Will the Real Planet Venus Please Stand Up!

Ya'll quite picking on Zorgon's, um, knighthood. I actually got married in a real castle and the ceremony was done by a knight. True story:

My (then) girlfriend was pushing me to marry her (we had been together for 10 years) and I was too stubborn to do it. Just to get her to shut up I agreed to, but then thought I was clever. I told her I didn't want to get married in a church (saying anything I could to delay the inevitable) She asked what kind of ceremony I wanted, I just blurted out the most impossible thing I could think of at the time. I told her I wouldn't get married unless we had it in a castle and had a bunch of knights and what not there. Never thinking she would actually be able to arrange for such silliness.

I learned my lesson right then and there...I had no idea she would take me seriously, lol. Two months later she came to me and told me she had everything arranged and to this day I am very, very careful what I challenge my wife to do.

But the ceremony was really, really cool. Everybody had a lot of fun, the castle was great. My friends, who snickered at first, ended up drooling over how cool and enjoyable our wedding was.

Now to bring this back on topic, I could just tell my wife we're not having kids unless she can end the debate about life on Venus beyond the shadow of a doubt. She could do it.

[edit on 11-12-2007 by IgnoreTheFacts]

reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts


Guess what .. I have one here that is pushing right now And she wants the ceremony in the woods! The thing is, I am actually wondering on how I am gonna propose..

Ps: we don't have any knights here in norway at the moment ..

Originally posted by tep200377
Guess what .. I have one here that is pushing right now

And she wants the ceremony in the woods! The thing is, I am actually wondering on how I am gonna propose..
Ps: we don't have any knights here in Norway at the moment ..

Well if its Norse weddings you want... I have that ceremony here somewhere... one of my people had such a ceremony here under a full moon in the park... we even roasted a pig (That he and his "second' had actually caught and killed at a ranch in CA )

You would fall under the jurisdiction of the Kingdom of Drachenwald... I am sure if your serious someone there could help you set it up... and it won't cost you what a Medieval wedding at Excalibur here in Vegas would...

Kingdom of Drachenwald

But as far as I know there are no Venusians currently involved
(feeble attempt to keep that on topic )

[edit on 11-12-2007 by zorgon]

Originally posted by tep200377
The thing is, I am actually wondering on how I am gonna propose..

Ask Gunnvör... she will be glad to help...

Viking Answer Lady

Well okay stretching here but Venus IS the planet of love yes?

I know a few amateur astronomers, they all have a nice personality, always seeking and learining new things as the go on with their lives. They also have telescopes, and one in particular has quite large one.. He has taken many pictures of venus, and none of those pictures show anything even remotely related to any civilization.. Those are pretty darn clear pictures. The net is also full of them.

I am beginning to think, though, that this is a conversation in where its totally pointless to say anything. People will go on with their beliefes anyway.

Source:Madison Metropolitan School District Planetarium

MMSDP:

It's realy a diferent picture of Venus. Not so "yellowish"/Orange as we used to see everywhere.
The clouds have a beatifull soft yellow tone, and the white polar zones are very clear.

I personaly belive that under that clouds all is possible, and it's so easy for modern science to scam us with false information!

[edit on 4/1/08 by Umbra Sideralis]

Originally posted by Umbra Sideralis
It's realy a diferent picture of Venus. Not so "yellowish"/Orange as we used to see everywhere.

What you are used to see, in the way of orange, is
(a) data from the Soviet probes who actually photographed the surface and produced other spectrographic data
(b) artificial colors found in compound images obtained via radar scans; these were colored orange to be "more realistic", as obviously there is no color in radar pics, and yet the corresponding optical image would be orange due to the experimental data we have

I personaly belive that under that clouds all is possible, and it's so easy for modern science to scam us with false information!

That is if you obsess with the idea that somebody would care to "scam you".

Originally posted by buddhasystem

That is if you obsess with the idea that somebody would care to "scam you".

