whereas that monolith
> on Mars broke free from the cliff above, tumbled end-for-end for a good
> distance and then landed perfectly upright in a 100% sand environment.  So,
> that monolith, presumably made of basalt or granite became "accidentally"
> buried in the Martian desert sands for billions of years and erosion of the
> cliff just now exposed it to us ... sounds so "2001 - A Space Odyssey" to
> me.
>
> Perhaps you're the ape with the bone ... you're mentally equipped for the
> part ...

I've never stipulated "proof positive" about intelligent other life
existing/coexisting on Venus, although at least thus far nothing of
any known forms of natural geology seems to fit the whole picture of
what "Guth Venus" seems to represent, as offering by far the most
interesting and complex collection of geometrical shapes that seem
arranged in the most community and intelligent infrastructure like
plan.

Planets, moons, asteroids and meteors have their metals, because
that’s what makes for their crust, those nifty kinds of rocks and
their otherwise solidified composition of complex elements, instead of
their being icy, fluids or gaseous.

The extremely tall Mars monolith should be another good example of a
protruding rock of somewhat unusual formation or conceivable as an
artificial placement.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47024373/ns/technology_and_science-science/

The Phobos monolith offers a similar item that’s quite unusual:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobos_monolith

The vast majority of terrestrial monoliths, especially those of any
significantly rectangular or geometric odd form, have been
intentionally created and placed, whereas few if any natural monoliths
are uniform enough to qualify as being so well shaped as rectangulars
and protruding quite as perpendicular as those identified on Mars and
Phobos. Most of our terrestrial monoliths are not isolated, whereas
instead there’s a nearby collection of natural formations with similar
monolithic configurations to pick from. Of course, visual imaging
isn’t nearly as reliable or image pixel truth-worthy as radar imaging,
and the low solar angle of below 45 degrees can become a distraction
or illusion that can fool the best human interpretation (although
shadows are also very telling).

Mainstream conditional physics:
Remember that our resident FUD-master (Hagar) and his fellow redneck
ZNRs as having picked out all sorts of those Muslim WMD from our best
spy camera imaging, that offered at least ten fold better resolution
than anything obtained of Mars or Phobos. So, perhaps this is clearly
another subjective science of deductive observationology that our
Hagar still isn’t qualified in. Never the less, Hagar accepts such
images of Mars as being of perfectly good mainstream science, and at
the very same time rejects all forms of interpreting those radar
obtained images of Venus.

http://www.enchantedrockstatenaturalarea.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/rocks.jpg
http://cdn.c.photoshelter.com/img-get/I0000uVz6oS8x0Y4/s/750/750/UTCR-067.jpg
http://davidinglima2.files.wordpress.com/2011/05/turret_arch.jpg
http://www.pictures1.temehu.com/p1/Acacus-natural-arch-Forzhaga.jpg
http://www.metrolic.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/Arches-National-Park.jpg

Square or rectangular need not be the only monoliths:
http://costaricaspecialdealsonline.blogspot.com/2011/05/costa-rica-stone-spheres-addition-to.html

What’s entirely missing from those monoliths of Mars and Phobos is
any surrounding or community like infrastructure, or rational
logistics pertaining to mining or extracting whatever.

In spite of the mainstream gauntlet that’ll automatically by default
and obfuscation will oppose anything that’s new or improved, perhaps
yourself and others of any deductive image interpreting expertise can
try to add a little something from their very own observationology
talent to this growing list, of contributing to what an actively
thriving community of an intelligent mining operation should look
like, as if imaged from the perspective of an advanced spy satellite,
keeping in mind that the scale of such items on any given dimension
has to be worth at least 75 meters/pixel or preferably larger 225 m/
pixel in order to count, so for the most part we’re not trying to
interpret anything that’s smaller than 225 meters per geometric
dimension.

Thumbnail images, including mgn_c115s095_1.gif (225 m/pixel)
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html
Lava channels, Lo Shen Valles, Venus from Magellan Cycle 1
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/html/object_page/mgn_c115s095_1.html
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif
“Guth Venus” 1:1, plus 10x resample/enlargement of the area in
question:
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5630418595926178146
https://picasaweb.google.com/bradguth/BradGuth#5629579402364691314
Brad Guth / Blog and my Google document pages:
http://groups.google.com/group/guth-usenet?hl=en
http://bradguth.blogspot.com/
http://docs.google.com/View?id=ddsdxhv_0hrm5bdfj
http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”



Hägar
2012-04-13 14:08:38 EST

"Brad Guth" <bradguth@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2c7f9ccf-ac8a-43ff-8160-db5fd56362a4@iu9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 13, 6:52 am, "H\ufffdgar" <hs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> But those extremely fuzzy and imagination dependent outlines on Venus that
> only you can discern, are proof positive, in your feeble mental
> constitution, that advanced intelligence created them, whereas that
> monolith
> on Mars broke free from the cliff above, tumbled end-for-end for a good
> distance and then landed perfectly upright in a 100% sand environment. So,
> that monolith, presumably made of basalt or granite became "accidentally"
> buried in the Martian desert sands for billions of years and erosion of
> the
> cliff just now exposed it to us ... sounds so "2001 - A Space Odyssey" to
> me.
>
> Perhaps you're the ape with the bone ... you're mentally equipped for the
> part ...

