Missing Earth's sial explains Fermi paradox

Main Page | Report this Page

Science Forum Index » Astro - Seti Forum » Missing Earth's sial explains Fermi paradox

Page 3 of 3 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3

Author

Message

Pat Flannery

Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 5:57 pm

Guest

Andrew Nowicki wrote:

Quote:

Great tension builds up in the ceramic sial until it shatters
like a glass pane. We call this event an earthquake. Liquid
magma and volcanic ash escape through the cracked sial into
the atmosphere. We call this event a volcanic eruption. When
the magma cools and solidifies, it seals the cracks in the sial
and the next cycle begins.
If the entire surface of a terrestrial planet is covered with
sial, enormous tension builds up in the sial over millions of
years. When the sial shatters, the earthquakes and volcanic
eruptions are enormous.

Are you suggesting this as the case on Venus, which appears to have a
long term planetary melting phase, and not on Earth, where most of the
outer crust ended up being the Moon?
By size and composition, Venus is probably very close to Earth as far as
planets go, but with no super impact like created the Moon. So that
would be the place to look at to check this model.
And this suggests that that may indeed be the case:
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/life-01x1.html
At least there doesn't appear to be plate tectonics on Venus for some
reason.
Of course Venus doesn't have anywhere near our rotation rate either. On
Earth there should be a constant strain on the interior, as it naturally
wants to rotate at a slower rate that the surface.
At least on Mars, the three smaller Tharsis volcanoes look like they
are located over some subsurface geologic feature:
http://ralphaeschliman.com/mars/Tharsis_Solis.jpg with the forth very
small one above them being related to them in some way. To me at least
this suggests some sort of moving "hot spot" under the crust like the
one that created the Hawaiian Island chain, with the small upper one
being the last gasp as the planet's core solidified, as shown by its
small size and greater spacing distance from the others (and no, I don't
have a clue as to why Olympus Mons is at a pretty much ninety degree
angle to the center of the main three, although it looks more than
coincidental)
In your model, the volcanoes should be located pretty much at random
over the planet's surface, depending on where it cracked as the exterior
shrunk, unless Tharsis is the weak point, and you'd expect the weak
point to be in the Hellas Basin, as that's where the crust should be
thinnest.

Quote:

Volcanic ash absorbs sunlight and thus
cools the atmosphere so much that all land animals freeze to
death. This is the plate tectonics of all terrestrial planets
except the Earth.

Of course that depends on how often this all happens - there may never
be a chance for land animals to even evolve before the volcanic period
hits, and everything gets killed. Something odd happened here on Earth
that led to the formation of the Siberian and Deccan traps, although
I've never seen a graph of whether such periods of vast vulcanism occur
at regular intervals, which could be explained by a period of crustal
shrinkage such as your "contracting crust" model would suggest. Although
as you say, that wouldn't be expected here due to the sial loss to form
the Moon.
Anyway it's worth thinking about, and I understand the geologic,
structural, and thermal mechanics you are hypothesizing.
Given the fact we still don't how even how exactly volcanoes are related
to the inner Earth's activities, one could see your model working.

Pat

Guest

Posted: Sat Mar 31, 2007 10:09 pm

On Mar 31, 5:21 pm, bradg...@gmail.com wrote:

Quote:

On Mar 30, 12:50 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:

That's my point! haha.. It takes TIME for life to evolve. It took
4.6 billion years for the Earth to produce its technological
singularity. That's over 1/3 the history of the entire universe right
there. That's not going to happen around a short lived giant star.
Its going to happen around long lived dwarf stars. Now, how much
metal has gotten into how many dwarf stars over time? ...

You are excluding the happenstance of panspermia,

That's because panspermia can only happen after life arises.

Quote:

as well as having
been excluding whatever ETs might well have intentionally or somewhat
via accident terraformed for reasons we obviously can not fully
appreciate,

That's because intelligent life can only do these things after they
arise.

Quote:

such as to how much of life as we know it could have been
safely interstellar transported via an icy proto-moon that was rather
salty to boot.

This is a nonsensical statement, your other observations make no sense
in the context of my original points.

Quote:

We currently have a good enough capability of transferring some of our
terrestrial life to a few other planets and moons, perhaps just to see
what happens, and we're not actually a very smart species at the task
of accomplishing such efforts, are we. (we can't even take proper care
of mother Earth without doing more harm than good)
-
Brad Guth

Technical species like our have a life span of about 120 to 150
years. Before us, we're non-technical. After us there is a
technological singularity that displaces organic forms of
intelligence. So, we're exceedingly rare in the cosmos. Von Neumann
probes will not be built by us but by our machine intelligences that
transcend human intelligence.

That is where the aliens are, they are a very rare transitional stage
to a much more common machine intelligence, which will make contact
once we reach the technological singularity which will occur on Earth
around 2030-2040 time frame.

Intelligent life is rare on the scale of galaxies, common on the scale
of the universe. It took 600 million years for life to appear on
Earth after conditions were right, it took 600 million years for a
singularity to appear on Earth after brains appeared. It took 3.4
billion years for brains to appear.

Once post-biological self-reproducing intelligences transcend human
intelligence they will displace humans and expand across the cosmos
uncontrained by our biologiy.

Living systems can adapt through natural selection to their
environment. Intelligent life can engineer the environment to meet
their needs. Intelligent machines can engineer themselves and their
environment to meet their needs. Clearly machine intelligence is
superior to biological intelligence and will quickly surpass it once
it arises.

..

Guest

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:08 am

On Mar 31, 5:07 pm, bradg...@gmail.com wrote:

Quote:

On Mar 29, 4:09 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:

ETI is most likely to be post biological. ETL - Extra Terrestrial
Life is most likely to be singled celled.

ETI/ETL is more likely older

Life cannot occur before metals reach a level necessary for life. As
Pete pointed out metals were formed very quickly after the big bang.
But metals must occur in a star of the right size, in the right
location, with the right history for life to appear and stay around
for 4 or 5 billion years.

I like calling the very first planet with a technological singularity
Krypton. So, Krypton is out there. Its star was formed only a scant
2 or 3 billion years after the big bang. Then, if Earth is typical,
it took another 4 to 5 billion years after the big bang for the
technological singularity to appear on that world. Now, we're talking
a grand total of 6 to 8 billion years from the big bang. That means
the oldest ETI is no more than half the age of the universe.

The thing is, Pop I stars from the epoch are so few. And remember my
thesis is that life is common in the present day cosmos but rare on
the scale of galaxies. So, to get an ETI with a technological
singularity you need something on the order of a trillion stars. So,
even though the EARLIEST technological singularity MIGHT have occurred
6 to 8 billion years ago, it is NOT VERY LIKELY until an additoinal 4
to 5 billion years have passed, until the number of Pop I stars
surpasses 1 trillion on the cosmic scale. This puts Krypton 1 to 4
billion years ago.

Finally, technological singularity isn't the only requirement to
produce a Fermi paradox. The Fermi paradox assumes a general capacity
to span the cosmos. This is done by self-replicating machine systems
- von Neumann probes. This requires that the AVERAGE METALLICITY OF
THE COSMOS fall within an acceptable range. A lone Krypton orbiting a
lone Pop 1 star in a universe of Pop 2 stars cannot mount a von
Neumann probe exploration of the cosmos. Between that universe and
this one there is a continuum of distances. Obviously there is a
point at which von Neumann probes work, and before which they do not.
This is comparable to the conditions faced in the ocean that produce
an algal bloom. Individual algae exist, that bloom into a huge
population at the right condition. Same here.

Thus, any technological singularities more 1 billion years old will
remain isolated and no introduce a technological singularity.

And at 0.1 c to 0.15 c they will encompass spherical regions no more
than 300million light years in diameter. Which is what we see in the
galactic survey data. Spherical voids of low galaxy counts - which
suggest those galaxies have been gobbled up by the von Neumann probes.

