<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_14_1356208</id>
	<title>New Map Hints At Venus' Wet, Volcanic Past</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1247580420000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://spacefellowship.com/" rel="nofollow">Matt\_dk</a> writes with this excerpt from Space Fellowship: <i>"Venus Express has charted the first map of Venus' southern hemisphere at infrared wavelengths. The new map hints that <a href="http://spacefellowship.com/2009/07/14/new-map-hints-at-venus-wet-volcanic-past/">our neighbouring world may once have been more Earth-like</a>, with a plate tectonics system and an ocean of water. The map comprises over a thousand individual images, recorded between May 2006 and December 2007. Because Venus is covered in clouds, normal cameras cannot see the surface, but Venus Express used a particular infrared wavelength that can see through them."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Matt \ _dk writes with this excerpt from Space Fellowship : " Venus Express has charted the first map of Venus ' southern hemisphere at infrared wavelengths .
The new map hints that our neighbouring world may once have been more Earth-like , with a plate tectonics system and an ocean of water .
The map comprises over a thousand individual images , recorded between May 2006 and December 2007 .
Because Venus is covered in clouds , normal cameras can not see the surface , but Venus Express used a particular infrared wavelength that can see through them .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Matt\_dk writes with this excerpt from Space Fellowship: "Venus Express has charted the first map of Venus' southern hemisphere at infrared wavelengths.
The new map hints that our neighbouring world may once have been more Earth-like, with a plate tectonics system and an ocean of water.
The map comprises over a thousand individual images, recorded between May 2006 and December 2007.
Because Venus is covered in clouds, normal cameras cannot see the surface, but Venus Express used a particular infrared wavelength that can see through them.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692897</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading title</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247594220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wait until they find out Uranus is wet and volcanic.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait until they find out Uranus is wet and volcanic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait until they find out Uranus is wet and volcanic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690561</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690571</id>
	<title>Greenhouse cataclysm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247584200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The new map hints that our neighbouring world may once have been more Earth-like, with a plate tectonics system and an ocean of water.</p></div><p>Yep.  Until the Venusians burned all those fossil fuels and released all that CO2....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The new map hints that our neighbouring world may once have been more Earth-like , with a plate tectonics system and an ocean of water.Yep .
Until the Venusians burned all those fossil fuels and released all that CO2... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The new map hints that our neighbouring world may once have been more Earth-like, with a plate tectonics system and an ocean of water.Yep.
Until the Venusians burned all those fossil fuels and released all that CO2....
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690789</id>
	<title>so, venus had a wet past...</title>
	<author>martas</author>
	<datestamp>1247585220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>but dry present is discouraging.</htmltext>
<tokenext>but dry present is discouraging .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but dry present is discouraging.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690765</id>
	<title>Re:Greenhouse cataclysm</title>
	<author>jameskojiro</author>
	<datestamp>1247585160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, I blame the people who didn't want to burn greenhouse gases who pushed everyone to use renewable sources like "Geo-thermal" or "Venu-Thermal" energy that caused plate tectonics to grind to a halt and the outer crust to solidify and thicken which was all well and good until a few hundred million years later all of that internal Venusian heat had to go somewhere and lo and behold instant planet wide resurfacing and extreme out gassing.</p><p>The Eco-nuts of Venus were all proud of their renewable energy plan for geothermal until the fateful day the surface of the planet melted and they were all screwed.    Thanks eco-nuts!!! Now there is one less habitable planet in the solar system!   Too bad all of the amazon Venusian Women melted in the great planetary resurfacing 500 million years ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , I blame the people who did n't want to burn greenhouse gases who pushed everyone to use renewable sources like " Geo-thermal " or " Venu-Thermal " energy that caused plate tectonics to grind to a halt and the outer crust to solidify and thicken which was all well and good until a few hundred million years later all of that internal Venusian heat had to go somewhere and lo and behold instant planet wide resurfacing and extreme out gassing.The Eco-nuts of Venus were all proud of their renewable energy plan for geothermal until the fateful day the surface of the planet melted and they were all screwed .
Thanks eco-nuts ! ! !
Now there is one less habitable planet in the solar system !
Too bad all of the amazon Venusian Women melted in the great planetary resurfacing 500 million years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, I blame the people who didn't want to burn greenhouse gases who pushed everyone to use renewable sources like "Geo-thermal" or "Venu-Thermal" energy that caused plate tectonics to grind to a halt and the outer crust to solidify and thicken which was all well and good until a few hundred million years later all of that internal Venusian heat had to go somewhere and lo and behold instant planet wide resurfacing and extreme out gassing.The Eco-nuts of Venus were all proud of their renewable energy plan for geothermal until the fateful day the surface of the planet melted and they were all screwed.
Thanks eco-nuts!!!
Now there is one less habitable planet in the solar system!
Too bad all of the amazon Venusian Women melted in the great planetary resurfacing 500 million years ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690571</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691425</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, but was already assumed</title>
	<author>Nimey</author>
	<datestamp>1247588040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Plenty of hydrogen in the atmospheric sulfuric acid.  Also, a Venusian day is 243 days back here on Earth; this is related to Venus being the only planet to rotate backwards compared to the other planets, probably the result of a collision long ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Plenty of hydrogen in the atmospheric sulfuric acid .
Also , a Venusian day is 243 days back here on Earth ; this is related to Venus being the only planet to rotate backwards compared to the other planets , probably the result of a collision long ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plenty of hydrogen in the atmospheric sulfuric acid.
Also, a Venusian day is 243 days back here on Earth; this is related to Venus being the only planet to rotate backwards compared to the other planets, probably the result of a collision long ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690977</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690811</id>
	<title>Hot vs Cool</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247585280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is it me, or did the "cool" parts of the map look to be over 400C?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is it me , or did the " cool " parts of the map look to be over 400C ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is it me, or did the "cool" parts of the map look to be over 400C?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690759</id>
	<title>Lots of possible "Wet" satellites</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247585160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>There seem to be a high percentage of historically "Wet" satellites in our solar system.  Earth,Venus, Mars possibly Europa, Titan.......

