Will the Real Planet Venus Please Stand Up!

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.

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".



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.

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.



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.



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?

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...

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


image source: http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Earth/Sky/San_Rafael.jpg


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

image source: http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Earth/Sky/42-15453842.jpg



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

image source: http://www.thelivingmoon.com/43ancients/04images/Earth/Sky/P5210030.JPG


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


image source: http://learn.arc.nasa.gov/planets/3/mirror/ap021212_files/as17-140-21391c1.jpg



[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?