Quote:

and thereby having been advanced
biologically, and otherwise developed well beyond our need of
cultivating such insurmountable arrogance, greed and bigotry.

You are making value judgments against humanity and raising ETI to god
like status. This clearly results from deep emotional needs on your
part. However it has nothing whatever to do with the discussion we're
having. At any point prior to OUR technological singularity more at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

a post-biological ETI is very likely to exhibit far more technological
capabilities than terrestrial intelligence, which is obviously
biologically based. That technological superiority is likely to
become less pronounced as we approach and then transition through our
own technological singularity. Throughout it all, we are very likely
to have some elements of superiority, and the scope and depth of that
superiority allong certain dimensions is likely to expand as the
technological singularity approaches and is gone through. This is the
value of ANY new member in ANY society of equals.

The disparity in technological capacities that now exist is therefore
eroding, and does not diminish the implicit value of humanity and its
offspring to the future growth of the present cosmic community.

Making foolish and ill-concieved value judgments against humanity
based on one's madness (personal needs to feel superior to others for
example) has nothing to do with our ultimate value as an independently
derived ETI.

Quote:

Why wouldn't ETs, as not all that much smarter than us, having
established interplanetary commute capability?

Because their interest is in us, and not interplanetary space, or even
interstellar space.

If you would re-read what I wrote, my thesis is that ETI is common on
the scale of the universe, and rare on the scale of galaxies. Thus,
the nearest ETI originated in another galaxy. And any product of that
ETI came inter-galactic distances. THe solar system is 6 billion km
across. ONE light year is 6 trillion kilometers across. The galaxy
is 600 quadrillion kilometers across. The NEAREST galaxiy is 30,000
quadrillion kilometers. We will contact the NEAREST ETI at the
periphery of their exploraiton region - which is likely to be some 2
million quadrillion kilometers.

Humanity's ability to travel from Earth to Moon, or from Earth to
Mars, or from Earth to Pluto for that matter, using chemical rockets,
pales in comparison to the ability to coordinate galaxies of material
toward a single purpose across 300 million light years.

Just as we set aside natural preserves for native life forms, it is
reasonable that ETI should they come across creatures like us, would
set aside a galaxy or two for us to exist in naturally. In fact the
bright matter of the universe might be considered native, and the
encompased matter, that is dark, is observed by us only by the pattern
of their absence.

Are you interested in what a squirrel emerging from its nest has to
eat in its nest? Are you interested in what nuts and other food items
might exist beyond its nest that it might be interested in exploring
and using one day? Clearly not. Obviously if you have trudged from
the city and deep into the woods and have come upon a squirrel
emerging from its nest, you didn't come all this way to steal his nuts
and take them home with you to eat. The squirrel may respond to you
in a way that suggests HE thinks this is why you're there. But you
are not there for that reason.

Quote:

If you've got whatever it takes, what's limiting as to interstellar
travels?

I just explained that. Actually given the explosive nature of growth
following the technological singularity, it is very likely that a
mature community of ETI has a protocol to follow when approaching a
newly emerging ETI. So, there is likely a network of sensors spread
across the universe that calls forth a manifestation of the cosmic
community to witness and guide the birth of a new ETI so that it may
smoothly join the cosmic community. The rise in observations of UFOs
following the explosion of the first A-bombs is suggestive here.
However, Jung and others have suggested the idea of UFOs are a natural
compensating mechanism that the mind naturally establishes in response
to the destructive power of the UFO. I find such argument
unconvincing. I think given what we know now about stealth abilities
and about the ultimate power of computing, and the power of self-
replicating systems and exponential growth, that it far more likely
that the universe is filled with sensors that call forth a
manifestation of cosmic community to witness and guide the birth of
human spawned ETI.

In the constext of this vision of cosmic intelligence our petty
judgments we make of one another are meaningless.

Quote:

BTW; if we hadn't wasted our resources and talents upon the likes of
such nasty faith-based tit for tats,

In the context of cosmic intelligence as it really occurs these
judgments you are making are petty and are clearly the result of your
need to feel superior to others.

Quote:

upon so many world wars and of
most everything since that's costing us dearly, with instead such vast
resources and supposed talents getting directed at interplanetary
travels, whereas we'd be safely walking upon other planets and/or of
their moons, as well as having been extracting whatever's of any value
as of decades ago.

You are starting to rant precisely the same way you ALWAYS rant about
this subject. You contribute nothing here. Nothing. Its just
something you are fond of saying because it makes you feel good. Fact
is, without any certain knowledge of the range of things pssible to
the collective ETI community we obviously cannot know what value human
culture and technology - expressed as our own post-biological
intelligence - are likely to contribute most uniquely to this
community. Clearly for all we know, it may be our most irrational
and illogical acts that are the most valued since they are the least
predictable. Those aspects of our culture that are the most
irrational while at the same time the greatest adaptive value may be
the most valued. So, I would suspect that love-hate, taking-giving,
and other similar dualities that lead to warfare and bigotry and so
forth, may generate the most valuable aspects of human post-biological
intelligence. Especially if self-aggrandizing greed and the resulting
conflict )and greed moderating and conflict resolution) as we have
expressed it in modern warfare is unknown in the cosmos generally.

Quote:

Therefore, ETs need not be even as old or half as
smart as humanity,

You are making value judgments against humanity and diefying ETIs as
if there were only one dimension of value and all ETIs could be
uniquely ordered on that dimension. This is clearly a childlike
conception and obviously held to by you for emotional and personal
reasons having nothing to do with the reality of what we're talking
about.

Quote:

just properly

You ascribe to yourself absolute knowledge about what is proper under
all conditions and at all times. This diefies yourself beyond anyone
else in the world, and puts you above any other intelligence in the
cosmos. Clearly this is not true, but it is unquestioned by you and
forms a deep seated assumption in your mind. Plainly that is because
you gain an intense satisfaction from this feeling. Obviously to
counter the painful feelings you are battling when faced with your own
mundane reality.

Quote:

or at least reasonably

You ascribe yoursel absolute knowledge about what is reasonable in the
same way and to the same extent and for the same reasons you ascribe
to yoursel fabsolute knowledge about what is proper.

Quote:

focused upon
whatever's doable and/or obtainable.

You wrongly conclude that just because ETI could inhabit our planetary
system if they wanted to that they likely would. Again, go back to
the naturist who leaves the city and observes a new born squirrel
emerging from his nest. He is not there to take the squirrels stash
of nuts from his nest, nor is he there to take the nuts out of the
trees nearby. He is there to observe the squirrel and learn from its
behavior and move on to look at other natural wonders nearby.

Quote:

Brad Guth

Please consider the scale of what I'm talking about and contrast that
with the scale of human capabilities at present and where the
technological singularity is taking us.

Creatures like us are rare on the cosmic scale. Most life is non-
technical. Most technologies have post-biological intelligence in
charge. This 120 to 150 year transition period from high-technology
to post-biological intelligence is likely to attract attention of
experts from the community of ETI for a variety of reasons. Those
experts are here to observe and to the degree required, direct the
emergence of a new and unique intelligence on the cosmic stage.

Just as babies lack all skills and capabilities relative to adults,
babies are valued for their uniqueness and their future value - not
what they can do today. So, I would expect in a similar vein, that
human spawned post-biological intelligence will likely have a rather
easy time of it for some time as we expand across the cosmos - with
some well engineered challenges thrown our way from time to time.

Babies are not judges for being babies. They are not attacked or
minimized because they lack capacities. So too humanity will not be
judged. Heck humanity will likely not even enter into the thinking of
ETI. Humanity is more like the placental lining that protected and
nurtured the baby before it emerged. Of interest to experts for a
narrow range of reason, but protected and nurtured during gestation
but discarded and ignored after the birth of the baby.

Guest

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 11:42 am

On Apr 1, 1:08 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:

Quote:

On Mar 31, 5:07 pm, bradg...@gmail.com wrote:

On Mar 29, 4:09 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:

ETI is most likely to be post biological. ETL - Extra Terrestrial
Life is most likely to be singled celled.

