Venus' mysterious night side revealed

September 15, 2017
Venus Express in orbit. Credit: ESA

Scientists have used ESA's Venus Express to characterise the wind and upper cloud patterns on the night side of Venus for the first time–with surprising results.

The study shows that the atmosphere on Venus' side behaves very differently to that on the side of the planet facing the Sun (the 'dayside'), exhibiting unexpected and previously-unseen cloud types, morphologies, and dynamics - some of which appear to be connected to features on the planet's surface.

"This is the first time we've been able to characterise how the atmosphere circulates on the night side of Venus on a global scale," says Javier Peralta of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), Japan, and lead author of the new study published in the journal Nature Astronomy. "While the atmospheric circulation on the planet's dayside has been extensively explored, there was still much to discover about the night side. We found that the cloud patterns there are different to those on the dayside, and influenced by Venus' topography."

Venus' atmosphere is dominated by strong winds that whirl around the planet far faster than Venus itself rotates. This phenomenon, known as 'super-rotation', sees Venusian winds rotating up to 60 times faster than the planet below, pushing and dragging along within the atmosphere as they go. These clouds travel fastest at the upper cloud level, some 65 to 72 km above the surface.

This mosaic illustrates the atmospheric super-rotation at the upper clouds of Venus. While the super-rotation is present in both day and night sides of Venus, it seems more uniform in the day (AKATSUKI-UVI image at 360 nm, right side), while in the night this seems to become more irregular and unpredictable (composite of Venus Express/VIRTIS images at 3.8 µm, left). Credit: ESA, JAXA, J. Peralta and R. Hueso

"We've spent decades studying these super-rotating winds by tracking how the upper clouds move on Venus' dayside–these are clearly visible in images acquired in ultraviolet light," explains Peralta. "However, our models of Venus remain unable to reproduce this super-rotation, which clearly indicates that we might be missing some pieces of this puzzle.

"We focused on the night side because it had been poorly explored; we can see the upper clouds on the planet's night side via their thermal emission, but it's been difficult to observe them properly because the contrast in our infrared images was too low to pick up enough detail."

The team used the Visible and Infrared Thermal Imaging Spectrometer (VIRTIS) on ESA's Venus Express spacecraft to observe the clouds in the infrared. "VIRTIS enabled us to see these clouds properly for the first time, allowing us to explore what previous teams could not–and we discovered unexpected and surprising results," adds Peralta.

These panels show examples of new types of cloud morphology discovered on the night side of Venus thanks to ESA's Venus Express and NASA's infrared telescope IRTF. Top row, from left to right: stationary waves observed by Venus Express, "net" patterns observed with IRTF; Bottom row: mysterious filaments (left) and dynamical instabilities (right) observed by Venus Express. Credit: ESA, NASA, J. Peralta and R. Hueso

Rather than capturing single images, VIRTIS gathered a 'cube' of hundreds of images of Venus acquired simultaneously at different wavelengths. This allowed the team to combine numerous images to improve the visibility of the clouds, and see them at unprecedented quality. The VIRTIS images thus reveal phenomena on Venus' night side that have never before been seen on the dayside.

The best models for how Venus' atmosphere behaves and circulates, known as Global Circulation Models (GCMs), predict super-rotation to occur in much the same way on Venus' night side as on its dayside. However, this research by Peralta and his colleagues contradicts these models.

Instead, the super-rotation seems to be more irregular and chaotic on the night side.

This sequence of images, taken with the VIRTIS instrument on Venus Express, shows stationary waves in the clouds above the night side of the planet. Observing the thermal emission from clouds in the upper layers of Venus's atmosphere has been difficult because the contrast in infrared images was low. A team of scientists, led by Javier Peralta of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), used the Visible and Infrared Thermal Imaging Spectrometer (VIRTIS) on ESA's Venus Express spacecraft to see the clouds properly for the first time, allowing them to explore what previous teams could not. Night side upper clouds form different shapes and morphologies than those found elsewhere–large, wavy, patchy, irregular, and filament-like patterns, many of which are unseen in dayside images–and are dominated by unmoving phenomena known as stationary waves. These waves are concentrated over steep, mountainous areas of Venus; this suggests that the planet's topography is affecting what happens up above in the clouds. This sequence runs from 20:11:10 UTC on 27 April 2007 to 01:11:10 UTC on 28 April 2007, and was taken with the 3.9 micron filter. Careful examination shows that some of the cloud features do not move. Credit: ESA/VIRTIS/J. Peralta and R. Hueso


This sequence of images, taken with the VIRTIS instrument on Venus Express, shows stationary waves in the clouds above the night side of the planet. Observing the thermal emission from clouds in the upper layers of Venus's atmosphere has been difficult because the contrast in infrared images was low. A team of scientists, led by Javier Peralta of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), used the Visible and Infrared Thermal Imaging Spectrometer (VIRTIS) on ESA's Venus Express spacecraft to see the clouds properly for the first time, allowing them to explore what previous teams could not. Night side upper clouds form different shapes and morphologies than those found elsewhere–large, wavy, patchy, irregular, and filament-like patterns, many of which are unseen in dayside images–and are dominated by unmoving phenomena known as stationary waves. These waves are concentrated over steep, mountainous areas of Venus; this suggests that the planet's topography is affecting what happens up above in the clouds. This sequence runs from 20:11:10 UTC on 27 April 2007 to 01:11:10 UTC on 28 April 2007, and was taken with the 3.9 micron filter. Careful examination shows that some of the cloud features do not move. Credit: ESA/VIRTIS/J. Peralta and R. Hueso
Night side upper clouds form different shapes and morphologies than those found elsewhere–large, wavy, patchy, irregular, and filament-like patterns, many of which are unseen in dayside images–and are dominated by unmoving phenomena known as stationary waves.

The 3-D properties of these stationary waves were also obtained by combining VIRTIS data with radio-science data from the Venus Radio Science experiment, or VeRa, also on Venus Express.

A link between atmospheric motion and topography has been spied on Venus before, although on the dayside; in a study from last year, researchers found weather patterns and rising waves on the dayside of Venus to be directly connected to topographic features on the surface.