Happy New Year BS. I would replace the word 'obsess' with 'finally realize' 'that somebody would care to scam you'.

When you finally realize the significance of the pitiful Apollo astronauts hops on the moon; the pure black of the lunar skies in all of NASA's photos; the neutral point of 43,495 miles; Apollo 17 as the last alleged voyage to the moon; Neil Armstrong's silence; the secrecy of the Apollo astronauts; the pitifully few statements of the Apollo astronauts; the impossibility of the lunar lander task with rocket propulsion; the absurdity of the 'rotational lock' theory and the equally absurd mainstream science explanation; the history of the moon; the reason for the photographs faking the Apollo missions on the moon) whether or not they really went; the photos that clearly show (at least to some) mining operations, cities, huge constructs; there comes a time when you finally realize: NAZA has scammed us!

You finally realize the moon has an atmosphere and substantial gravity and that people live there. And that people live on Venus, Mars, Saturn, Uranus and all of the other planets and satellites.

But what to we earthlings get? A parade of unnecessary wars, gas prices at $4 a gallon and leaders who profit by the cultivation, harvest and distribution of illegal drugs; oh, and an occasional fabricated story, preaching doom and gloom for the masses like this Planet X baloney. Just to mention of the few 'benefits' of living on earth.

But keep on pluggin' BS. There are many who find comfort in the trappings of mainstream science; many who would prefer not to say, hey…wait a minute here; something's not right. And you are their lifeline.

The rest of us know not who you are but what your job is. And we welcome your thoughts however diametrically opposite they are from ours.

Happy New Year!

Originally posted by Umbra Sideralis
I personaly belive that under that clouds all is possible, and it's so easy for modern science to scam us with false information!

What would be the point of scamming anyone, given the incredibly unlikely occurence of you, I, or any other person, actually going there and experiencing the environment of Venus? What would be "modern science's" motivation for doing that? It would seem that with the incredible expansion and improved accessibility of information, coupled with the ease of moving vast amounts of data quickly, that keeping the "scam" running should be vastly more difficult than say, the 18th or 19th century. Heck, the first half of the previous century generated a flood of new information. So another question comes to mind; why do you find it "so easy" for us to be scammed with false information? What makes it so? Might it be the "dumbing down" of society in general? Lots of doofusses out there.

Just as an aside...does anyone find the phrase "modern science" odd? Is the modifier "modern" necessary? Seems to me if done correctly--science that is--it is automatically "modern".

Originally posted by johnlear
I would replace the word 'obsess' with 'finally realize' 'that somebody would care to scam you'.

And I wouldn't, John.

the neutral point of 43,495 miles

We've been through this 43,495 times and even your friend Bob Lazar told you it's crock, didn't he. You keep drumming this up while realizing this is an arbitrary and misleading statement.

the pitifully few statements of the Apollo astronauts

Don't pity the astronauts, they are heros and just let them be.

the impossibility of the lunar lander task with rocket propulsion

Blah. Impossibility...

the absurdity of the 'rotational lock' theory

Unless you can demonstrate that it is absurd, and explain that many celestial bodies have it, it is your statement, John, that is absurd.

the photos that clearly show (at least to some) mining operations, cities, huge constructs

Sure, like in the movie "sixth sense".... "I see dead people".

You finally realize the moon has an atmosphere and substantial gravity and that people live there.

And you, John, are an android sent to us from the galaxy, right? You can't prove that you aren't.

There are many who find comfort in the trappings of mainstream science

And there are many, many armchair scientists, who prefer the comfort of pseudo-science and empty talk because it allows them to feel smart in the face of this great Universe without having to make the effort to learn.

Originally posted by johnlear

We've been through this 43,495 times and even your friend Bob Lazar told you it's crock, didn't he.

Yes and he also told me flying saucers were bunk.

You keep drumming this up while realizing this is an arbitrary and misleading statement.