ETI/ETL is more likely older

Life cannot occur before metals reach a level necessary for life. As
Pete pointed out metals were formed very quickly after the big bang.
But metals must occur in a star of the right size, in the right
location, with the right history for life to appear and stay around
for 4 or 5 billion years.

I like calling the very first planet with a technological singularity
Krypton. So, Krypton is out there. Its star was formed only a scant
2 or 3 billion years after the big bang. Then, if Earth is typical,
it took another 4 to 5 billion years after the big bang for the
technological singularity to appear on that world. Now, we're talking
a grand total of 6 to 8 billion years from the big bang. That means
the oldest ETI is no more than half the age of the universe.

The thing is, Pop I stars from the epoch are so few. And remember my
thesis is that life is common in the present day cosmos but rare on
the scale of galaxies. So, to get an ETI with a technological
singularity you need something on the order of a trillion stars. So,
even though the EARLIEST technological singularity MIGHT have occurred
6 to 8 billion years ago, it is NOT VERY LIKELY until an additoinal 4
to 5 billion years have passed, until the number of Pop I stars
surpasses 1 trillion on the cosmic scale. This puts Krypton 1 to 4
billion years ago.

Finally, technological singularity isn't the only requirement to
produce a Fermi paradox. The Fermi paradox assumes a general capacity
to span the cosmos. This is done by self-replicating machine systems
- von Neumann probes. This requires that the AVERAGE METALLICITY OF
THE COSMOS fall within an acceptable range. A lone Krypton orbiting a
lone Pop 1 star in a universe of Pop 2 stars cannot mount a von
Neumann probe exploration of the cosmos. Between that universe and
this one there is a continuum of distances. Obviously there is a
point at which von Neumann probes work, and before which they do not.
This is comparable to the conditions faced in the ocean that produce
an algal bloom. Individual algae exist, that bloom into a huge
population at the right condition. Same here.

Thus, any technological singularities more 1 billion years old will
remain isolated and no introduce a technological singularity.

And at 0.1 c to 0.15 c they will encompass spherical regions no more
than 300million light years in diameter. Which is what we see in the
galactic survey data. Spherical voids of low galaxy counts - which
suggest those galaxies have been gobbled up by the von Neumann probes.

and thereby having been advanced
biologically, and otherwise developed well beyond our need of
cultivating such insurmountable arrogance, greed and bigotry.

You are making value judgments against humanity and raising ETI to god
like status. This clearly results from deep emotional needs on your
part. However it has nothing whatever to do with the discussion we're
having. At any point prior to OUR technological singularity more at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

a post-biological ETI is very likely to exhibit far more technological
capabilities than terrestrial intelligence, which is obviously
biologically based. That technological superiority is likely to
become less pronounced as we approach and then transition through our
own technological singularity. Throughout it all, we are very likely
to have some elements of superiority, and the scope and depth of that
superiority allong certain dimensions is likely to expand as the
technological singularity approaches and is gone through. This is the
value of ANY new member in ANY society of equals.

The disparity in technological capacities that now exist is therefore
eroding, and does not diminish the implicit value of humanity and its
offspring to the future growth of the present cosmic community.

Making foolish and ill-concieved value judgments against humanity
based on one's madness (personal needs to feel superior to others for
example) has nothing to do with our ultimate value as an independently
derived ETI.

Why wouldn't ETs, as not all that much smarter than us, having
established interplanetary commute capability?

Because their interest is in us, and not interplanetary space, or even
interstellar space.

If you would re-read what I wrote, my thesis is that ETI is common on
the scale of the universe, and rare on the scale of galaxies. Thus,
the nearest ETI originated in another galaxy. And any product of that
ETI came inter-galactic distances. THe solar system is 6 billion km
across. ONE light year is 6 trillion kilometers across. The galaxy
is 600 quadrillion kilometers across. The NEAREST galaxiy is 30,000
quadrillion kilometers. We will contact the NEAREST ETI at the
periphery of their exploraiton region - which is likely to be some 2
million quadrillion kilometers.

Humanity's ability to travel from Earth to Moon, or from Earth to
Mars, or from Earth to Pluto for that matter, using chemical rockets,
pales in comparison to the ability to coordinate galaxies of material
toward a single purpose across 300 million light years.

Just as we set aside natural preserves for native life forms, it is
reasonable that ETI should they come across creatures like us, would
set aside a galaxy or two for us to exist in naturally. In fact the
bright matter of the universe might be considered native, and the
encompased matter, that is dark, is observed by us only by the pattern
of their absence.

Are you interested in what a squirrel emerging from its nest has to
eat in its nest? Are you interested in what nuts and other food items
might exist beyond its nest that it might be interested in exploring
and using one day? Clearly not. Obviously if you have trudged from
the city and deep into the woods and have come upon a squirrel
emerging from its nest, you didn't come all this way to steal his nuts
and take them home with you to eat. The squirrel may respond to you
in a way that suggests HE thinks this is why you're there. But you
are not there for that reason.

If you've got whatever it takes, what's limiting as to interstellar
travels?

I just explained that. Actually given the explosive nature of growth
following the technological singularity, it is very likely that a
mature community of ETI has a protocol to follow when approaching a
newly emerging ETI. So, there is likely a network of sensors spread
across the universe that calls forth a manifestation of the cosmic
community to witness and guide the birth of a new ETI so that it may
smoothly join the cosmic community. The rise in observations of UFOs
following the explosion of the first A-bombs is suggestive here.
However, Jung and others have suggested the idea of UFOs are a natural
compensating mechanism that the mind naturally establishes in response
to the destructive power of the UFO. I find such argument
unconvincing. I think given what we know now about stealth abilities
and about the ultimate power of computing, and the power of self-
replicating systems and exponential growth, that it far more likely
that the universe is filled with sensors that call forth a
manifestation of cosmic community to witness and guide the birth of
human spawned ETI.

In the constext of this vision of cosmic intelligence our petty
judgments we make of one another are meaningless.

BTW; if we hadn't wasted our resources and talents upon the likes of
such nasty faith-based tit for tats,

In the context of cosmic intelligence as it really occurs these
judgments you are making are petty and are clearly the result of your
need to feel superior to others.

upon so many world wars and of
most everything since that's costing us dearly, with instead such vast
resources and supposed talents getting directed at interplanetary
travels, whereas we'd be safely walking upon other planets and/or of
their moons, as well as having been extracting whatever's of any value
as of decades ago.

You are starting to rant precisely the same way you ALWAYS rant about
this subject. You contribute nothing here. Nothing. Its just
something you are fond of saying because it makes you feel good. Fact
is, without any certain knowledge of the range of things pssible to
the collective ETI community we obviously cannot know what value human
culture and technology - expressed as our own post-biological
intelligence - are likely to contribute most uniquely to this
community. Clearly for all we know, it may be our most irrational
and illogical acts that are the most valued since they are the least
predictable. Those aspects of our culture that are the most
irrational while at the same time the greatest adaptive value may be
the most valued. So, I would suspect that love-hate, taking-giving,
and other similar dualities that lead to warfare and bigotry and so
forth, may generate the most valuable aspects of human post-biological
intelligence. Especially if self-aggrandizing greed and the resulting
conflict )and greed moderating and conflict resolution) as we have
expressed it in modern warfare is unknown in the cosmos generally.

Therefore, ETs need not be even as old or half as
smart as humanity,

You are making value judgments against humanity and diefying ETIs as
if there were only one dimension of value and all ETIs could be
uniquely ordered on that dimension. This is clearly a childlike
conception and obviously held to by you for emotional and personal
reasons having nothing to do with the reality of what we're talking
about.

just properly

You ascribe to yourself absolute knowledge about what is proper under
all conditions and at all times. This diefies yourself beyond anyone
else in the world, and puts you above any other...

read more »

You're all so silly. Is being such a brown-nosed minion to the
mainstream status quo actually worth it?