Are our assumptions about solar system formation and the likely hood of liquid water covered satellites off?</htmltext>
<tokenext>There seem to be a high percentage of historically " Wet " satellites in our solar system .
Earth,Venus , Mars possibly Europa , Titan...... . Are our assumptions about solar system formation and the likely hood of liquid water covered satellites off ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There seem to be a high percentage of historically "Wet" satellites in our solar system.
Earth,Venus, Mars possibly Europa, Titan.......

Are our assumptions about solar system formation and the likely hood of liquid water covered satellites off?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690621</id>
	<title>Re:Greenhouse cataclysm</title>
	<author>wjousts</author>
	<datestamp>1247584440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Damn you <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The\_Mekon" title="wikipedia.org">Mekon!</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn you Mekon !
[ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn you Mekon!
[wikipedia.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690571</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691261</id>
	<title>Number of Comments When I Posted</title>
	<author>2names</author>
	<datestamp>1247587320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>42.  It's everywhere!</htmltext>
<tokenext>42 .
It 's everywhere !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>42.
It's everywhere!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690593</id>
	<title>Volcanic, or just really hot?</title>
	<author>Blixinator</author>
	<datestamp>1247584320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Does molten rock really mean there has to be a volcano? The thermal map shows that some parts get up to 715 K, hot enough to melt lead.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does molten rock really mean there has to be a volcano ?
The thermal map shows that some parts get up to 715 K , hot enough to melt lead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does molten rock really mean there has to be a volcano?
The thermal map shows that some parts get up to 715 K, hot enough to melt lead.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691083</id>
	<title>SFW?</title>
	<author>Junior J. Junior III</author>
	<datestamp>1247586420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder how many people will get fired as a result of reading this article, and then googling for "wet venus" at work, and getting NSFW results.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder how many people will get fired as a result of reading this article , and then googling for " wet venus " at work , and getting NSFW results .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder how many people will get fired as a result of reading this article, and then googling for "wet venus" at work, and getting NSFW results.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692239</id>
	<title>We need better resolution on the imaging-</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247591580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To see the remains of ancient smokestacks which should lead to an answer to the Fermi paradox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To see the remains of ancient smokestacks which should lead to an answer to the Fermi paradox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To see the remains of ancient smokestacks which should lead to an answer to the Fermi paradox.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690977</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, but was already assumed</title>
	<author>Ihlosi</author>
	<datestamp>1247586000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i> It also has gravity closer to ours than the moon or Mars.</i> <p>