"It was an exciting moment when we realised that some of the cloud features in the VIRTIS images didn't move along with the atmosphere," says Peralta. "We had a long debate about whether the results were real–until we realised that another team, led by co-author Dr. Kouyama, had also independently discovered stationary clouds on the night side using NASA's Infrared Telescope Facility (IRTF) in Hawaii! Our findings were confirmed when JAXA's Akatsuki spacecraft was inserted into orbit around Venus and immediately spotted the biggest stationary wave ever observed in the Solar System on Venus' dayside."

This finding raises challenges for existing models of stationary waves. Such waves were expected to be formed by surface winds interacting with obstacles such as surface elevations–a mountain, for example. However, previous Russian missions involving landers have measured surface winds on Venus that may be too weak for this to be true.

Additionally, the planet's southern hemisphere (where VIRTIS observed) is generally quite low in elevation, and–more mysteriously–stationary waves appear to be missing in Venus' intermediate and lower cloud levels (up to roughly 50 km above the surface).

This pair of images, taken with the VIRTIS instrument on Venus Express, shows stationary waves in the clouds above the night side of the planet. Observing the thermal emission from clouds in the upper layers of Venus's atmosphere has been difficult because the contrast in infrared images was low. A team of scientists, led by Javier Peralta of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), used the Visible and Infrared Thermal Imaging Spectrometer (VIRTIS) on ESA's Venus Express spacecraft to see the clouds properly for the first time, allowing them to explore what previous teams could not. Night side upper clouds form different shapes and morphologies than those found elsewhere–large, wavy, patchy, irregular, and filament-like patterns, many of which are unseen in dayside images–and are dominated by unmoving phenomena known as stationary waves. These waves are concentrated over steep, mountainous areas of Venus; this suggests that the planet's topography is affecting what happens up above in the clouds. This pair show cloud cover at 19:06:56 UTC on 9 January 2007 and 1.5 hours later, and was taken with the 3.9 micron filter. Careful examination shows that some of the cloud features do not move. Credit: ESA/VIRTIS/J. Peralta and R. Hueso


This pair of images, taken with the VIRTIS instrument on Venus Express, shows stationary waves in the clouds above the night side of the planet. Observing the thermal emission from clouds in the upper layers of Venus's atmosphere has been difficult because the contrast in infrared images was low. A team of scientists, led by Javier Peralta of the Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), used the Visible and Infrared Thermal Imaging Spectrometer (VIRTIS) on ESA's Venus Express spacecraft to see the clouds properly for the first time, allowing them to explore what previous teams could not. Night side upper clouds form different shapes and morphologies than those found elsewhere–large, wavy, patchy, irregular, and filament-like patterns, many of which are unseen in dayside images–and are dominated by unmoving phenomena known as stationary waves. These waves are concentrated over steep, mountainous areas of Venus; this suggests that the planet's topography is affecting what happens up above in the clouds. This pair show cloud cover at 13:35:23 UTC on 29 April 2008 and one hour later, and was taken with the 3.9 micron filter. Careful examination shows that some of the cloud features do not move. Credit: ESA/VIRTIS/J. Peralta and R. Hueso
"We expected to find these waves in the lower levels because we see them in the upper levels, and we thought that they rose up through the cloud from the surface," says co-author Ricardo Hueso of University of the Basque Country in Bilbao, Spain. "It's an unexpected result for sure, and we'll all need to revisit our models of Venus to explore its meaning."

The effect of topography on atmospheric circulation remains unclear among climate modellers; many models show that the inclusion or omission of surface topography makes a difference to the resulting behaviour seen in Venus' atmosphere, but do not show persistent weather patterns linked to topography.

"This study challenges our current understanding of climate modelling and, specifically, the super-rotation, which is a key phenomenon seen at Venus," says Håkan Svedhem, ESA Project Scientist for Venus Express. "Additionally, it demonstrates the power of combining data from multiple different sources–in this case, remote sensing and radio-science data from Venus Express' VIRTIS and VeRa, complemented by ground-based observations from IRTF's SpeX. This is a significant result for VIRTIS and for Venus Express, and is very important for our knowledge of Venus as a whole."

Explore further: Venus's turbulent atmosphere

More information: Tetsuya Fukuhara et al. Large stationary gravity wave in the atmosphere of Venus, Nature Geoscience (2017). DOI: 10.1038/ngeo2873

J. Peralta et al. Stationary waves and slowly moving features in the night upper clouds of Venus, Nature Astronomy (2017). DOI: 10.1038/s41550-017-0187

Related Stories

Venus's turbulent atmosphere

July 25, 2017

Venus is often referred to as Earth's twin because both planets share a similar size and sur-face composition. Also, they both have atmospheres with complex weather systems. But that is about where the similarities end: Venus ...

Complex meteorology at Venus

October 13, 2006

In its relentless probing of Venus's atmosphere, ESA's Venus Express keeps revealing new details of the Venusian cloud system. Meteorology at Venus is a complex matter, scientists say.

Views of Venus day and night side

May 19, 2014

This sequence of images was taken by the Ultraviolet/Visible/Near-Infrared spectrometer (VIRTIS) on board ESA's Venus Express spacecraft between 12 and 19 April 2006, during the first orbit (capture orbit) around the planet.

Image: Venus Express snaps swirling vortex

January 20, 2015

This ghostly puff of smoke is actually a mass of swirling gas and cloud at Venus' south pole, as seen by the Visible and Infrared Thermal Imaging Spectrometer (VIRTIS) aboard ESA's Venus Express spacecraft.

Tracking alien turbulences

April 3, 2007

New images and data from ESA's mission to Venus provide new insights into the turbulent and noxious atmosphere of Earth's sister planet. What causes violent winds and turbulences? Is the surface topography playing a role ...

Image: Understanding the atmosphere of Venus

November 10, 2015

On 9 November 2005, 10 years ago today, ESA's Venus Express spacecraft left Earth and began its 153-day journey to Venus. The craft then spent eight years studying the planet in detail before the mission came to an end in ...

Recommended for you

NASA telescope studies quirky comet 45P

November 22, 2017

When comet 45P zipped past Earth early in 2017, researchers observing from NASA's Infrared Telescope Facility, or IRTF, in Hawai'i gave the long-time trekker a thorough astronomical checkup. The results help fill in crucial ...

Uncovering the origins of galaxies' halos

November 21, 2017

Using the Subaru Telescope atop Maunakea, researchers have identified 11 dwarf galaxies and two star-containing halos in the outer region of a large spiral galaxy 25 million light-years away from Earth. The findings, published ...