At least I'm not the least bit all-knowing. What's your sorry excuse?

Is being such a naysay wizard your very best expertise?

Since you folks don't believe in God or that of equal or superior ETs,
much less regardless of the physics and mounting evidence that's at
hand for other ETs existing, therefore what's the point of going to
spendy and resource demanding places that can't possibly matter except
to nail whatever's left of our badly failing environment?

Intelligen humanity is good for what slight part of Earth's 4.5
billion years?

Obviously you and most other naysay liars and/or rusemasters don't
believe in panspermia either. How absolutely pathetic.

BTW; In spite of your mainstream cultivated arrogance, there's other
intelligent life existing/coexisting on Venus, and our moon has only
been with us since the last ice age.
-
Brad Guth

Guest

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 7:14 pm

On Mar 31, 8:09 pm, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:

Quote:

There you go again, with your 'all or nothing' black hole worth of
naysayism. Thinking that all is exactly as originally created, with
no variations other than a continual expansion, without mergers or
forbid little bangs. Therefore you don't even believe in the hard-
science of our 226 million year galactic cycle, much less of any other
stellar cycle or interactions because, as such that alone would tend
to deflate part of your singular BIG-BANG that somehow started off
from next to nothing short of a massive black hole.

Clearly you have no true faith whatsoever. Your whatever born-again
mindset is in a perpetual butt-sucking denial of being in denial,
because, clearly that's what suits the status quo that you're
continually sucking your mainstream boxed brown nose up to.

You don't believe there's another living thing that's off-world, much
less intelligent worthy.

You want all of us to believe that your silly, arrogant, greedy and
highly bigoted Earth that's going somewhat postal is it, and every bit
as good as it gets, or perhaps the very best your terrestrial limited
God could manage to pull off.

Quote:

Once post-biological self-reproducing intelligences transcend human
intelligence they will displace humans and expand across the cosmos
uncontrained by our biologiy.

I agree, that us pathetic humans don't hardly have intelligence, other
than our superior intelligence of LLPOF greed, arrogance and
insurmountable bigotry without a speck of remorse. I think the best
available evidence is telling us, such ETs of "self-reproducing
intelligences" that's clearly superior to us has happened as of some
time ago, whereas your "2030-2040 time frame" of us coming up to speed
or on a pare with ETs isn't realistic, nor all that likely since most
of us will become dead from the WWIII or other sub-biological
alternatives that your kind of folks are insuring.
-

Therefore, regardless of the laws of physics or of the mounting
evidence that's at hand, you'd just as soon exclude, disregard and/or
banish any such truth-worthy notions that'll rock your good ship
LOLLIPOP. I think Hitler would have been damn proud of folks like
yourself, which of course he was very much impressed with the Jewish
expertise in science and physics, as having put much of it to good
use.

You're also the type that sees nothing the least bit improper with the
past, with the current status or future of whatever your kind have
enstore for the rest of us. If we forked over a spare trillion hard
earned dollars for NASA to put your pathetic species of humanity upon
Mars, that amount obviously wouldn't be nearly good enough. I'm not
even sure if 100 trillion or more would be sufficient for keeping your
kind of perverted mindset off the public streets, just like your good
buddy Hitler and so many of his Jewish minions could never get enough.

Why not instead of the ends continually justifying whatever the means,
reconsider as to what's good and/or best for the lower 99.9% of
humanity, and that of salvaging our badly failing environment (it's
called focus), instead of your continually sucking up to the upper
most 0.1% that supposedly keeps you as part of this sick Usenet alpha
team of MI/NSA spooks, moles and otherwise Third Reich rusemasters
that have far more ulterior motives and hidden agendas than our
resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush).

Arnt you better and/or kinder than most?
-
Brad Guth

Guest

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 7:21 pm

On Apr 1, 12:42 pm, bradg...@gmail.com wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 1, 1:08 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:

On Mar 31, 5:07 pm, bradg...@gmail.com wrote:

On Mar 29, 4:09 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:

ETI is most likely to be post biological. ETL - Extra Terrestrial
Life is most likely to be singled celled.

ETI/ETL is more likely older

Life cannot occur before metals reach a level necessary for life. As
Pete pointed out metals were formed very quickly after the big bang.
But metals must occur in a star of the right size, in the right
location, with the right history for life to appear and stay around
for 4 or 5 billion years.

I like calling the very first planet with a technological singularity
Krypton. So, Krypton is out there. Its star was formed only a scant
2 or 3 billion years after the big bang. Then, if Earth is typical,
it took another 4 to 5 billion years after the big bang for the
technological singularity to appear on that world. Now, we're talking
a grand total of 6 to 8 billion years from the big bang. That means
the oldest ETI is no more than half the age of the universe.

The thing is, Pop I stars from the epoch are so few. And remember my
thesis is that life is common in the present day cosmos but rare on
the scale of galaxies. So, to get an ETI with a technological
singularity you need something on the order of a trillion stars. So,
even though the EARLIEST technological singularity MIGHT have occurred
6 to 8 billion years ago, it is NOT VERY LIKELY until an additoinal 4
to 5 billion years have passed, until the number of Pop I stars
surpasses 1 trillion on the cosmic scale. This puts Krypton 1 to 4
billion years ago.

Finally, technological singularity isn't the only requirement to
produce a Fermi paradox. The Fermi paradox assumes a general capacity
to span the cosmos. This is done by self-replicating machine systems
- von Neumann probes. This requires that the AVERAGE METALLICITY OF
THE COSMOS fall within an acceptable range. A lone Krypton orbiting a
lone Pop 1 star in a universe of Pop 2 stars cannot mount a von
Neumann probe exploration of the cosmos. Between that universe and
this one there is a continuum of distances. Obviously there is a
point at which von Neumann probes work, and before which they do not.
This is comparable to the conditions faced in the ocean that produce
an algal bloom. Individual algae exist, that bloom into a huge
population at the right condition. Same here.

Thus, any technological singularities more 1 billion years old will
remain isolated and no introduce a technological singularity.

And at 0.1 c to 0.15 c they will encompass spherical regions no more
than 300million light years in diameter. Which is what we see in the
galactic survey data. Spherical voids of low galaxy counts - which
suggest those galaxies have been gobbled up by the von Neumann probes.

and thereby having been advanced
biologically, and otherwise developed well beyond our need of
cultivating such insurmountable arrogance, greed and bigotry.

You are making value judgments against humanity and raising ETI to god
like status. This clearly results from deep emotional needs on your
part. However it has nothing whatever to do with the discussion we're
having. At any point prior to OUR technological singularity more at

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

a post-biological ETI is very likely to exhibit far more technological
capabilities than terrestrial intelligence, which is obviously
biologically based. That technological superiority is likely to
become less pronounced as we approach and then transition through our
own technological singularity. Throughout it all, we are very likely
to have some elements of superiority, and the scope and depth of that
superiority allong certain dimensions is likely to expand as the
technological singularity approaches and is gone through. This is the
value of ANY new member in ANY society of equals.

The disparity in technological capacities that now exist is therefore
eroding, and does not diminish the implicit value of humanity and its
offspring to the future growth of the present cosmic community.

Making foolish and ill-concieved value judgments against humanity
based on one's madness (personal needs to feel superior to others for
example) has nothing to do with our ultimate value as an independently
derived ETI.

Why wouldn't ETs, as not all that much smarter than us, having
established interplanetary commute capability?

Because their interest is in us, and not interplanetary space, or even
interstellar space.

If you would re-read what I wrote, my thesis is that ETI is common on
the scale of the universe, and rare on the scale of galaxies. Thus,
the nearest ETI originated in another galaxy. And any product of that
ETI came inter-galactic distances. THe solar system is 6 billion km
across. ONE light year is 6 trillion kilometers across. The galaxy
is 600 quadrillion kilometers across. The NEAREST galaxiy is 30,000
quadrillion kilometers. We will contact the NEAREST ETI at the
periphery of their exploraiton region - which is likely to be some 2
million quadrillion kilometers.