Gravity is a nice thing, but since you eventually want to launch more stuff into space, Mars-like gravity is better than something close to 1g. It allows all the niceties (indoor plumbing, showers, toilets, kitchens, cups of coffee, etc) while still making it much easier to launch something.</p><p>

<i> If we could turn the CO2 into O2 and usable carbon (like for soil), we could eventually live on it. </i> </p><p>

Unfortunately, you'll need hydrogen, too, and most of Venus' hydrogen has already escaped into space. Large amounts of nitrogen would be nice, too, which Venus seems to be lacking, too.</p><p>

<i>Wouldn't be easy, but probably more feasible than terra-forming Mars.</i> </p><p>

Mars is probably closer to being terraformed now than Venus will be for thousands of years (even if we start working on it now). You could take a walk on Mars in a spacesuit right now, on Venus, you'd be well-done within seconds. A Martian day is about 25 hours, compare that to a few weeks on Venus, with all the associated problems (even if we get rid of the atmosphere, someone on the planet will be in direct sunlight for weeks, and without sunlight for weeks).</p><p>
The approach for terraforming Venus that sounds most promising to me was to build a giant sunshade, wait until the atmosphere solidifies, and then ship it offworld or shoot it into space. Then crash some comets rich in hydrogen and nitrogen on the planet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It also has gravity closer to ours than the moon or Mars .
Gravity is a nice thing , but since you eventually want to launch more stuff into space , Mars-like gravity is better than something close to 1g .
It allows all the niceties ( indoor plumbing , showers , toilets , kitchens , cups of coffee , etc ) while still making it much easier to launch something .
If we could turn the CO2 into O2 and usable carbon ( like for soil ) , we could eventually live on it .
Unfortunately , you 'll need hydrogen , too , and most of Venus ' hydrogen has already escaped into space .
Large amounts of nitrogen would be nice , too , which Venus seems to be lacking , too .
Would n't be easy , but probably more feasible than terra-forming Mars .
Mars is probably closer to being terraformed now than Venus will be for thousands of years ( even if we start working on it now ) .
You could take a walk on Mars in a spacesuit right now , on Venus , you 'd be well-done within seconds .
A Martian day is about 25 hours , compare that to a few weeks on Venus , with all the associated problems ( even if we get rid of the atmosphere , someone on the planet will be in direct sunlight for weeks , and without sunlight for weeks ) .
The approach for terraforming Venus that sounds most promising to me was to build a giant sunshade , wait until the atmosphere solidifies , and then ship it offworld or shoot it into space .
Then crash some comets rich in hydrogen and nitrogen on the planet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> It also has gravity closer to ours than the moon or Mars.
Gravity is a nice thing, but since you eventually want to launch more stuff into space, Mars-like gravity is better than something close to 1g.
It allows all the niceties (indoor plumbing, showers, toilets, kitchens, cups of coffee, etc) while still making it much easier to launch something.
If we could turn the CO2 into O2 and usable carbon (like for soil), we could eventually live on it.
Unfortunately, you'll need hydrogen, too, and most of Venus' hydrogen has already escaped into space.
Large amounts of nitrogen would be nice, too, which Venus seems to be lacking, too.
Wouldn't be easy, but probably more feasible than terra-forming Mars.
Mars is probably closer to being terraformed now than Venus will be for thousands of years (even if we start working on it now).
You could take a walk on Mars in a spacesuit right now, on Venus, you'd be well-done within seconds.
A Martian day is about 25 hours, compare that to a few weeks on Venus, with all the associated problems (even if we get rid of the atmosphere, someone on the planet will be in direct sunlight for weeks, and without sunlight for weeks).
The approach for terraforming Venus that sounds most promising to me was to build a giant sunshade, wait until the atmosphere solidifies, and then ship it offworld or shoot it into space.
Then crash some comets rich in hydrogen and nitrogen on the planet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690709</id>
	<title>Venus Got Screwed up when plate techtonics stopped</title>
	<author>jameskojiro</author>
	<datestamp>1247584800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Plate tectonics stopped on venus long ago and this lead to overheating which caused a massive planet wide resurfacing and out gassing ever few hundred million years, causing venus to be the craphole it is now.   If it had a moon and decent rotation plate techtonics would have likely been persevered. and life may still have been there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Plate tectonics stopped on venus long ago and this lead to overheating which caused a massive planet wide resurfacing and out gassing ever few hundred million years , causing venus to be the craphole it is now .