I've never stipulated "proof positive" about intelligent other life
existing/coexisting on Venus, although at least thus far nothing of
any known forms of natural geology seems to fit the whole picture of
what "Guth Venus" seems to represent, as offering by far the most
interesting and complex collection of geometrical shapes that seem
arranged in the most community and intelligent infrastructure like
plan.

Planets, moons, asteroids and meteors have their metals, because
that\ufffds what makes for their crust, those nifty kinds of rocks and
their otherwise solidified composition of complex elements, instead of
their being icy, fluids or gaseous.

The extremely tall Mars monolith should be another good example of a
protruding rock of somewhat unusual formation or conceivable as an
artificial placement.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47024373/ns/technology_and_science-science/

The Phobos monolith offers a similar item that\ufffds quite unusual:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobos_monolith

The vast majority of terrestrial monoliths, especially those of any
significantly rectangular or geometric odd form, have been
intentionally created and placed, whereas few if any natural monoliths
are uniform enough to qualify as being so well shaped as rectangulars
and protruding quite as perpendicular as those identified on Mars and
Phobos. Most of our terrestrial monoliths are not isolated, whereas
instead there\ufffds a nearby collection of natural formations with similar
monolithic configurations to pick from. Of course, visual imaging
isn\ufffdt nearly as reliable or image pixel truth-worthy as radar imaging,
and the low solar angle of below 45 degrees can become a distraction
or illusion that can fool the best human interpretation (although
shadows are also very telling).

Mainstream conditional physics:
Remember that our resident FUD-master (Hagar) and his fellow redneck
ZNRs as having picked out all sorts of those Muslim WMD from our best
spy camera imaging, that offered at least ten fold better resolution
than anything obtained of Mars or Phobos. So, perhaps this is clearly
another subjective science of deductive observationology that our
Hagar still isn\ufffdt qualified in. Never the less, Hagar accepts such
images of Mars as being of perfectly good mainstream science, and at
the very same time rejects all forms of interpreting those radar
obtained images of Venus.

*** I have only these comments:
Just like you're innocent until proven guilty,
Anything that looks like an intelligent artifact on any heavenly
body other than Earth is indeed freak of nature, until there is vetted
scientific proof to the contrary.



Notroll2012
2012-04-13 14:21:43 EST


"Hägar" wrote in message
news:EqGdnWQKt7Yx9hXSnZ2dnUVZ_rGdnZ2d@giganews.com...


"Brad Guth" <bradguth@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:2c7f9ccf-ac8a-43ff-8160-db5fd56362a4@iu9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 13, 6:52 am, "Hägar" <hs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> But those extremely fuzzy and imagination dependent outlines on Venus that
> only you can discern, are proof positive, in your feeble mental
> constitution, that advanced intelligence created them, whereas that
> monolith
> on Mars broke free from the cliff above, tumbled end-for-end for a good
> distance and then landed perfectly upright in a 100% sand environment. So,
> that monolith, presumably made of basalt or granite became "accidentally"
> buried in the Martian desert sands for billions of years and erosion of
> the
> cliff just now exposed it to us ... sounds so "2001 - A Space Odyssey" to
> me.
>
> Perhaps you're the ape with the bone ... you're mentally equipped for the
> part ...

I've never stipulated "proof positive" about intelligent other life
existing/coexisting on Venus, although at least thus far nothing of
any known forms of natural geology seems to fit the whole picture of
what "Guth Venus" seems to represent, as offering by far the most
interesting and complex collection of geometrical shapes that seem
arranged in the most community and intelligent infrastructure like
plan.

Planets, moons, asteroids and meteors have their metals, because
that’s what makes for their crust, those nifty kinds of rocks and
their otherwise solidified composition of complex elements, instead of
their being icy, fluids or gaseous.

The extremely tall Mars monolith should be another good example of a
protruding rock of somewhat unusual formation or conceivable as an
artificial placement.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47024373/ns/technology_and_science-science/

The Phobos monolith offers a similar item that’s quite unusual:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobos_monolith

The vast majority of terrestrial monoliths, especially those of any
significantly rectangular or geometric odd form, have been
intentionally created and placed, whereas few if any natural monoliths
are uniform enough to qualify as being so well shaped as rectangulars
and protruding quite as perpendicular as those identified on Mars and
Phobos. Most of our terrestrial monoliths are not isolated, whereas
instead there’s a nearby collection of natural formations with similar
monolithic configurations to pick from. Of course, visual imaging
isn’t nearly as reliable or image pixel truth-worthy as radar imaging,
and the low solar angle of below 45 degrees can become a distraction
or illusion that can fool the best human interpretation (although
shadows are also very telling).