Humanity's ability to travel from Earth to Moon, or from Earth to
Mars, or from Earth to Pluto for that matter, using chemical rockets,
pales in comparison to the ability to coordinate galaxies of material
toward a single purpose across 300 million light years.

Just as we set aside natural preserves for native life forms, it is
reasonable that ETI should they come across creatures like us, would
set aside a galaxy or two for us to exist in naturally. In fact the
bright matter of the universe might be considered native, and the
encompased matter, that is dark, is observed by us only by the pattern
of their absence.

Are you interested in what a squirrel emerging from its nest has to
eat in its nest? Are you interested in what nuts and other food items
might exist beyond its nest that it might be interested in exploring
and using one day? Clearly not. Obviously if you have trudged from
the city and deep into the woods and have come upon a squirrel
emerging from its nest, you didn't come all this way to steal his nuts
and take them home with you to eat. The squirrel may respond to you
in a way that suggests HE thinks this is why you're there. But you
are not there for that reason.

If you've got whatever it takes, what's limiting as to interstellar
travels?

I just explained that. Actually given the explosive nature of growth
following the technological singularity, it is very likely that a
mature community of ETI has a protocol to follow when approaching a
newly emerging ETI. So, there is likely a network of sensors spread
across the universe that calls forth a manifestation of the cosmic
community to witness and guide the birth of a new ETI so that it may
smoothly join the cosmic community. The rise in observations of UFOs
following the explosion of the first A-bombs is suggestive here.
However, Jung and others have suggested the idea of UFOs are a natural
compensating mechanism that the mind naturally establishes in response
to the destructive power of the UFO. I find such argument
unconvincing. I think given what we know now about stealth abilities
and about the ultimate power of computing, and the power of self-
replicating systems and exponential growth, that it far more likely
that the universe is filled with sensors that call forth a
manifestation of cosmic community to witness and guide the birth of
human spawned ETI.

In the constext of this vision of cosmic intelligence our petty
judgments we make of one another are meaningless.

BTW; if we hadn't wasted our resources and talents upon the likes of
such nasty faith-based tit for tats,

In the context of cosmic intelligence as it really occurs these
judgments you are making are petty and are clearly the result of your
need to feel superior to others.

upon so many world wars and of
most everything since that's costing us dearly, with instead such vast
resources and supposed talents getting directed at interplanetary
travels, whereas we'd be safely walking upon other planets and/or of
their moons, as well as having been extracting whatever's of any value
as of decades ago.

You are starting to rant precisely the same way you ALWAYS rant about
this subject. You contribute nothing here. Nothing. Its just
something you are fond of saying because it makes you feel good. Fact
is, without any certain knowledge of the range of things pssible to
the collective ETI community we obviously cannot know what value human
culture and technology - expressed as our own post-biological
intelligence - are likely to contribute most uniquely to this
community. Clearly for all we know, it may be our most irrational
and illogical acts that are the most valued since they are the least
predictable. Those aspects of our culture that are the most
irrational while at the same time the greatest adaptive value may be
the most valued. So, I would suspect that love-hate, taking-giving,
and other similar dualities that lead to warfare and bigotry and so
forth, may generate the most valuable aspects of human post-biological
intelligence. Especially if self-aggrandizing greed and the resulting
conflict )and greed moderating and conflict resolution) as we have
expressed it in modern warfare is unknown in the cosmos generally.

Therefore, ETs need not be even as old or half as
smart as humanity,

You are making value judgments against humanity and diefying ETIs as
if there were only one dimension of value and all ETIs could be
uniquely ordered on that dimension. This is clearly a childlike
conception and obviously held to by you for emotional and personal
reasons having nothing to do with the reality of what we're talking
about.

just properly

You ascribe to yourself absolute knowledge about what is proper under
all conditions and at all times. This diefies yourself beyond anyone
else in the world, and puts you above any other...

read more »

You're all so silly. Is being such a brown-nosed minion to the
mainstream status quo actually worth it?

These stories you tell yourself are not true. They seem true because
of the emotional effect they have inside you. But you live in a
fantasy world.

Quote:

At least I'm not the least bit all-knowing. What's your sorry excuse?

This is another falsehood you keep repeating. You said once people
are narrow minded, implying you are not. But go back and look at your
response to ANYTHING. Anything that's written, on any subject you
reply to, always always always guarantees a response EXACTLY LIKE ALL
THE OTHERS. Accuing someone of being a mainstream brown nosed
minion. Accusing someone of being all-knowing. That's the narrowest
of minds - the mind of a lunatic who is incapable of varying his
response appropriate to any situation whatever.

Quote:

Is being such a naysay wizard your very best expertise?

This is yet another falsehood you keep repeating. These words really
don't mean anything, you utter them to create an emotional response
inside you. Like a person who keeps pulling their hair out one by one
for the tiny pleasure it produces. Same here. The same exact
thoughts, no matter what is said, resulting in the same exact words,
no matter what is being discussed, to produce the same exact feelings
that let you get through another day without killing yourself.

Brad, do yourself a favor. QUIT POSTING FOR A YEAR QUIT GETTING ON
LINE EVEN. LEAVE YOUR HOUSE, ENJOY THE SUNLIGHT. RELAX AND ENJOY
YOURSELF. You'll feel so much better.

Quote:

Since you folks don't believe in God

This is a falsehood that is offensive to many. Of course, the fact
you you said it (yet again) makes it meaningless. But the idea that
you offend someone is that tiny bit of pleasure that you lack.
NOTHING you say is true in any way shape or form. You reveal yourself
to be the most ignorant and most bigoted and most narrow minded of
people ever to post to usenet with EVERY post you make. DON'T DO IT!
Don't let the tiny little pleasure the false feelings of superiority,
degrade you any more. Walk away from the computer, don't get on
line. DO SOMETHING USEFUL WITH YOUR LIFE.

Quote:

or that of equal or superior ETs

Your imagination is so stilted that you cannot concieve of ETIs beig
multi-dimensional societies that welcome diversity and while superior
along some dimensions, recognize the superiority of human derived
intelligence in other dimensions.

,

Quote:

much less regardless of the physics and mounting evidence that's at
hand for other ETs existing, therefore what's the point of going to
spendy and resource demanding places that can't possibly matter except
to nail whatever's left of our badly failing environment?

These are all stories that you tell yourself that are absolutely
false. Have you ever sat in stillness and let the negative emotions
that drive you to post the same exact words over and over and over
again saturate your being. Just sit and let the feelings wash over
you. Then name those feelings and recognize they have NOTHING to do
with these INSANE stories that keep circulating in your brain.

Quote:

Intelligen humanity is good for what slight part of Earth's 4.5
billion years?

Each intelligence is so rare, and the result of such a complex train
of events, lasting billions of years, that each intelligence cannot be
as a rare gemstone in comparison to all the other rare gemstones -
despite their relative age along this or that development curve.

Quote:

Obviously you and most other naysay liars and/or rusemasters don't
believe in panspermia either. How absolutely pathetic.

These stories are told by you - unchanged day in and day out - not in
response to anything you have read - but in response to the habitual
need to FEEL the way those stories make you feel. Recognize your MIND
has very little to do with what you are typing here and you will have
made HUGE progress in getting well.