You want arbitrary and misleading? Try this from Jim Obergs School for revisionist orbital mechanics:

originally posted by JimO
The second way of calculating the boundary came into fashion when mathematicians began actually computing earth-moon trajectories, and had to chose a point to switch the computations from Earth-centered to Moon-centered. The 'sphere of influence' concept was computationally most practical. That's the second approach.

And in real terms, it's the only 'authentic' definition, as you can show by calculating the Earth-SUN 'neutral point' both ways, and see that the 'classic' (i.e., pre-Space-Age) method gives a neutral point CLOSER to Earth than the moon's orbit -- counter-intuitive and contrary to several billion years of loyal lunar earth-orbiting. Jim Oberg

In more classic revisionist orbital mechanics Jim goes on:

originally posted by JimO
Further -- this famous image from the 1865 Verne novel, 'From the Earth to the Moon', shows the occupants floating weightless inside their space vehicle. It has often been incorrectly labeled as showing that Verne correctly predicted that space travelers would experience zero-G and float inside their vehicles.

abyss.uoregon.edu...

But Verne didn't predict that. His travelers floated off their chairs only at the precise 'neutral point' between Earth and Moon, at the old 'classic' distance -- which was bad physics. At least his excuse was the idea was 'unearthly' -- no similar excuse allowed for the poster on this thread earlier who said that spacecraft-based accelerometers would measure zero at and only at the 'neutral point' -- hoagwash! Twenty lashes with a Mars face nose hair.

He's stuck in Vernian physics, and he's apparently got company.

Twenty lashes with a Mars face nose hair? Sounds like something they'd buy over at bad astronomy to me.

And then in Jim Obergs classic dismissal of things he no longer wants to discuss:

. originally posted by Jim O
....and re the 'neutral point' questions, all the correct explanations and links have already been posted, the only thing remaining is for you to study them and seek to understand their arguments before closing your mind to learning. I found the original 'disconnect' in that book to be intriguing, and the later explanations I found through research to be thoroughly satisfying, and I don't really care if you do, or don't, agree. I've spent all the keystrokes on it I care to.

originally posted by bs
Don't pity the astronauts, they are heros and just let them be.

Yes they are and for more reasons than you know. And I have never bothered any of them except for a polite hello.

Unless you can demonstrate that it is absurd, and explain that many celestial bodies have it, it is your statement, John, that is absurd.

I disagree. I think it is absurd that so many have bought into 'rotational lock', a ragtag mainstream scientific explanation for something that did not, in fact, occur, but for which the real explanation eludes them.

And you, John, are an android sent to us from the galaxy, right? You can't prove that you aren't.

Actually I can.

An android is a robot designed to resemble a human, usually both in appearance and behavior. The word derives from the Greek andr-, meaning "man, male", and the suffix -eides, used to mean "of the species; alike" (from eidos "species").

en.wikipedia.org...

My wife has told me many times that I don't behave like a normal human being. Ask her.

And there are many, many armchair scientists, who prefer the comfort of pseudo-science and empty talk because it allows them to feel smart in the face of this great Universe without having to make the effort to learn.

And there are many armchair scientists that have figured out more about the real workings of the universe than those with Piled Higher and Deeper college degrees.

That’s because you limit yourselves to mainstream science dogma which is simply the ragtag, dogmatic interpretation of real Universal Laws.

But thanks for the post.

Originally posted by johnlear

Unless you can demonstrate that it is absurd, and explain that many celestial bodies have it, it is your statement, John, that is absurd.

I disagree. I think it is absurd that so many have bought into 'rotational lock'

Well John, because it makes a lot of sense. Tell me what part of this concept you find unacceptable.

And you, John, are an android sent to us from the galaxy, right? You can't prove that you aren't.

Actually I can.

An android is a robot designed to resemble a human, usually both in appearance and behavior. The word derives from the Greek andr-, meaning "man, male", and the suffix -eides, used to mean "of the species; alike" (from eidos "species").

en.wikipedia.org...