Cassini image mosaic: A farewell to Saturn

November 21, 2017

In a fitting farewell to the planet that had been its home for over 13 years, the Cassini spacecraft took one last, lingering look at Saturn and its splendid rings during the final leg of its journey and snapped a series ...

62 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Chris_Reeve
1.8 / 5 (10) Sep 15, 2017
Article: "our models of Venus remain unable to reproduce this super-rotation, which clearly indicates that we might be missing some pieces of this puzzle."

"The mystery of Venus' internal heat", Nov. 13 1980 issue of New Scientist

"Two years' surveillance by the Pioneer Venus Orbiter seems to show that Venus is radiating away more energy than it receives from the Sun. If this surprising result is confirmed, it means that the planet itself is producing far more heat than the Earth does.

F.W. Taylor, of the Clarendon Laboratory at Oxford, presented these measurements at the Royal Society meeting last week. Venus's surface temperature is higher than any other in the solar system, at 480 C. The generally accepted theory is that sunlight is absorbed at Venus's surface, and re-radiated as infrared. The latter is absorbed in the atmosphere, which thus acts as a blanket keeping the planet hot. It is similar to the way a greenhouse keeps warm ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1.8 / 5 (10) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

"Pioneer has shown that there is enough carbon dioxide (and the tiny proportion of water vapour) needed to make the greenhouse effect work -- just. If this is the whole story, the total amount of radiation emitted back into space, after its journey up through the atmospheric blanket, must be exactly equal to that absorbed from sunlight (otherwise the surface temperature would be continuously changing).

But Taylor found that Venus radiates 15 per cent more energy than it receives. To keep the surface temperature constant, Venus must be producing this extra heat from within.

All the inner planets, including the Earth, produce internal heat from radioactive elements in their rocks ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1.8 / 5 (10) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

"But Taylor's observations of Venus would mean that the planet is producing almost 10,000 times more heat than the Earth -- and it is inconceivable, according to present theories of planetary formation, that Venus should have thousands of times more of the radioactive elements than the Earth does. At last week's meeting, Taylor's suggestion met with scepticism -- not to say sheer disbelief -- from other planetary scientists.

Taylor himself has no explanation for his result. He simply points out that the discrepancy seemed at first to be simply experimental error -- but with more precise measurement it refused to go away. More measurements are needed before astronomers accept the result, and most planetary scientists are obviously expecting -- and hoping -- that the embarrassing extra heat will disappear on further investigation."
cantdrive85
1.7 / 5 (11) Sep 15, 2017
"However, our models of Venus remain unable to reproduce this super-rotation, which clearly indicates that we might be missing some pieces of this puzzle.

Clearly, something "dark" needs to be invented.
large, wavy, patchy, irregular, and filament-like patterns,

Ah ha, a clue to be ignored by the plasma ignoramuses.
"This study challenges our current understanding of climate modelling..."

This includes the Earth as well, and is precisely the reason skepticism for AGW is valid. The plasma ignoramuses are blind to real plasma physics in favor for their fanciful mathematical based guesses about plasmas.
Chris_Reeve
1.4 / 5 (9) Sep 15, 2017
http://www.newdaw...en-right

"... In 1939, Velikovsky brought his family to New York City, planning to spend the summer engaged in research at Columbia University's library. He was compiling a psycho-historical text to outline the many intriguing parallels he had uncovered between the Greek literary character Oedipus and the Egyptian Pharaoh Akhnaton.

This research, however, was soon sidelined when Velikovsky uncovered an Egyptian papyrus called 'The Admonitions of Ipuwer,' a text that seemed to provide historical confirmation for biblical accounts of the 10 plagues in Egypt at the time of Moses. Intrigued that the biblical account might possibly have foundation in actual historic events, Velikovsky began to seek out other ancient references that might serve to uphold that point of view ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1.4 / 5 (9) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

"Using the techniques of a comparative mythologist, Velikovsky began a comprehensive review of ancient texts from around the world dating from that same time period, and produced a body of supporting evidence that was more substantial than he at first imagined.

The ancient texts presented what he saw as a kind of universality of theme relating to reports of global calamity -- descriptions of,

- fire raining from the sky
- violent earthquakes
- volcanoes erupting
- displacement of great bodies of water,

... and similar disasters of seeming mythic proportion.

At the same time he also began a search for references that might point to some real-world agent capable of inflicting the kinds of misfortunes described in the Book of Exodus. He eventually settled on the theoretic close approach of a comet to the Earth as the type of natural event that most closely fits the profile of destructive consequences described in the texts."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1.4 / 5 (9) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

"This tentative conclusion was upheld in his mind by many explicit ancient references to a fearful wandering comet associated with great calamity.

References to this comet were given by different cultures under various names such as Seth and Typhon. Velikovsky also found himself confused to learn that in some cultures, the names that had been initially assigned to this fearful comet also came later to be associated with the planet Venus.

Meanwhile, Velikovsky became aware of the sudden rise at about that same historical period of what seemed to be a global obsession with tracking the motions of Venus.

Many different cultures began to keep careful written counts of the number of days between the risings and settings of Venus. Tracking Venus is the likely motive that is cited by some historians as having inspired the Oracle Bone texts -- the earliest form of written record known to exist in China."
Chris_Reeve
1.4 / 5 (9) Sep 15, 2017
John Ackerman, "An Alternative View of Venus"

"Thus independent measurements on five vehicles, one measuring the energy emitted into space from the cloud tops, and four measuring some component of the up-welling or net (upwelling minus down-dwelling) energy flux in the atmosphere at completely different geographic locations, are consistent and indicate that Venus is radiating an enormously larger amount of energy than it receives from the Sun. In spite of this data, the authors of every one of these papers deferred to the theoretical model of Pollack, suggesting that all five of the radiation instruments on which their analyses are based, might be in error -- even though there was no indication of problems in the calibration of data ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1.4 / 5 (9) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

"Based strictly on a thermodynamic analysis of the Pioneer Venus radiation data another group stated that neither the greenhouse effect nor global dynamics can explain the net outflow of energy, and that an internal source on Venus must be responsible for the emanating some 250 times the flux radiated by the Earth. Unfortunately, these authors also defer to the Pollack model, suggesting the possibility of instrumental error or that perhaps two of the three small probe sites are atypical of the planet as a whole."
Chris_Reeve
1.4 / 5 (9) Sep 15, 2017
L.G. Young, "Infrared Spectra of Venus," Exploration of the Planetary System (Boston 1974), p.139

"some theoreticians have dismissed perfectly good observations under the assumption that the data were 'noisy' because conditions on Venus appeared to vary on a short time scale, a situation that could not occur in their models ...