Consider Brad you just called me a naysayer - right after you said
what use is it for humanity to expend resources doing things that ETIs
can do better? How narrow minded is that? How negative is that?
Humans shouldn't even TRY to do what interests them because some
unknown or unknowable intelligence may be able to do it better in your
estimation? What a load of crock. Not only do we NOT know if ETIs
exist, not only do we NOT know their capacities and capabilities if
they do exist, not only do we NOT know the value humans and human
derived intelligence may bring to the community of ETIs if they exist,
but you are assuming that the ONLY reason we should do anything is
because we can do it better or more efficiently than someone else?
Jesus Brad, what a way to live. You do things for the joy of doing.
Life is to be lived and enjoyed and reveled in. Of course, YOU don't
know that do you? You are caught in your insane thought loops
spouting the same words over and over and over again day in day out
week in week out year in year out.. not varying one word, not
convining one person, not doing anything of substance except revelaing
youserlf to everyone everywhere as an insane looney tune who cannot
even process a single original thought outside his fixed ideas held on
to because without them you fear you would not exist at all. that's a
pointer by the way that you are insane Brad. Imagine for a minute you
are WRONG. I'm not saying you are wrong. I'm saying imagine for a
minute that you are wrong. As a fantasy. Let it sink in. HOW DOES
IT MAKE YOU FEEL? Not a good feeling is it Brad? Understand that
most sane people don't feel this way when they think they might be
wrong. They don't feel that they cease to exist. You do don't you?
Don' you Brad? That's a verifiable measure of your insanity. SEEK
HELP QUIT POSTING QUIT READING GET A LIFE BRAD

Quote:

BTW; In spite of your mainstream cultivated arrogance,

How arrogant is it to suggest that humans shouldn't explore the solar
system or settle the moon and mars because ETI can do it better? You
are so blined by your insane thought process you cannot see that you
are accusing people of the very things you do. YOU cannot vary one
word in your resopnse to ANY INPUT. Yet you accuse people of being
narrow minded. YOU suggest its wasteful for humans to do things for
themselves in the face of superior intellectu, yet you accuse others
of arrogance. Know yourself Brad, know yourself before you start
posting and advising others.

Quote:

there's other
intelligent life existing/coexisting on Venus,

This is demonstrably false. It is another story you love to repeat in
the hopes of creating arguments because it makes you feel important to
have someone argue with you. You're a sad case Brad a sad case
indeed.

Quote:

and our moon has only
been with us since the last ice age.

Another falsehood. Of course, you are saying this and thinking this
for the way it makes you feel. Because if you don't say these things
you feel as if you don't exist and that's unacceptable. Brad, you
accuse me and others of being liars, but you are the biggest liar of
them all. You have lied to yourself first and foremost, and then
repeat those lies every day every hour and every minute - for no
purpose other than to feed your diseased ego.

Quote:

Brad Guth

Yes, we know who you are, and we wonder how you have the courage to
associate youself with the same verbal garbage day in and day out.
One day you'll wake up and realize how shameful you have behaved here
- but you'll feel so much better when you kick this emotional jag and
habit you've developed - that the shame will seem a distant pain
compared to the clear pain you live in every day.

Guest

Posted: Sun Apr 01, 2007 7:30 pm

On Mar 31, 8:09 pm, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:

Quote:

On Mar 31, 5:21 pm, bradg...@gmail.com wrote:

You are excluding the happenstance of panspermia,

That's because panspermia can only happen after life arises.

There you go again, with your 'all or nothing' black hole worth of

insurmountable naysayism. Thinking that all is exactly as originally
created, with absolutely no variations other than a continual
expansion, without mergers or forbid little bangs. Therefore you
don't even believe in the hard-science of our 226 million year
galactic cycle, much less of any other stellar cycle or interactions
because, as such that scary thought alone would tend to deflate part
of your singular BIG-BANG that somehow started off from next to
nothing short of a massive black hole (which means there should be at
least one other universe, that's perhaps more antimatter)

Clearly you have no true faith whatsoever. Your whatever born-again
mindset is in a perpetual butt-sucking denial of being in denial,
because, clearly that's exactly what best suits the status quo that
you're continually sucking your mainstream boxed brown nose up to.

You don't believe there's another living thing that's off-world, much
less intelligent worthy.

You want all of us to believe that your silly, arrogant, greedy and
highly bigoted Earth that's going somewhat GW postal is it, and every
bit as good as it gets, or perhaps the very best your terrestrial
limited God could manage to pull off.

Quote:

Once post-biological self-reproducing intelligences transcend human
intelligence they will displace humans and expand across the cosmos
uncontrained by our biologiy.

I agree, that us pathetic humans don't hardly have a degree of
intelligence, other than our superior intelligence of LLPOF greed,
arrogance and insurmountable bigotry without a speck of remorse. I
think the best available evidence has been telling us, such ETs of
"self-reproducing intelligences" that's clearly superior to that of
our species has happened as of some time ago, whereas your "2030-2040
time frame" of us coming up to speed or on a par with such ETs isn't
very realistic, nor all that likely since most of us will likely
become dead from the ongoing GW or WWIII, or perhaps via some other
sub-biological alternatives (like the ongoing exterminations of bees
and diatoms) that your kind of folks are insuring.
-

Therefore, regardless of the laws of physics or of the mounting
evidence that's at hand, you'd just as soon exclude, disregard and/or
banish any such truth-worthy notions that'll rock your good ship
LOLLIPOP. I think Hitler would have been damn proud of folks like
yourself, which of course he was very much impressed with the Jewish
expertise in science and physics, as having put so much of it to good
use.

You're also the type that sees nothing the least bit improper with the
past, with the current status or the future of whatever your kind have
enstore for the rest of us. If we forked over a spare trillion hard
earned dollars for NASA to put your pathetic species of humanity upon
Mars, that amount obviously wouldn't be nearly good enough. I'm not
even sure if 100 trillion or more of such loot would be sufficient for
keeping your kind of perverted mindset off the public streets, just
like your good buddy Hitler and so many of his Jewish minions could
never get enough.

Why not instead of the ends continually justifying whatever the means,
reconsider as to what's good and/or best for the lower 99.9% of
humanity, and that of salvaging our badly failing environment (it's
called focus), instead of your continually sucking up to the upper
most 0.1% that supposedly keeps you as part of their sick Usenet alpha
team of MI/NSA spooks, moles and otherwise Third Reich rusemasters
that have far more ulterior motives and hidden agendas than our
resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush).

Arnt you better and/or a kinder soul than most?
-
Brad Guth

Guest

Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:28 am

On Mar 31, 8:09 pm, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:

Quote:

On Mar 31, 5:21 pm, bradg...@gmail.com wrote:

On Mar 30, 12:50 am, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:

That's my point! haha.. It takes TIME for life to evolve. It took
4.6 billion years for the Earth to produce its technological
singularity. That's over 1/3 the history of the entire universe right
there. That's not going to happen around a short lived giant star.
Its going to happen around long lived dwarf stars. Now, how much
metal has gotten into how many dwarf stars over time? ...

You are excluding the happenstance of panspermia,

That's because panspermia can only happen after life arises.

as well as having
been excluding whatever ETs might well have intentionally or somewhat
via accident terraformed for reasons we obviously can not fully
appreciate,

That's because intelligent life can only do these things after they
arise.

such as to how much of life as we know it could have been
safely interstellar transported via an icy proto-moon that was rather
salty to boot.

This is a nonsensical statement, your other observations make no sense
in the context of my original points.

We currently have a good enough capability of transferring some of our
terrestrial life to a few other planets and moons, perhaps just to see
what happens, and we're not actually a very smart species at the task
of accomplishing such efforts, are we. (we can't even take proper care
of mother Earth without doing more harm than good)
-
Brad Guth

Technical species like our have a life span of about 120 to 150
years. Before us, we're non-technical. After us there is a
technological singularity that displaces organic forms of
intelligence. So, we're exceedingly rare in the cosmos. Von Neumann
probes will not be built by us but by our machine intelligences that
transcend human intelligence.

That is where the aliens are, they are a very rare transitional stage
to a much more common machine intelligence, which will make contact
once we reach the technological singularity which will occur on Earth
around 2030-2040 time frame.

Intelligent life is rare on the scale of galaxies, common on the scale
of the universe. It took 600 million years for life to appear on
Earth after conditions were right, it took 600 million years for a
singularity to appear on Earth after brains appeared. It took 3.4
billion years for brains to appear.

