Re: SETI and The Fermi Paradox

brainfart/typo corrections

On Sep 20, 11:56 am, Puck Greenman <dubh_gh...@hotmail.com> wrote:

On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 09:19:58 -0700 (PDT), BradGuth <bradg...@gmail.com> wrote:

Quit with the arm waving, the insults, and the vaguese, and give us details.

Details:
1)  Unlike yourself (mainstream arms flying every which way), I don't
happen to know everything there is to know.

That is *very* clear.

2)  All the energy and raw elements necessary for technology and
humans surviving on Venus, form the most part already exist on Venus.

And you know this.... How?


Physics-101, plus otherwise the best available science that's
indicating no place on Venus or within its robust atmosphere is there
any lack of energy.  Even the entire planet itself is on average
radiating 20.5 w/m2.  Good grief, that one hell of a lot of local
energy.

3)  We have sufficient technology as is to accommodate our scientific
gathering and surface exploring via robotics.

4)  The composite rigid airship notion is also a technology that's
within existing spec of what we can accomplish.

There really is no point in continuing this.  You are obviously incapable of holding a
reasoned debate.  Neither do you have any idea as to what can and cannot be done with
existing science.


Poor pretend-engineer Puck Greenman, can't take the heat, literally
that is.

Did the technology exist to work on the surface of Venus,in the manner which you describe,
it would already be employed to mine the ocean bed, on our own world.


(correction)
True, you can't buy whatever's necessary for accomplishing Venus from
RadioShack.

Four fifths of our world is under water, which means that four fifths of our mineral
resources are under water.

The longest that anything has survived on the surface of Venus, is two hours, seven
minutes.  In that time, it managed to take and transmit, fourteen pictures.

We have had machines on the sea bed for much longer, gained much more information, and
retrieved them, still functional.

By the by, conspiracy theories do nothing for your credibility.


Your continued policy of systematic obfuscation is noted, as is that
other good one about life supposedly not being capable of surviving
under extreme pressure, as is your continued inability to research
anything past your extremely brown nose is also noted, as well as
having noted your obvious incest mutated inability to deductively
think inside or much less outside of that cozy mainstream kosher
failsafe box of yours.

http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identi...
 �Abstract : Simulated dives were made with dogs to a depth equivalent
to 1000 feet of Sea water (305 meters). Sixteen of these animals
breathed a non-explosive hydrogen-oxygen mixture (hydrox) containing
no more than 3% oxygen, while 12 breathed gas mixtures containing
helium in place of hydrogen. In a number of dives, animals were
exposed to hydrogen continuously for between 96-100 hours, 48 of which
was spent at 1000 FSW. Extensive pre- and post-dive blood enzyme and
hematological studies were carried out. In addition lung, brain and
liver biopsies were carried out on selected animals. all such studies
showed no significant abnormalities. One dive employing helium and one
dive employing hydrogen proved fatal. In both instances, these
fatalities were due to volatile hydrocarbons present in a cylinder of
contaminated oxygen. All other animals survived the exposures. Indeed,
some animals made more than one dive. Three of these animals still
appear normal after 3 to 5 years post-dive. EEG studies showed no
residual post-dive abnormalities and no evidence of High Pressure
Nervous Syndrome while at 1000 FSW, although transient EEG
abnormalities were noted during hypoxia. Techniques were developed for
mixing hydrogen and oxygen in a non-explosive manner. The techniques
developed for the use of hydrox appear to be reasonably safe. For the
past eleven years, this laboratory has carried out over 645O hours of
hydrox exposure on animals including mice, rats, dogs, and man, and
has mixed approximately 200 cylinders of hydrox without an accident
related to the use of hydrogen.�

If 305 meters depth (434 psi) has been found suitable for 3% O2 and
97% H2, imagine what having 1353 psi (92 bar) should allow, whereas
perhaps less than 1% O2 and greater than 99% H2 should do rather
nicely.  I�m sure there are any number of higher pressure tested
examples of complex biodiversity doing just fine and dandy at as
little as 1% O2 and 99% H2, once having been adapted to a 1000 psi (69
bar) environment (the extremely mountainous elevated terrain on Venus
for example).

Gradual pressurization (say applied over 100 days) and perhaps a few
somewhat minor physiological modifications would be required,
including an Ove-Glove composite suit and heat exchanging would be
required, along with a sufficient supply of frozen pizza and ice cold
beer.

 Brad Guth, Brad_Guth, Brad.Guth, BradGuth, BG / �Guth Usenet