There has been a profusion of crude, oversimplified models which have 'explained' discrepancies between theory and observation as due to effects not included in the theory. Thus there has been a tendency to claim 'agreement' with the observations prematurely. Finally, not only have wrong interpretations of the data been widely accepted at various times, but some correct interpretations have been rejected for long periods of time ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (8) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

"What interpretation is 'acceptable' has been colored by prejudices (Venus is/isn't like the Earth, the curve of growth does/doesn't apply to a scattering atmosphere, etc.) so that major questions appear to have been decided more on emotional than on rational grounds."
Solon
1.4 / 5 (9) Sep 15, 2017
"But Taylor found that Venus radiates 15 per cent more energy than it receives. To keep the surface temperature constant, Venus must be producing this extra heat from within."

The Atmospheric Light Transformer model explains their findings. There is no visible Sunlight at Venus,or anywhere else, the light and heat is produced by conversion of shorter wavelength Solar radiation to visible and IR by and within the atmosphere. There is no need for an internal heat source.

Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Sep 15, 2017
H. E. Revercomb, L. A. Sromovsky, and V. E. Suomi, "Net Thermal Radiation in the Atmosphere of Venus," _Icarus_ 61, p521-538 (1985)

"The magnitudes of the CORRECTIONS for both instruments are determined by FORCING AGREEMENT with a range of CALCULATED net fluxes at one altitude deep in the atmosphere, where the net flux MUST BE small because of the large density of co2."
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Sep 15, 2017
Michael Shermer's The Skeptic Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience

"But there was no excess of energy radiated from the planet (since the thick atmosphere effectively contained the high surface temperature). The total radiated energy was in balance with absorbed sunlight, and it did not decline over time. Further, the high surface temperature had an alternative explanation from an atmospheric greenhouse effect."
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 15, 2017
Richard A. Kerr, "Venus: Not Simple of Familiar, But Interesting," Science, Vol. 207 (1980), p. 289

"The question concerns how the sun's energy behaves once it penetrates the highest clouds. When Pioneer Venus's probes looked at the amount of radiant energy passing through the atmosphere, each one found more energy being radiated up from the lower atmosphere than enters it as sunlight. At first blush, it would seem that the atmosphere violates the laws of thermodynamics by transferring heat energy from the cool clouds to the hot lower atmosphere, from which it is then radiated. To further complicate the situation, the size of the apparent upward flow of energy varies from place to place by a factor of 2, which was a disturbing discovery about a planet thought to be relatively uniform ...

The much bally-hooed greenhouse effect of Venus's carbon dioxide atmosphere can account for only part of the heating, and evidence for other heating mechanisms is now in a turmoil."
rustolio
1 / 5 (3) Sep 15, 2017
I tell my Sunday school students that the larger amount of heat is from the train tracks since they keep the trains running contiuously. The lines in the clouds on the night side are because they turn the lights lower to save energy.
rrwillsj
2.8 / 5 (9) Sep 15, 2017
As long as the sideshow of drivel-happy evangelists of pseudo-scientific bunkum are babbling away....

I want to join in with a list of profitable con-artists of Classical Swindles.

John Keely's Apergy engine
Prosper-Rene Blondlot and his miraculous N-rays
T.T.Brown inventing electro-gravitics

And myself being a dissolute scoundrel, my absolute favorite remains
Franciszek Rychnowski who started by discovering eteroids. And went on to invent the orgone box for our salacious amusement.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 15, 2017
https://books.goo...;f=false

Venus and the Cosmic Connection

"Repeatedly, these calamities were attributed to a malicious deity almost invariably a goddess coming to wreak havoc upon the Earth. Although the actual names naturally varied, the deity involved turned out time and time again to be the one that cultures worldwide associated with the object we know today as the planet Venus. But they didn't talk about it as if it were a planet -- they described it as a comet. A Chinese text describes Venus as spanning the heavens, rivaling the Sun in brightness. Mexican astronomers referred to it as 'the star that smokes,' while on the opposite side of the world the same theme is found in the Hindu Vedas, the Hebrew Talmud, and the Egyptian description of Sekhmet ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

"The Aztecs called Venus the 'heart' of Quetzlcoatl, which in turn means 'plumed serpent,' with feathers that signify fire. The serpent or dragon is one of the most common figures used in the ancient world to signify 'comet,' examples being the Greek Typhon, Egyptian Set, Babylonian Tiamat, Hindu Vrta, all of whom raged across the sky and brought destruction upon the world.

The word 'comet' comes from the Greek coma, meaning hair, and among ancient astronomers referred to a star with hair, or a beard. The same appellation was given to Venus. One of the Mexican names for Venus was 'the mane' -- the Peruvian name, chaska, means 'wavy-haired'; the Arabs call Venus 'the one with hair.' One of the most vivid comet images is the Babylonian goddess Ishtar, recognized universally as representing Venus. Ishtar is described as being 'the bright torch of heaven,' 'clothed in fire,' and the 'fearful dragon,' while her heavenly manifestation is known as the 'bearded star.'"
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 15, 2017
Excerpts from The Many Faces of Venus: The Planet Venus in Ancient Myth and Religion
by Ev Cochrane
(2001)

(just the parts which trace Venus to its former cometary appearance)

"Chapter 2: The Female Star

[...]

A survey of Venus-lore reveals a diverse set of intriguing and endlessly recurring themes: the planet as female or goddess; the planet as agent of war, death, and destruction; the planet as witch-like hag; the planet as 'eye' of heaven; the planet as paramour of Mars ... A systematic analysis of these various mythological themes, in turn, allows for the reconstruction of an archetypal Venus myth which, in a very real sense, represents mankind's collective memory of our neighbor's tumultuous recent history."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

"... the planet's consistent association with the female sex is commonly acknowledged and readily demonstratable. Thus, in his recent book on Venus, Peter Cattermole noted that 'a female association is almost universal.' [2] And so it is, despite occasional statements to the contrary. [3]"

[2] P Cattermole, Venus: The Geological Story (Baltimore, 1994), p.1

[3] Following the lead of Anthony Aveni, Grinspoon op. cit. p.24, writes that: "It is simply not true that a female association is general." In support of this statement, Grinspoon points to Quetzalcoatl and Tlahuizcalpanteuctli as classic male Venus deities. Here it can be shown that most of the male deities which various scholars have hitherto identified with Venus are actually Martian in origin. See the discussion in E. Cochrane, "Mars Gods of the New World," Aeon 4:1 (1995), pp.47-63.