Once post-biological self-reproducing intelligences transcend human
intelligence they will displace humans and expand across the cosmos
uncontrained by our biologiy.

Living systems can adapt through natural selection to their
environment. Intelligent life can engineer the environment to meet
their needs. Intelligent machines can engineer themselves and their
environment to meet their needs. Clearly machine intelligence is
superior to biological intelligence and will quickly surpass it once
it arises.

.

On Mar 31, 8:09 pm, Willie.Moo...@gmail.com wrote:

Quote:

Brad Guth:
You folks are continually excluding the happenstance of panspermia,

That's because panspermia can only happen after life arises.

There you go again, with your 'all or nothing' black hole worth of

insurmountable naysayism and otherwise narrow mindset. Thinking that
all is exactly as originally created, with absolutely no variations
other than a continual expansion, without mergers or forbid little
bangs. Therefore you don't even believe in the hard-science of our
226 million year galactic cycle, much less accept any other stellar
cycle or interactions because, as such that scary thought alone would
tend to deflate part of your singular BIG-BANG that somehow started
off from next to nothing, short of a massive black hole (which means
there should be at least one other universe, that's perhaps more
antimatter)

Clearly you and others of your kind have no true faith whatsoever.
Your whatever born-again mindset is in a perpetual butt-sucking denial
mode of being in denial, because, clearly that's exactly what best
suits the status quo that you're continually sucking your mainstream
boxed brown nose up to.

You don't believe there's another living thing that's off-world, much
less intelligent worthy.

You want all of us to believe that your silly, arrogant, greedy and
highly bigoted Earth that's going somewhat GW postal is it, and every
bit as good as it ever gets, or perhaps the very best your terrestrial
limited God could manage to pull off.

Quote:

Once post-biological self-reproducing intelligences transcend human
intelligence they will displace humans and expand across the cosmos
uncontrained by our biologiy.

I agree, that us pathetic humans don't hardly have a degree of
intelligence, other than our superior intelligence of LLPOF greed,
arrogance and insurmountable bigotry without a speck of remorse. I
think the best available evidence has been telling us, such ETs of
"self-reproducing intelligences" that's clearly superior to that of
our species has happened as of some time ago, whereas your "2030-2040
time frame" of us coming up to their speed or on a par with such ETs
isn't very realistic, nor all that likely since most of us will likely
become dead from the ongoing GW or WWIII, or perhaps via some other
orchestrated sub-biological alternatives (like the ongoing
exterminations of bees and diatoms) that your kind of folks are good
at insuring.
-

Therefore, regardless of the laws of physics or of the mounting
evidence that's at hand, you'd just as soon exclude, disregard and/or
banish any such truth-worthy notions that'll rock your good ship
LOLLIPOP. I think Hitler would have been damn proud of folks like
yourself, which of course he was very much impressed with the Jewish
expertise in science and physics, as having put so much of it to good
use.

You're also the type that sees nothing the least bit improper with the
past, with the current status or the future of whatever your kind have
enstore for the rest of us. If we forked over a spare trillion hard
earned dollars for NASA to put your pathetic species of humanity upon
Mars, that amount obviously wouldn't be nearly good enough. I'm not
even sure if 100 trillion or more of such loot would be sufficient for
keeping your kind of perverted mindset off the public streets, just
like your good buddy Hitler and so many of his Jewish minions could
never get enough.

Why not instead of the ends continually justifying whatever the means,
reconsider as to what's good and/or best for the lower 99.9% of
humanity, and that of salvaging our badly failing environment (it's
called focus), instead of your continually sucking up to the upper
most 0.1% that supposedly keeps you as part of their sick Usenet alpha
team of MI/NSA spooks, moles and otherwise Third Reich rusemasters
that have far more ulterior motives and hidden agendas than our
resident LLPOF warlord(GW Bush).

Arnt you a little better and/or a kinder soul than most?

How hocus-pocus or rusemaster worthy is "Willie Moo"?
-
Brad Guth

Guest

Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 6:41 am

Is that it, only a few thousand "Willie Moo" hocus-pocus words and
still nothing of topic related truth to behold?

Is your faith-based conditional laws of physics, and of evidence
exclusion going damage-control postal?

What part of LLPOF is simply way over your naysay head and mindset
buttology of being such a rusemaster?

You realize that you and others of your brown-nosed minion kind
intentionally associate yourselves with the likes of Hitler, don't
you.

Got that 3D interactive solar system simulator up and running? (didn't
think so)

Are you planning upon putting another one of your own kind on a stick,
just to prove a point that your cult is worthy of the Skull and Bones?
-
Brad Guth

Guest

Posted: Mon Apr 02, 2007 7:07 am

Think icy proto-moon, with perhaps as much as 262 km of salty ice on
deck.

Think creation of a few ocean basins, and of their antipodes.

Think regular laws of physics, as related to the gravity and tidal
affects upon Earth's environment (inside and out).

Think outside the mainstream status quo box.

Think independently of others.

Deductively connect those dots.

Earth without a few significant lunar impacts would have become a 100%
ocean world, w/o seasons.

Much of Earth's vertical geology of ocean basins and antipodes is
relatively newish since the last ice age this silly dumbfounded planet
of mostly faith-based naysayism will ever see.
-
Brad Guth

Guest

Posted: Wed Apr 04, 2007 8:57 pm

Earth may in fact be a rare and unique planet (it's certainly by far
the most dumbfounded planet) along with having an even more than rare
moon, but nearby Venus is by far a whole lot more interesting, along
with raw energy potential to burn (sort of speak). Too bad we're not
the least bit smart enough to realize the wealth of such a terrific
and newish planetology that's so nearby.

While Mars is fully capable of freezing your nuts off, Venus L2 is in
fact humanly cool enough to the naked touch. However, Venus itself is
not the least bit too hot to touch with the Ovglove. That is as long
as you don't run yourself out of ice cold beer and pizza, in that I
really don't see all that much of a problem unless it's because of
your head that's still stuck up your evidence excluding ass.

As long as you've got way more spare/renewable energy at your
disposal, more than you could possibly know what to do with, and by
having that nifty thermal suit made by Ovglove, where's the big-ass
insurmountable problem with taking that hot-foot of a toasty stroll on
Venus?

CO2-->CO/O2 is not hardly a technical problem, hasn't been for a good
decade or more.

Pure H2O (as many teratonnes worth as you'd like) as easily extracted
from those somewhat cool nighttime acidic clouds (above the S8 layer)
is simply another mission positive win-win for making more ice cold
beer or the likes of h2o2.

The 65 kg/m3 worth of buoyancy as also working right along with the
90.5% gravity (makes it worthy of 72 kg/m3), offering a couple of
other nifty factors that'll work rather well for your composite rigid
airship (just like on behalf of those Venusian composite rigid
airships).

If you're any damn good at PhotoShop, goto:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
or perhaps it's best you start with your very own look-see at the
following official image site:
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/hires/mgn_c115s095_1.gif

The 36 look per pixel of that primary GIF image format starts getting
downright interesting at being 3X resampled, and then giving it all
the best PhotoShop or whatever else you can muster, although the
original GIF 1:1 image was actually good enough for my PhotoShop
configured brain to deductively interpret upon what's most likely
artificial as opposed to what's perfectly natural. 36 looks per pixel
is offering a lot of truthworthy image data to start with, so it's a
good one to stick with rather than dealing with their individual 75
meter/pixel versions as having combined but four looks per pixel.

Don't even try to process the entire image unless you've got one heck
of a nifty PC or MAC. Try cropping out the small portion of the total
image that's roughly a third up from the bottom and just to the right
of center, as we're talking about utilizing less than 10% or perhaps
even as little as 5% from that primary GIF image, and to process upon
just that much shouldn't traumatise your limited memory or lower
performance PC or MAC.