My wife has told me many times that I don't behave like a normal human being. Ask her.

I don't have to ask her. It's obvious.

But you patently conform to the Wikipedia definition! Note the "resemble" part. If you were drastically different from a normal human, your wife wouldn't have married you.

But thanks for the post.

You, too.

Originally posted by johnlear
And there are many armchair scientists that have figured out more about the real workings of the universe than those with Piled Higher and Deeper college degrees.

If you are talking about Stephen Hawking, I wholeheartedly agree.

If, however, you stayed with the original figurative meaning of this phrase (which I believe you did), I doubt that people who insist that experimental facts don't matter as long as you believe into something can understand "inner workings" of anything.

But thanks for the post.

You, too.

Yet more mainstream science propaganda. When will they learn that a select few at some obscure website called ATS are on to the truth? Their propaganda knows no bounds

Venus

reply to post by IgnoreTheFacts


I get a little confused.

ATS comprises, say, about 150.000 members in total? (give or take).

When I get a blast mail to remind us of T&C, or decorum rules, or whatnot...it usually references to the 'last 5600 (give or take) ATS members who have been online in the last 15 days'...

Again, I am paraphrasing, but my point is -- we are a VERY small, select group, we who bother to read posts, and even post as well. Yet, there is a tremendous amount of animosity that seems to fly back and forth.

Perhaps someone needs to remember this. Sure, put 5,500 people in a room and there will be 5,499 different opinions. BUT...a common ground can be reached by many of the other 5,498 if they just pulled in their claws for a minute and listened to the others.

So in the grander scheme, let's not delude ourselves...a squabble between members isn't going to further any cause. A gentlemanly disagreement, and civil argument will instead help to broaden discourse, and may lead to greater understanding. Shouting at each other doesn't seem to work...

meant to edit a mistake, but my post seems OK now that I am in the 'edit' mode...so, never mind!

[edit on 9-1-2008 by weedwhacker]

Originally posted by greatlakes
here's another image of the trio:

They are: Jill, Donn and Valiant Thor (l-r)

[edit on 31-5-2007 by greatlakes]

I wonder if they are from the same origin point, in truth, as for example Semjase / Semiramis and for that matter the Cancer Planet hominids?

Originally posted by Stormrider

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by Stormrider
So, please tell me, how can water exist without oxygen?

Water can exist without being in the presence of free oxygen. It may be true that water cannot form without free oxygen, it certainly can exist.

Do you have scientific data to back up that claim, or are you just making it up as you go along? How many instances do you know of in the annals of science where water was discovered in a place where free oxygen did not exist.?

Um... the Moon? Comets? Asteroids?

Originally posted by Smokersroom

Originally posted by zorgon
Debunk THAT

Erm, sorry I didn't see any evidence to debunk. Just something a dude wrote a couple of thousand years ago.

And for the hell of it, I'm going to throw some of this into the mix...

Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill."

Exodus 32:27 "Thus sayeth the Lord God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, . . . and slay every man his brother, . . . companion, . . . neighbor."

Please don't let the aliens be religeous, PLEASE?!

Um... Not to make fun of your "deny ignorance" tagline or anything... oh actually I am.

Ignorant of classical hebrew as you are, it escapes you that the original is "do not murder", not "do not kill". The latter quote is indeed "kill", not "murder". Desperate as you are to find a contradiction in Exodus, at least use the actual language it's written in to try and find it. Otherwise to someone educated you are just going to come off sounding like you are off your chough.

Hello, sorry to post out of topic but i as just wondering what the best size telescope would be to view venus? I am getting ready to buy one and want to make sure I get one I can use. Any suggestions welcomed.

Originally posted by IgnoreTheFacts
Yet more mainstream science propaganda. When will they learn that a select few at some obscure website called ATS are on to the truth? Their propaganda knows no bounds

Venus

Very interesting pic there
What colour is Niburu purported to be?

Talk about hiding in plain sight