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

"Among the Arabic peoples of Northern Syria and the Mesopotamian desert, Venus was known as al-'Uzza and envisaged as a powerful female warrior. [4] This planetary goddess is well-attested in ancient sources: 'In sources from the fifth century AD she is identified with Aphrodite by an anonymous Syrian historian; with Kaukabta, 'the female star;' with Balthi, by Isaac of Antioch; and finally with Lucifer, the morning star, by Jerome. [5]"

[4] M. Hofner, "al-'Uzza," in H. Haussig ed., Gotter und Mythen im Vorderen Orient (Stutgart 1976), p.475.

[5] W. Heimpel, "A Catalog of Near Eastern Venus Deities," Syro-Mesopotamian Studies 4:3 (1982), p.19.

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

"The Hebrews knew Venus as Kokebet, a name which translates as 'she-star.' [6] This name finds a cognate in the Syrian name for Venus: Kawkabta."

[6] R. Stieglitz, "The Hebrew Names of the Seven Planets," JNES 40:2 (1981), pp.135-136. See also L. Bobrova & A. Militarev, "From Mesopotamia to Greece: On the Origin of Semitic and Greek Star Names," in H. Galter ed., Die Rolle der Astronomie in den Kulturen Mesopotamiens (Graz, 1993), p.315.

"In ancient Persia, Venus was identified with the voluptuous goddess Anahita, the latter being viewed as a warrior and agent of fertility. [7] A vestige of these ancient traditions is preserved in the Koran, one verse describing the transfiguration of a young woman into the beautiful star Zohra, an Arabic name for Venus. [8] Yet variant traditions name this young woman Anahid. [9]"

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

[7] See Yast 5.85 for Anahita's astral aspect. See also W. Eilers, Sinn und Herkunft der Planetennamen (Munchen, 1976), pp.55; A. Carnoy, "Iranian Mythology," in L. Gray ed., The Mythology of All Races (Boston, 1917), pp.279-280.

[8] Koran 2.96. See also W. Eilers, op. cit. p.55.

[9] J. Puhvel, Comparative Mythology (Baltimore, 1989), p.104.

"In Africa, as well Venus was commonly thought of as female. Among the Rotse, for example, Venus was regarded as the wife of the first man. [10] Analogous ideas prevailed among the Karanga, where Venus was known as Nehanda and accorded the strange ability to transform herself into a serpent. [11]

[10] P. Breutz, "Sotho-Tswana Celestial Concepts," in Ethnological and Linguistic Studies in Honour of N. J. van Warmelo (Pretoria, 1969), p.206.

[11] H. von Sicard, "Karanga Stars," NADA 19 (1943), p.48.

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

"Numerous peoples in the New World also viewed Venus as a female star. The Iroquois of New York knew Venus as 'Star Woman' and held that the sun lit his fire by means of her brilliant torch. [12] A similar conception prevailed among the Chilcotin of British Columbia; they viewed Venus as an old woman holding a torch. [13] The Eastern Pomo Indians of California called Venus Xa'a da, 'Day Woman.' [14] Interestinaly, the Pomo held that Venus served as a guide to the departing soul as it made its way to the celestial hereafter. [15]"

[12] D. Miller, Stars of the First People (Boulder, 1997), p.52.

[13] L. Farand, "Traditions of the Chilcotin Indians," Memoirs of the American Museum of Natural History 4 (1900), p.31.

[14] D. Miller, op. cit. p.144.

[15] Ibid.

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

"Venus was accorded a feminine nature by various peoples of Central and South America as well. Among the Zinacenteco Indians of Mesoamerica, Venus was envisaged as a girl sweeping the path of the sun. [16] The Chamacoco of Paraguay perceived in the planet a beautiful woman named Johle. [17] The Warraus tribe of the Pomeroon knew Venus as Okona-kura. Of this goddess they told the following story: 'She it was who stuck in the hole when her people first came down from above the skies to populate the earth.' [18]"

[16] See E. Vogt, Zinacantan (Cambridge, 1969), pp.316-318. See also the tale quoted by J. Sosa, "Maya Concepts of Astronomical Order," in G. Gossen ed, Symbol and Meaning Beyond the Closed Community (Albany, 1986), p.189.

[17] J. Wilbert & K. Simoneau, Folk Literature of the Chamacoco Indians (Los Angeles, 1987), p.94.

[18] W. Roth, "An Inquiry into the Animism and Folklore of Guiana Indians," Bureau of American Ethnology 30 (1915), p.260.

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

"The Inca knew Venus as a lovely woman by the name of Chasca [19], renowned for her long-flowing hair. An anonymous Jesuit of the seventeenth century described the planet-goddess as especially devoted to women and princesses:

'[Of Venus] they said that she was a goddess of young maidens and princesses, and originator of the flowers of the fields, and mistress of dawn and twilight; and it was she who drew onto the earth when she shook her hair, and they thus called her Chasca.'"

[19] De las costumbres antiguas de los naturales del Piru (Madrid, 1879), as translated by Jan Sammer, "The Cosmology of Tawantinsuyu," Kronos 9:2 (1984), p.25. See also B.C. Brundage, Empire of the Inca (Norman, 1963), p.50.

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

"The ancient Balts knew Venus as Ausrine, represented as a maiden of stunning beauty. She was famous for her long hair and deemed responsible for preserving the sun's fire. [20]"

[20] V Straizys & L. Klimka, "Cosmology of the Ancient Balts," Journal for the History of Astronomy 28 (1997), p.73.