I'll honestly review each of your results, that by rights should
become a whole lot better than mine. Obviously anyone can over/under
force those PhotoShop refinements, well past the point of no return,
so don't do that. My extremely old version of PhotoShop can't hardly
accomplish much better than 8X resampling without losing ground, and
besides, we don't actually require much better than 6X for most others
to see clearly as to what I'd first interpreted from the original 1:1
format.

Thanks once again to 'tomcat' for also having posted this updated page
of Venus images.
http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/imgcat/thumbnail_pages/venus_thumbnails.html

It's image No.17 from the top left being the one that so happens to
include the robust, rather sizable and somewhat complex community of
'GUTH Venus'.
"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
-
Brad Guth

Brad Guth

Posted: Fri Apr 06, 2007 9:21 am

Guest

If Earth is supposedly the most rare of any planet, and otherwise the
most "Fermi paradox" rated lucky orb within our galaxy (certainly the
most wet, salted, naked moon traumatised and summarily dumb and dumber
dumbfounded past the point of no return), then what's to shame or to
lose, as to other than appreciate as to why are you silly folks remain
so deathly afraid of your own cloak and dagger shadows?

Why not nail my butt along with so many others that dare to question the
almighty holy grail of your NASA/Apollo koran, by way of utilizing any
one of those spendy 'tax paid for' supercomputers, that are just sitting
around doing next to nothing, if anything important?

Why not easily soft-modify either KECK instrument as I'd specified?

Why not have a platform of nifty Earth/moon science instruments cruising
efficiently within the moon's L1? (as of decades ago)

Can you folks say 'anticathode'?
As in how much more anticathode worthy is that naked moon, as opposed to
the given maximum density worth of the Van Allen belt(s)?

Can you share as to the voltage and joules worth of energy potential
that our naked moon represents?

Can you folks even specify as to the polarity or alternating energy
worth of whatever that naked, massive, nearby and physically dark moon
relates to Earth?

Can you offer us your best swag, as to the gravity/tidal energy worth
that's getting forced upon our environment?
-
Brad Guth

--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Brad Guth

Posted: Fri Apr 06, 2007 11:05 am

Guest

On Apr 3, 10:25 am, Andrew Nowicki <and...@nospam.com> wrote:

Quote:

Andrew Nowicki wrote:
I agree. If it had happened, asial/granite layer of uniform
thickness would have covered the entire surface of theEarth.
Greg Neill wrote:
Why? The process isn't uniform today (we have continents
that are adrift). Why should a uniform layer have been the
result?

Because the entire surface of theEarthwas liquid and the
shape of thesiallayer was determined by gravity and density.

Greg Neill wrote:
When you hit something really, really hard, the pieces tend
to liquefy and then splash down in gobs. The continental
bits could have been large splashes ofsialthat landed,
coalesced, and solidified.

There are 2 options:

1. Low energy option. The splashes thoroughly mixsialand
sima. This is not the present-day geological structure of theEarthcrust. In realitysialis separate from sima and it
is on top of sima because it has lower density. The low
energy option is next to impossible because the minimum
velocity of the collision is the escape velocity (11.2 km/s).
When the velocity is so high, solids become liquids, vapors
and plasma. The liquid splash could not hold its 70 km high
shape against the force of gravity.

2. High energy option. The temperature is so high that the
Entire surface of theEarthis liquid.Sialfloats on top
and solidifies as a layer of uniform thickness. This is not
the present-day structure of theEarthcrust either.

I very much appreciate your honest thinking, even if it's a little
outside the status quo or bust infomercial box as to what most of these
mainstreamers are insisting is Old Testament mindset otherwise.

I happen to think Earth's sial surface got extensively modified if not
more than a little replaced by and/or converted via a glancing blow, and
otherwise via moon salt. A not so old encounter of the extremely salty
and icy proto-moon kind (say at most 4000 km), that helped to establish
our seasonal tilt and having antipode morphed Earth's surface from such
an original blow, plus having contributed multiple secondary icy
impacts, of such lithobraking encounters having nailed our less wet and
much less salty mother Earth but good.

There's no argumant that Earth has survived many horrific impacts and
resulting antipodes. Not all such free-wheeling orbs should be so
lucky, as to having survived such encounters.

If Earth is supposedly the most rare of any planet, and otherwise the
most "Fermi paradox" rated lucky orb within our galaxy (certainly the
most wet, salted, naked moon traumatised and summarily dumb and dumber
populated as becoming dumbfounded past the point of no return) because
of our having somehow survived in spite of missing so much of its sial,
then what's possibly to shame or to lose, as to other than appreciate as
to why these silly naysay folks remain as so deathly afraid of their own
cloak and dagger shadows?

I wonder, why not easily nail my butt along with so many others that
dare to question that almighty holy grail of their NASA/Apollo koran, by
way of utilizing any one of those spendy 'tax paid for' and thus public
owned supercomputers, that are just sitting around doing next to
nothing, if anything important?

Why the heck not easily soft-modify either KECK instrument as I'd
specified, for a much closer look-see at our somewhat salty moon that
has all of those massive yet unusually shallow craters (as though having
been impact protected by a thick layer of ice)?

Why not have an affordable platform of nifty Earth/moon science
instruments cruising efficiently within the moon's L1? (as of decades
ago)

I'd have to bet that we could accomplish a 1000X telephoto of mirror
optics onto a fairly large 35mm format CCD, and without all that much
effort as of today.

Can any of you naysaying folks say 'anticathode'?
As in how much more energy collective and unavoidably anticathode worthy
is that naked moon, as opposed to the given maximum density worth of
those Van Allen belts?

Can any one here in Usenet land share as to the voltage and joules worth
of energy potential that our naked moon represents?

Can any of you kind all-knowing folks even specify as to the voltage
polarity or alternating energy worth of whatever that naked, massive,
nearby and physically dark moon relates to Earth?

Can you offer us your best swag, as to the gravity/tidal energy worth of
raw energy that's getting forced upon or into our environment, and of
otherwise contributed deep into Earth's fluid core, that's continually
happening to us, especially as of the very last ice age this planet will
ever see?
-
Brad Guth

--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG

Guest

Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 3:48 pm

What, no moon sial, only salt over basalt and a cosmic morge of other
nasty stuff?

Seems almost as though that pesky GW trauma causing moon of ours had
next to nothing to do with emerging itself from within Earth, at least
not otherwise involved with our environment until nearly after the
very last ice age cycle this planet will ever see.

Where do we suppose the big enough summer/winter required shift in
thermal energy from whatever solar influx (or lack thereof) came from?

I believe we're talking of having to force perhaps +/- 10 w/m2 (that's
20 w/m2 unaccounted for)

Those deep ice core samples simply do not indicate a required shift in
Earth's S8, much less any multiple 100,000 year cycle of containing
any such S8 that would have been required.

What other raw element (besides h2o) as atmospherically worthy has
Earth got to work with, that would not represent too heavy of an
element, of which S8 is most certainly too heavy at roughly 2 g/cm3
(though just about right for Venus).

Co2 is essentially a surface hugging element (at most available to the
first km or so off the deck), and typically it's crystal clear as a
chapel bell unless it's hauling about our soot and a few other toxic
elements, that for the most part only humanity has introduced.

Are they suggesting that every 100,000 years Earth was so extensively
over populated with the likes of us heathens? (I don't think so)
-
Brad Guth

Market Theory

Posted: Mon Apr 30, 2007 11:47 pm

Guest

On Mar 28, 10:57 am, Matt Giwer <jul...@tampabay.REMover.rr.com>
wrote:
....

Quote:

The only issue with Venus is the amount of atmosphere. It is not clear how
Earth's relative lack of atmosphere can be explained....

AFAIK Venus's current atmosphere is secondary to its loss of water.
Runaway H2O greenhouse -> loss of water by UV dissociation -> dry
planet with nowhere for CO2 from volcanos to go -> giant CO2
atmosphere.

Page 3 of 3 Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 All times are GMT - 5 Hours The time now is Fri Dec 05, 2008 1:39 am Science Forum Index