Will the Real Planet Venus Please Stand Up!

Originally posted by sarentack
I think whats seen or known in the atmosphere is no basis in determining if life can exist on that planet. Now I dont think life exist on Mercury but who knows, but perhaps on all other planets? yeah, because truly you have to view the inner most atmosphere of a planet to really get an understanding of whats going on, not the outer most.

Well, saying that life exists on ALL planets is a little far out, don't you think?

Such a bizzare speculation is only allowed, because the person saying it has a disclaimer in the signature. (And a number of followers)


Actually, that's a great idea! All the time travellers, aliens, and inventors of free energy devices coming here should have a similiar disclaimer in their signatures.

Maybe then, they wouldn't get banned, and we could still enjoy their lies and dellusions. Our lives would be enriched by a tenfold.

And our knowledge.. Who cares about knowledge.. Truth is boring, right? Let's all start living in a fantasy world!

[edit on 31/1/08 by deezee]

reply to post by deezee


Be careful that you don't so ferociously eradicate percieved lies that you end up throwing out the baby with the bath water.

I think science should begin to take a step back and quit saying "its impossible" and start asking "how is it possible". Otherwise, they are going to be proven wrong time and time again by people who find themselves capable of imaging so much more.

[edit on 2-2-2008 by bigfatfurrytexan]

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


You're first sentence in this post is good....but then, your second sentence appears to be basically the very action the first one decries.

I'm not confident that "it's impossible", as a tenet of science, can be statistically shown to be the norm. I feel you may be painting with a very big brush. I'm under the impression the basic idea is to find out "what is possible.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Be careful that you don't so ferociously eradicate percieved lies that you end up throwing out the baby with the bath water.

Hey, i completelly agree with you on this.

But i also believe, this particular task would be MUCH easyer, if people wouldn't constantly be throwing so much mud in that water. At least then, we could tell the "baby" appart from the "mud".

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
I think science should begin to take a step back and quit saying "its impossible" and start asking "how is it possible". Otherwise, they are going to be proven wrong time and time again by people who find themselves capable of imaging so much more.

And there i was thinking, that science already does just that.

Science should always only accept theories as the best explanations SO FAR, while always be on the lookout for a better one.

It is scientists, not science, that sometimes believe, something is impossible, because of a theory, that was prooven right, time and time again.
But there are allways many more scientists, trying to discover something new, something that IS possible.


And then there are pseudoscientists, who just use a lot of big words, to give their story the appearance of scientific validity to people, who don't understand these words. You can sift through that muddy watter as much as you want, but you won't find a baby in there unless it fell in by an accident.


BTW: I'm always open to all possibilities, but without some supporting evidence, it's just a belief system, and i think we have enough of those already.

There are many, many fields that charlatans have ruined. The concept of 'free energy" is so ruined that one cannot bring it up without making oneself a laughing stock without any further review.

So....there is that little problem. As well, in much of science, there are solid theories that completely get ignored.

Would it not seem more pertinent to consider all possibilities in lieu of a singular tunnel vision for one theory?

Consider this thread:

www.abovetopsecret.com...'

I present evidence for real anti-gravity, and possible cover up. In this same thread we have a scientist that wants to preclude the concept based on the use of the word "electrogravity". The fact that NASA and the DoD are interested and funding the scientist is irrelevant, i suppose.

Consider the lady who has found underwater pyramids off Cuba, or the lady that proved that Clovis was NOT the standard for mans antiquity in North America. You would think that their names would be as common, and well known, as the likes of Zahi Hawass, but they are not.

I agree with you that it is the way it is supposed to work...but it isn't the reality unfortunately.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
Would it not seem more pertinent to consider all possibilities in lieu of a singular tunnel vision for one theory?

That's my point exactly!

And yes, many fields were completelly ruined by charlatans unfortunatelly.
So much BS, that it makes it hard to see, if there is anything to it AT ALL.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
I present evidence for real anti-gravity, and possible cover up. In this same thread we have a scientist that wants to preclude the concept based on the use of the word "electrogravity". The fact that NASA and the DoD are interested and funding the scientist is irrelevant, i suppose.

I saw that thread of yours. And it seems interesting.

I've also seen an amazing medical technology patented and advertised as "10 years from ready", only for it to dissapear into oblivion. It's been 15 years now and nothing.
So yes, some of these things can be true sometimes.

Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
I agree with you that it is the way it is supposed to work...but it isn't the reality unfortunately.