"The Yakuts, an aboriginal people in Siberia, knew the planet by the name Solbon, envisaged as a beautiful girl. [21] A legend first recorded in the last century assigns the planet an ominous aspect:

'She is the bride and sweetheart of Satan's son -- urgel ... When these two stars come close to one another, it is a bad omen; their eager quivering, their discontinuous panting cause great disasters: storms, blizzards, gales. When they unite, fathomdeep snow will fall even in the summer, and all living beings, animals and trees will perish ...' [22]"

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 15, 2017
(cont'd)

[21] L. Mandoki, "Two Asiatic Sidereal Names," in V. Dioszegi ed., Popular Beliefs and Folklore Traditions in Siberia (Bloomington, 1968), p.489. See also U. Holmberg, "Finno-Ugric and Siberian Mythology," in L. Gray ed., The Mythology of All Races (Boston, 1927), p.431.

[22] Ibid., p.489.

"A related Yakut tradition makes the disaster-bringing star the daughter of the Devil:

'It is said to be 'the daughter of the Devil and to have had a tail in the early days.' If it approaches the earth, it means destruction, storm, and frost, even in the summer; 'Saint Leontius, however, blessed her and thus her tail disappeared.'' [23]

[23] Ibid.

Viewed in isolation, such traditions can only seem the stuff of fiction. Yet, when viewed with a critical eye in the light of comparable traditions from around the globe, the suspicion arises that something more than pure fantasy is at work here."
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Sep 15, 2017
H. E. Revercomb, L. A. Sromovsky, and V. E. Suomi, "Net Thermal Radiation in the Atmosphere of Venus," Icarus 61, p521-538 (1985)

"The LIR measurements are reasonable in the clouds, but increase to physically unreasonable levels shortly below the clouds. The probable error source and a correction procedure are identified"

Richard A. Kerr, "Venus: Not Simple of Familiar, But Interesting," Science, Vol. 207 (1980), p. 289

"Possible explanations for this apparent quandary cover a range of speculations. Problems with the instruments are still an issue, but a year of recalibration and analysis in the laboratory has revealed significant errors in only one of the three types of instruments involved."

http://www.amazon...9RXS7S8/

Pioneering Venus: A Planet Unveiled

"One main objective of the Multiprobe mission was to test the belief that the 'runaway greenhouse effect' caused the high surface temperature."
FineStructureConstant
3.5 / 5 (8) Sep 16, 2017
Looks like Chris has finally succumbed to sleep - let's look forward to another hundred or so messages from him about whatever his feverish obsessive mind turns to when he awakes from his slumbers...
Viewed in isolation, such traditions can only seem the stuff of fiction. Yet, when viewed with a critical eye in the light of comparable traditions from around the globe, the suspicion arises that something more than pure fantasy is at work here
"Critical"? Right - whatever, dude...
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 16, 2017
http://sci.esa.in...ng-down/

"Venus Express discovered that surface features were not quite where they should be, evidence that Earth's cloud-covered neighbour spins a little slower than previously measured. Using the VIRTIS instrument at infrared wavelengths to penetrate the thick cloud cover and study the surface, scientists discovered that some features were displaced by up to 20 km from where they should be."
cantdrive85
1.8 / 5 (10) Sep 16, 2017
"Critical"? Right - whatever, dude...

Funny how FSC being "critical" allows him to blindly accept "science" that casts aside or adjusts the data to fit the expected hypothesized ignorance based guesses. FSC is so religious in his acceptance of these "scientists".
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 16, 2017
https://books.goo...;f=false

Newton, Einstein, and Velikovsky
Charles Ginenthal

"To determine if the runaway greenhouse effect is the mechanism that is heating the Venusian atmosphere from above ... or whether the hot subsurface of the planet is the source of the heat, a probe must be drilled below the Venus surface to find the temperature gradient. If the scientific community's greenhouse mechanism is correct, the temperature beneath the Venusian surface should be cool with depth."
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 16, 2017
https://books.goo...;f=false

Lewis M. Greenberg, Kronos, Vol. IV, No. 4 (Summer 1979), p.9

"When four Venus probes plunged toward the planet's surface -- two in daylight and two in darkness ...

One instrument carried aboard each probe was a nephelometer designed to detect clouds by monitoring variations in light ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 16, 2017
(cont'd)

"Within each nephelometer was a sensitive radiometer that reacted to ever smaller changes in outside light. Those radiometers showed only gloom around the two probes dropping through darkness -- until the temperature sensors failed.

At almost exactly that instance, the radiometers detected a faint glow in the atmosphere. The glow grew brighter and brighter as the space probes left the cloud [cover] above them."
FineStructureConstant
4 / 5 (8) Sep 16, 2017
That's it - I've seen just about enough of the crazies here to last me a lifetime. I'm canceling my account and getting the fuck out of here...
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Sep 16, 2017
http://www.nytime...?mcubz=1

Argon Level on Venus Stirs Debate
By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD
DEC. 19, 1978

"Dr. Hoffman and his colleagues had discovered in the Venusian atmosphere an unexpectedly large amount of the rare gas argon‐36. This confounded the other 114 mission scientists, for it flew in the face of their theories about the formation of the planets ...

Argon‐36 is one of the gases that was present in the solar nebula, the great envelope of matter out of which the sun and the planets were born some 4.6 billion years ago. It is a volatile element, one that is easily boiled off. Since the inner planets like Venus, Earth and Mars were extremely hot at the time of formation, nearly all the argon and many other primordial gases dissipated or were blown away by the force of other solar gases ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 16, 2017
(cont'd)

"Now the atmospheres of planets like Venus, Earth and Mars are composed primarily of gases that originated in the planets themselves. Argon‐40, for example, is generated by the radioactive decay of potassium‐40. In Earth's atmosphere, there is 300 times as much argon‐40 as argon‐36, and even that is a minute fraction of 1 percent of the total atmosphere. On Venus, according to the Pioneer mass spectrometer, there are almost equal amounts of argon‐3б and argon‐40 ...

'I cannot account for the values I'm getting' ...

Whatever the reason for the discrepancy between the two experiments, Dr. Donahue said the data indicate that primordial argon is either 100 times as abundant on Venus as on Earth — according to the gas chromatograph — or 500 times as abundant, according to the mass spectrometer."
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Sep 16, 2017
https://books.goo...;f=false

R.A. Kerr, "Venus is looking too Pristine," Science, Vol. 250 (Nov. 16, 1990), p.912.

"The planetary geologists who are studying the radar images streaming back from Magellan find they have an enigma on their hands. When they read the [impact crater count curve] the geologic clock tells them how old the Venusian surface is they find a planet on the brink of adolescence ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 16, 2017
(cont'd)

"... But when they look at the surface itself they see a newborn babe ... Magellan scientists have been struck by the newly minted appearance of craters formed ...