Mainstream conditional physics:
Remember that our resident FUD-master (Hagar) and his fellow redneck
ZNRs as having picked out all sorts of those Muslim WMD from our best
spy camera imaging, that offered at least ten fold better resolution
than anything obtained of Mars or Phobos. So, perhaps this is clearly
another subjective science of deductive observationology that our
Hagar still isn’t qualified in. Never the less, Hagar accepts such
images of Mars as being of perfectly good mainstream science, and at
the very same time rejects all forms of interpreting those radar
obtained images of Venus.

*** I have only these comments:
Just like you're innocent until proven guilty,
Anything that looks like an intelligent artifact on any heavenly
body other than Earth is indeed freak of nature, until there is vetted
scientific proof to the contrary.
*****************
How ironic that Hagar should speak of freaks of nature.


Brad Guth
2012-04-13 16:48:38 EST
On Apr 13, 11:08 am, "Hägar" <hs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Brad Guth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2c7f9ccf-ac8a-43ff-8160-db5fd56362a4@iu9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 13, 6:52 am, "Hägar" <hs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > But those extremely fuzzy and imagination dependent outlines on Venus that
> > only you can discern, are proof positive, in your feeble mental
> > constitution, that advanced intelligence created them, whereas that
> > monolith
> > on Mars broke free from the cliff above, tumbled end-for-end for a good
> > distance and then landed perfectly upright in a 100% sand environment. So,
> > that monolith, presumably made of basalt or granite became "accidentally"
> > buried in the Martian desert sands for billions of years and erosion of
> > the
> > cliff just now exposed it to us ... sounds so "2001 - A Space Odyssey" to
> > me.
>
> > Perhaps you're the ape with the bone ... you're mentally equipped for the
> > part ...
>
> I've never stipulated "proof positive" about intelligent other life
> existing/coexisting on Venus, although at least thus far nothing of
> any known forms of natural geology seems to fit the whole picture of
> what "Guth Venus" seems to represent, as offering by far the most
> interesting and complex collection of geometrical shapes that seem
> arranged in the most community and intelligent infrastructure like
> plan.
>
> Planets, moons, asteroids and meteors have their metals, because
> that’s what makes for their crust, those nifty kinds of rocks and
> their otherwise solidified composition of complex elements, instead of
> their being icy, fluids or gaseous.
>
> The extremely tall Mars monolith should be another good example of a
> protruding rock of somewhat unusual formation or conceivable as an
> artificial placement.
>  http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47024373/ns/technology_and_science-science/
>
>  The Phobos monolith offers a similar item that’s quite unusual:
>  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobos_monolith
>
>  The vast majority of terrestrial monoliths, especially those of any
> significantly rectangular or geometric odd form, have been
> intentionally created and placed, whereas few if any natural monoliths
> are uniform enough to qualify as being so well shaped as rectangulars
> and protruding quite as perpendicular as those identified on Mars and
> Phobos.  Most of our terrestrial monoliths are not isolated, whereas
> instead there’s a nearby collection of natural formations with similar
> monolithic configurations to pick from.  Of course, visual imaging
> isn’t nearly as reliable or image pixel truth-worthy as radar imaging,
> and the low solar angle of below 45 degrees can become a distraction
> or illusion that can fool the best human interpretation (although
> shadows are also very telling).
>
> Mainstream conditional physics:
> Remember that our resident FUD-master (Hagar) and his fellow redneck
> ZNRs as having picked out all sorts of those Muslim WMD from our best
> spy camera imaging, that offered at least ten fold better resolution
> than anything obtained of Mars or Phobos.  So, perhaps this is clearly
> another subjective science of deductive observationology that our
> Hagar still isn’t qualified in.  Never the less, Hagar accepts such
> images of Mars as being of perfectly good mainstream science, and at
> the very same time rejects all forms of interpreting those radar
> obtained images of Venus.
>
> *** I have only these comments:
> Just like you're innocent until proven guilty,
> Anything that looks like an intelligent artifact on any heavenly
> body other than Earth is indeed freak of nature, until there is vetted
> scientific proof to the contrary.

Exactly, as I've always stipulated that items depicted within "Guth
Venus" are truly quite freakish and otherwise entirely unheard of as
per geological formations, especially when combined within that area
which seems to offer a good dozen "freak of nature" items of truly
impressive size and complexity to pick from.