Well, that's my idealized view of science.
But i did mention, that science and scientists are not the same, so...

wow this is amazing.

If there is an atmosphere on the moon, why don't the pictures blur into the distance?

reply to post by Kalapadea


This often comes up, that somehow images aren't "real" because we cannot see the wavelengths with unaided eyes. All images, including with our own eyes, are an interpretation of various wavelengths of light or other energy reflected off of objects by the brain with possible minipulation by any intervening instruments. Images are real only to the extent that they convey meaning about perceived objects. These "unreal" images (X-ray, infrared, UV, sound, etc.) actually expand our awareness of reality by letting us see things that evolution didn't equip us to see.

Originally posted by Twisted-Inside-Out
If there is an atmosphere on the moon, why don't the pictures blur into the distance?

That is probably one of the best arguments yet. Keeping in mind how much daylight there is on the moon, the air would be heated up allso, creating heat waves on the images...

Originally posted by Twisted-Inside-Out
If there is an atmosphere on the moon, why don't the pictures blur into the distance?

Elementary... there is no water vapor in the air on the moon... so there is nothing to diffract the light... and the particles from the dust storms have nothing to cling to (IE water molecules) so the air is crystal clear and no blurring happens

All you have to do is go to a mountain top where there is thin clear air on Earth to see this

Here is a sample.. but remember that even here there is still water vapor




Here is the canyon on a clear day... (years ago) Thats looking lengthways and your seeing about a 100 miles




And here it is with the water vapor colored by smoke and dust



SMOG after all is created from SMOKE and FOG

Now then you tell me that the hills in the distance on Apollo shots SHOULD be just as sharp as the foreground yes? Well as this picture shows they are not... in fact there is more blur on this than my mountain on Earth





[edit on 9-7-2008 by zorgon]

HA! Right about waist height on the astronaut you can see where the background image starkly changes texture. It looks like they put some bland, gray shapes in the back, put in some dots, and then smudged the hell out of it. They are the worst mountains i have ever seen.

and if the atmosphere was crisp and clear, i would expect to see boulders out there, too. where are they?

John, you think that in order to sustain life form planets must have an atmosphere. But consider this and all gets clear. Reality is multidimensional. Human beings is the only intelligent species in our solar system that live in the 3rd density (dimension). Other civilizations live in the 4th, maybe in 5th density. And this is why we can see them only by non-physical means such as "remote viewing", "astral projection", from ET's space ship and so forth.
All other planets is just lifeless wastelands, but only from our 3rd density perspective.


(sorry if I messed up with English which is not my native language).

Originally posted by zorgon
Now then you tell me that the hills in the distance on Apollo shots SHOULD be just as sharp as the foreground yes? Well as this picture shows they are not... in fact there is more blur on this than my mountain on Earth

I believe you are confusing atmospheric haze/fog with camera focal blur. Looking at high resolution version of AS17-140-21391 (951kb) It's obviously the camera that is out of focus. It doesn't matter if you're in the densest atmosphere or in the vacuum of space, if it's not focused right it will be blurry.

reply to post by Jack_Deth


Yeah seriously... as I was reading it, it reminded me of news items of finding water on Mars or some moon of whatever planet... huh..

reply to post by Kalapadea


I believe you are quite justified in thinking this way. I think that way too, why should we just believe what they feed us? I reserve judgement on what the OP wrote about, but it is fascinating to think about. It has really got me excited about space again... kinda like I was when I was younger... back when the possibilities in my mind were endless. What a great feeling.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/9a30ae28e330.jpg[/atsimg]

Hello all !

I have been reading threads about Venus for a few days now, and found that many people share some interesting infomation that is quite similar to my source of infomation about Venus.

At the moment I am studying in an International university in Thailand, I speak Thai, Dutch and English because I am Half Dutch-Thai, Because of this as I speak and understand Thai, I have got into many knowledge that is only known in Thai, some of them are about the universe and planets, most of this knowledge come from Buddhist monks that practice meditation, I persume that in the western will be similar to remote viewing.

What really intrest me is that there was this one Thai Buddhist monk, very well known and respected in thailand, he wrote many books about practicing meditation, Dharma teachings and he have many followers, In presentday he has already passed away, but many of his books still remain, and one of them is a book that he describe about the planets in our solar system from his vision, athough he never claim that what he says in the book is true and he always mention it as a bedtime story, but it might just be some saying not to make people that can not see what he see's take it seriously, and people can truely believe the story on thier free will.