But by geologists' usual measure these fresh-looking craters had plenty of time to fall prey to the [erosional] ravages of geologic change."
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 16, 2017
http://www.scienc...3a04.htm

1991:

"Of the 75 craters mapped so far by Magellan, only one shows any signs of aging; i.e., tectonic movements, lava-filling, etc. The surface of Venus should be hundreds of millions of years old, yet it looks freshly minted. The anticipated spectrum of degradation has not yet been seen.

One theory is that recent lava flooding erased the old craters, and we now see only recent impact scars. But why would a planet's volcanism turn off so completely and so abruptly? Our earth, Venus' sister planet in many ways, still perks away, leaving craters of various ages. Why is Venus so different? One idea not advanced by Kerr in Science is that Venus might be a recently acquired member of the solar system!"
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 16, 2017
https://books.goo...;f=false

David Harry Grinspoon, "Venus Unveiled," The Sciences (July/Aug. 1993), p.24

"But there is something quite strange almost unnatural about the Venusian craters. Nearly all of them are pristine, as if planted there recently. Virtually every geological feature of the planet appears brand-new, even though the surface is quite old ..."
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 16, 2017
http://sci.esa.in...ng-down/

"Venus Express discovered that surface features were not quite where they should be, evidence that Earth's cloud-covered neighbour spins a little slower than previously measured. Using the VIRTIS instrument at infrared wavelengths to penetrate the thick cloud cover and study the surface, scientists discovered that some features were displaced by up to 20 km from where they should be."
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Sep 16, 2017
https://www.thund...enus.htm

"Cloud movements show a 4-day rotation period of the upper atmosphere at the equator, which declines to 2 days towards the poles. Within the framework of standard theory, no force is present to drive the upper winds around the planet at such a speed, since Venus itself has a rotational period of 243 days retrograde and the planet's lower winds are exceptionally sluggish. Since the planet is the same temperature overall there is no temperature gradient to drive the winds."
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (5) Sep 16, 2017
Contradicting the notion that the Venus Pioneer temperature flux dataset required correction, it was not the only mission which recorded a pronounced upward radiation flux ...

http://www.holosc...ur-twin/

"The second law of thermodynamics is a general principle, which places constraints upon the direction of heat transfer. To maintain the high surface temperature of Venus there should be no net flow of heat through the atmosphere. However, when the Pioneer Venus probes looked at the amount of radiant energy passing through the atmosphere, each one found more energy being radiated up from the lower atmosphere than enters it as sunlight. And, if this were not enough, the night probe site was shown to be about 2K warmer than it was at the day probe site. The Russian probes, Vega 1 and 2, also 'recorded a pronounced upward radiation flux.' These findings simply show that Venus' surface is hot and still cooling."
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Sep 16, 2017
https://books.goo...;f=false

Carl Sagan, I. Shklovskii, Intelligent Life in the Universe, Delta ed. (NY 1966), p319

"In 1956, a team of American radio astronomers at the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, headed by Cornell H. Meyer, first turned a large radiotelescope towrad Venus. The observations were made near inferior conjunction, the time when Venus is nearest the Earth, and when, also, we are looking almost exclusively at the dark hemisphere of the planet ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1.5 / 5 (8) Sep 16, 2017
(cont'd)

"... Meyer and his colleagues were astounded to find that Venus radiated, as it were, a hot object at a temperature of 300 degrees C [celsius or 600 K]. Subsequent observations at a variety of wavelengths have confirmed these observations ... The most natural explanation of the observations is that the surface of Venus is hot -- far hotter than anyone had previously imagined."

(note the phrases "astounded" and "far hotter than anyone had previously imagined", which combined demonstrate that the high temperature was unexpected by the scientific community.)
Chris_Reeve
1.5 / 5 (8) Sep 17, 2017
That is basically the meat of this controversy. If you don't know these parts, you do not understand the debate.

Notice, first of all, how few people make it to the end.

Second, always the emotions.

Third, many things which do not fit the narrative. Repeated surprises.

And strange coincidences in the Pagan Venus stories.

... The fact that it was not just the American Venus Pioneer mission which returned back anomalous upward fluxes, but also the Russian Vega missions.

It means something.
panurg3
1.9 / 5 (9) Sep 17, 2017
thanks, CR! Your diligent data mining is always thought provoking. Given that tenured scientists seriously entertain parallel universes and the possibility that we are living in someone else's simulation, a reasonable person should be at least (weakly) agnostic about solar system shake-ups, Velikovskian or otherwise. Also, keep up the good work of not responding with 3rd grade insults like many here. Also, thanks mod for allowing these comments.
Tessellatedtessellations
3.9 / 5 (14) Sep 17, 2017
Chris Reeve, it would probably be a really good idea to see a doctor. Putting aside your ideas for the moment, just spending that much time to write that much for an audience that didn't ask for it, could be a sign of something medically serious like mania. I mean that seriously, not as some sort of not-funny puerile insult.

If your brain is okay, then I highly recommend reading Carl Sagan's "The Demon Haunted World." I promise there are no demons in it.
Chris_Reeve
1.9 / 5 (9) Sep 17, 2017
Tessellatedtessellations, the idea that something has occurred to Venus in recent human-historical times is not something which anybody -- ever -- has intentionally concocted. Even Velikovsky stumbled into it. He did not CRAFT the idea; if you are following the history, you can see that he followed the surprises.

Learning the details of what has been claimed is just the first part of the process of learning some controversies; just as crucial, in many cases, is observing peoples' reactions to an unemotional recounting of the facts of the situation.

When the responses are unprovoked by anything other than a recounting of the facts of the situation, then we can learn much about how people react to facts which they may fully understand are pulling them into a direction which they do not want to go.

What is particularly noticeable is when the person relaying those facts becomes the focus, even though all they have done is to review the details.
ProfessorTseng
4.4 / 5 (8) Sep 18, 2017
Genuine question Chris, what do you actually hope to accomplish by posting that stuff here?

Only a small amount of people read and take comments on articles seriously, especially on a site like this.

All that ever happens is large argument threads between the same people over and over again.

Wouldn't genuine scientific pursuance, writing and publishing supporting material be more productive to your cause than spending time arguing with the same 5 people on phys.org over and over again?