Speaking about "freak of nature"; how exactly did you and your fellow
ZNRs come to be?

Is becoming a LLPOF brown-nosed clown and/or minion working on behalf
of the Semites in charge, required before redneck bully manhood is
achieved?

http://groups.google.com/groups/search
http://translate.google.com/#
Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / “Guth Usenet”

Hägar
2012-04-13 17:02:08 EST

"Brad Guth" <bradguth@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4dbf3a6a-51f8-4b54-a415-7ec89d0bb53b@vy9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
On Apr 13, 11:08 am, "H\ufffdgar" <hs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "Brad Guth" <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:2c7f9ccf-ac8a-43ff-8160-db5fd56362a4@iu9g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...
> On Apr 13, 6:52 am, "H\ufffdgar" <hs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > But those extremely fuzzy and imagination dependent outlines on Venus
> > that
> > only you can discern, are proof positive, in your feeble mental
> > constitution, that advanced intelligence created them, whereas that
> > monolith
> > on Mars broke free from the cliff above, tumbled end-for-end for a good
> > distance and then landed perfectly upright in a 100% sand environment.
> > So,
> > that monolith, presumably made of basalt or granite became
> > "accidentally"
> > buried in the Martian desert sands for billions of years and erosion of
> > the
> > cliff just now exposed it to us ... sounds so "2001 - A Space Odyssey"
> > to
> > me.
>
> > Perhaps you're the ape with the bone ... you're mentally equipped for
> > the
> > part ...
>
> I've never stipulated "proof positive" about intelligent other life
> existing/coexisting on Venus, although at least thus far nothing of
> any known forms of natural geology seems to fit the whole picture of
> what "Guth Venus" seems to represent, as offering by far the most
> interesting and complex collection of geometrical shapes that seem
> arranged in the most community and intelligent infrastructure like
> plan.
>
> Planets, moons, asteroids and meteors have their metals, because
> that\ufffds what makes for their crust, those nifty kinds of rocks and
> their otherwise solidified composition of complex elements, instead of
> their being icy, fluids or gaseous.
>
> The extremely tall Mars monolith should be another good example of a
> protruding rock of somewhat unusual formation or conceivable as an
> artificial placement.
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47024373/ns/technology_and_science-science/
>
> The Phobos monolith offers a similar item that\ufffds quite unusual:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phobos_monolith
>
> The vast majority of terrestrial monoliths, especially those of any
> significantly rectangular or geometric odd form, have been
> intentionally created and placed, whereas few if any natural monoliths
> are uniform enough to qualify as being so well shaped as rectangulars
> and protruding quite as perpendicular as those identified on Mars and
> Phobos. Most of our terrestrial monoliths are not isolated, whereas
> instead there\ufffds a nearby collection of natural formations with similar
> monolithic configurations to pick from. Of course, visual imaging
> isn\ufffdt nearly as reliable or image pixel truth-worthy as radar imaging,
> and the low solar angle of below 45 degrees can become a distraction
> or illusion that can fool the best human interpretation (although
> shadows are also very telling).
>
> Mainstream conditional physics:
> Remember that our resident FUD-master (Hagar) and his fellow redneck
> ZNRs as having picked out all sorts of those Muslim WMD from our best
> spy camera imaging, that offered at least ten fold better resolution
> than anything obtained of Mars or Phobos. So, perhaps this is clearly
> another subjective science of deductive observationology that our
> Hagar still isn\ufffdt qualified in. Never the less, Hagar accepts such
> images of Mars as being of perfectly good mainstream science, and at
> the very same time rejects all forms of interpreting those radar
> obtained images of Venus.
>
> *** I have only these comments:
> Just like you're innocent until proven guilty,
> Anything that looks like an intelligent artifact on any heavenly
> body other than Earth is indeed freak of nature, until there is vetted
> scientific proof to the contrary.

Exactly, as I've always stipulated that items depicted within "Guth
Venus" are truly quite freakish and otherwise entirely unheard of as
per geological formations, especially when combined within that area
which seems to offer a good dozen "freak of nature" items of truly
impressive size and complexity to pick from.

Speaking about "freak of nature"; how exactly did you and your fellow
ZNRs come to be?

Is becoming a LLPOF brown-nosed clown and/or minion working on behalf
of the Semites in charge, required before redneck bully manhood is
achieved?

********************************************
The minimum requirement is a good dose of common sense and intelligence,
which, unfortunately, would leave you standing at the dock, thumb firmly
implanted in rectum, while the ship has long sailed with us ZNR Rednecks
aboard. You could try swimming ... rumor has it that bullshit floats ...


Page: 1 2 3 4 5   Next  (First | Last)


2020 - UsenetArchives.com | Contact Us | Privacy | Stats | Site Search
Become our Patron