Because this thread is about Venus, I will translate a chapter from his book that he describe about Venus, I'll post it after I finish translate it and make it in to a summary, all of the knowledge about planets in this book is obtain by insight, meditation practice to use power of the mind to take a state of consciousness to travel trough space and time, in Buddhism these things are called Superknowledges that can be reachable by the act of meditation or contemplation and meditation exercises wish will result in the highest state to have Powers beyond psychic, many Buddhist saint have this power, as well as the buddha him self, athough in present days people that have acsess to this knowledge are so few and usually not apearing in public.

Translation coming soon, Give me a hour or two . . .


[edit on 18/9/09 by BlackRosEmyth]

Summary of the Venus chapter, out of the Book that the Thai Buddhist saint wrote about planets in our solar system.

Venus is a planet covered with thick clouds, the clouds makes sparkling lights because the light of the sun that reflect with the ice that streams in the clouds, if looked from far distance it's like a big mirror sparkling with the sun light in a bright Blue shade. The cloud atmosphere is spread over the whole planet.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/e53cac101d36.jpg[/atsimg]

Venus has two sides that are totally diffrent, one side of venus has a bald landscape, very hot, no lifes and a dry nature condition, about 50% of venus landscape is as described, mainly in the middle towards the south of the planet will be like this. because this side is very close to the sun.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/d40854c0abf6.jpg[/atsimg]

A little bit up from the center of the planet towards the north all the way to the back, the more up north from the center towards the back, the more forrest and tree will be seen and the more density it will have, these area have a moist atmosphere, this side of Venus has Oceans, lakes, Forrest, snow and is rich of a special mineral that can not befound on earth, this mineral can produce free energy, it's an element that can be found on Venus, some regions of this side has a warm atmosphere similar to the middle east on earth, The Venersians that live in this area has a dark skin, thier looks are just like humans on earth but with a more beautiful figure, thier costume are very fancy and well made, they have farming, raising animals such as cows and chickens similar to earth, acthullay they are also humans just like those on earth.

The Venersians have no need of military no police no court, they live in peace among each other, there are no killing no stealling, towards the north to the back of the planets there are major cities, very advance constructed and very clean, they have roads with and a transportation system, they have Flying aircraft that are far beyond technology on earth, all of the power is produce by the special element that give's energy for just a little amount, Venus also have animals similar to earth but not exactly the same, these animals can comunicate with the Venersians and the Venersians don't kill animals for meat.

The age of the Venersians are about 20,000 years to 23,000 years and there is no body aging to old, the body remains young shape until death.
There is rivers and lakes with doking ports for boats, the roads and transpotations system connected to cities are well constructed together, there are also factories that produce products for the Venersians, some of thier transpotation are Flying balloons, There are also some places where Oceans are all ice.

Space travel for the Venusians was not mentioned in the Chapter, not sure if they have no intrest in it or no need to but might be in practice sometimes, the Venersians have well knowledge and contact with aliens from other planets, the Venersians is a simple moral living society, because of this they have no intrest much in Earth even though they have the knowledge of earth and know of it's existing. What can be seen from the Venersians that if compared with aliens from other planets such as Jupiter Saturn Mercury or Nibiru the Venersian are like the country aliens, just simple living aliens of the solar system. The venersians up north are lighter skin people, most of them have a simple life no hard work, thier figure are very beautiful in a perfect shape, loving-kindness are the nature of the Venersians.

I think this is all of the important infomation out of the 5 pages of the chapter as I have translated it as a summary in to english, Peace.

All planets have to dissipate heat energy somehow.

If what NASA say's is true about Venus is true there should be massive Cyclones similar to Jupiter with eye storm formations appearing.

But this doesn't seem to be the case on Venus! That atmosphere doesn't seem to be any more energetic than here on Earth from the photo's I have seen! So maybe it's really is just NASA BS.

reply to post by MOTT the HOOPLE

If what NASA say's is true about Venus is true there should be massive Cyclones similar to Jupiter with eye storm formations appearing. But this doesn't seem to be the case on Venus! That atmosphere doesn't seem to be any more energetic than here on Earth from the photo's I have seen! So maybe it's really is just NASA BS.

That's funny. I was just reviewing Venus information after reading this thread and came across information about cyclones.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/1f0c4dca5c2c.jpg[/atsimg]

How's the weather up there?



ESA