These articles will continue to be posted and research you don't agree with will continue to be done despite your comments, which will disappear unnoticed.

(and to be fair, this can be applied to anyone who tries to argue with many of these article; your words fall on only a handful of deaf ears every single time)
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (8) Sep 18, 2017
Wouldn't genuine scientific pursuance, writing and publishing supporting material

That would require real work (and the inevitable admission that he actually can't produce and kind of scientific output)

Better for him to try to fake scientific literacy (entirely unsucessfully, mind).
What he hopes to achive -besides derision for his scientific illiteracy- is anyone's guess.

Then again: It may well be his only kind of 'social life'. Being show up as a moron over and over again is preferrable -to some- over having no social contact at all.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (5) Sep 18, 2017
Re: "Wouldn't genuine scientific pursuance, writing and publishing supporting material be more productive to your cause than spending time arguing with the same 5 people on phys.org over and over again?"

I learned how to code 3 years ago so that I can build out a site to crowdsource information on scientific controversies. The site remains under active construction, but each of the quotes posted here will turn up in the search results at controversiesofscience.com.

Academia has refused to bring order to the topic of challenges to textbook theory. They insist upon a "positivist" approach (where science is treated as a body of knowledge), yet challenges to textbook theory require a "constructivist" approach (where science is used more as a tool for thinking and learning).
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (5) Sep 18, 2017
The "mainstream" approach to science has overlooked some subtle, crucial details ...

First of all, most people online do not understand what a worldview is. It is imperative that the tools we use to discuss science teach the structure of science (science educator Bob Gowan tried and failed to institute this many years ago with his Vee diagram).

Second, higher-order thinking is precluded through the teaching of just one particular worldview. When a person only knows one worldview, they are SUBJECT TO it; it is only through a process of questioning this mainstream worldview that a person can learn to think of worldviews AS OBJECTS. This is called the subject-object transition, and it is the most important concept for teaching higher-order thinking (aka critical thinking).

The approach which dominates today's science journalism actually precludes the formation of higher-order thinking.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (5) Sep 18, 2017
Third, creative collaboration follows what is known as a Power Law. For each challenge, a particular person may have just one (if that) meaningful idea to contribute. What this means, in practice, is that the large majority of creative collaboration contributions will be garbage, but buried in that large heap of communications can be insights.

The key to effective creative collaboration is to make sure that the best contributions rise to the top. Once a person figures out what is preventing that from happening, then crowdsourcing becomes a numbers game (See the work of Rob Spencer of Pfizer on this).

What has confused people about scientific discourse is that there are different levels of communication which vaguely correspond to epistemology: Our conversations at the worldview level are fundamentally different than those at the model level. I will demonstrate that once we stop applying the same standards for both levels, then the process becomes streamlined.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (5) Sep 18, 2017
Critical thinking has been taught in lit classes for many decades now. The International Baccalaureate program, for instance, encourages students to interpret classic texts from different, oftentimes opposing worldviews.

What has yet to be done, for whatever reason, is to apply the same approach to scientific controversies.

The way this will be done is to track challenges to textbook theory over time. That is fundamentally what an app which crowdsources information on scientific controversies aims to do: With this approach, the reader over time learns how to be critical of the science journalism they are reading. No different from the existing lit classes, critical thinking in the sciences can be taught as a skill.

Academia's refusal to bring order to scientific controversies will eventually come to be viewed as a crucial oversight, because whoever brings order to this topic will effectively own it for a number of years to come -- until academia copies it.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (5) Sep 18, 2017
Interaction is very important for what I do. I've spent the past 12 years observing the reactions of laypeople and professional "debunkers" to controversial scientific claims. Repeated observation is important because it is the only way to identify the most common psycho/social patterns.

When a pattern is identified, it must be labeled and presented with the others in a consistent format (for the purpose of assisting the thinker to transition from subject to object).

Many people do not understand the constructivist approach: The point of the practice is not to identify truth. It's actually the exact opposite: The point is to train the mind to hold two contradictory opposing worldviews at once.

This does not come naturally for people. Only around 8% of the population ever learns to master this practice. This is the world of CEO's and other leaders. It's called the "growth" mindset. People will pay money to learn this, and you will eventually work for one of them.
Maggnus
5 / 5 (6) Sep 19, 2017
Wouldn't genuine scientific pursuance, writing and publishing supporting material be more productive to your cause than spending time arguing with the same 5 people on phys.org over and over again?

These articles will continue to be posted and research you don't agree with will continue to be done despite your comments, which will disappear unnoticed.


He is preaching. https://youtu.be/hmyuE0NpNgE

If he is devout enough, he will be rewarded. It has nothing to do with science.
Maggnus
5 / 5 (4) Sep 20, 2017
Argon Level on Venus Stirs Debate
By JOHN NOBLE WILFORD
DEC. 19, 1978

"Dr. Hoffman and his colleagues had discovered in the Venusian atmosphere an unexpectedly large amount of the rare gas argon‐36. This confounded the other 114 mission scientists, for it flew in the face of their theories about the formation of the planets ...

Argon‐36 is one of the gases that was present in the solar nebula, the great envelope of matter out of which the sun and the planets were born some 4.6 billion years ago. It is a volatile element, one that is easily boiled off. Since the inner planets like Venus, Earth and Mars were extremely hot at the time of formation, nearly all the argon and many other primordial gases dissipated or were blown away by the force of other solar gases
1978.. Yea they learned a bit since then. Acolyte, you are an embarrassment to your religion.
Captain Stumpy
1 / 5 (1) Oct 01, 2017
@ProfessorTseng
Wouldn't genuine scientific pursuance, writing and publishing supporting material be more productive to your cause...
nice to see rational folk on the site, but you'll not be able to actually convince a true believer like chris reeve (aka hannesalfven) of anything logical, scientific or against his religious belief (in this case, the electric universe)

i hate to disagree so publicly, but you're a mite off with the statement "this can be applied to anyone who tries to argue"

for starters, some of the less scientifically literate gain their "insights" from these comments so providing them with real science is vital

more importantly - it is also a fantastic source of material for those studying psychology (which requires poking the acolytes and believers to get them to respond in order to ascertain their level of delusion)

some of those people you see arguing are actually poking to get data - it's quite fascinating, actually

just sayin'

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.