If it had a moon and decent rotation plate techtonics would have likely been persevered .
and life may still have been there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plate tectonics stopped on venus long ago and this lead to overheating which caused a massive planet wide resurfacing and out gassing ever few hundred million years, causing venus to be the craphole it is now.
If it had a moon and decent rotation plate techtonics would have likely been persevered.
and life may still have been there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692015</id>
	<title>Re:we always focus on mars</title>
	<author>martas</author>
	<datestamp>1247590560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>unfortunately it also means that in the event of some freaky sun-related incident like a giant solar flare, electronic devices on venus will be fried way easier than anything on earth, or especially mars. (although maybe i'm wrong about the mars part. after all, it doesn't have a humongous magnetic field protecting it...)</htmltext>
<tokenext>unfortunately it also means that in the event of some freaky sun-related incident like a giant solar flare , electronic devices on venus will be fried way easier than anything on earth , or especially mars .
( although maybe i 'm wrong about the mars part .
after all , it does n't have a humongous magnetic field protecting it... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>unfortunately it also means that in the event of some freaky sun-related incident like a giant solar flare, electronic devices on venus will be fried way easier than anything on earth, or especially mars.
(although maybe i'm wrong about the mars part.
after all, it doesn't have a humongous magnetic field protecting it...)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28693991</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading title ... my second thought was...</title>
	<author>davidsyes</author>
	<datestamp>1247598600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>NASA pap shows dent at Uranus' volatile (p)as(s)t.... this could be a cosmogasmic/galactigasmic pit sto(m)p...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>NASA pap shows dent at Uranus ' volatile ( p ) as ( s ) t.... this could be a cosmogasmic/galactigasmic pit sto ( m ) p.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>NASA pap shows dent at Uranus' volatile (p)as(s)t.... this could be a cosmogasmic/galactigasmic pit sto(m)p...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690561</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692009</id>
	<title>Re:we always focus on mars</title>
	<author>Attila Dimedici</author>
	<datestamp>1247590560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually from many things I have seen, Mars would actually be easier to terraform, but I have always thought that Venus had more long term potential. A couple of years ago I saw a suggestion of a system to terraform Mars that is within our current technological capability. The article ran all of the numbers and it would work. The basic idea was that you find an ice asteroid or two and crash them into Mars. This would provide the missing water and help increase the density of the atmosphere (it has been long enough that I don't remember if the author suggested finding an asteroid with frozen gases such as nitrogen as well or not). The increased water and atmospheric density would create a greenhouse effect increasing the ambient temperature. I wish I could remember who the author was. It may have been Larry Niven, but I'm not sure.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually from many things I have seen , Mars would actually be easier to terraform , but I have always thought that Venus had more long term potential .
A couple of years ago I saw a suggestion of a system to terraform Mars that is within our current technological capability .
The article ran all of the numbers and it would work .
The basic idea was that you find an ice asteroid or two and crash them into Mars .
This would provide the missing water and help increase the density of the atmosphere ( it has been long enough that I do n't remember if the author suggested finding an asteroid with frozen gases such as nitrogen as well or not ) .
The increased water and atmospheric density would create a greenhouse effect increasing the ambient temperature .
I wish I could remember who the author was .
It may have been Larry Niven , but I 'm not sure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually from many things I have seen, Mars would actually be easier to terraform, but I have always thought that Venus had more long term potential.
A couple of years ago I saw a suggestion of a system to terraform Mars that is within our current technological capability.
The article ran all of the numbers and it would work.
The basic idea was that you find an ice asteroid or two and crash them into Mars.
This would provide the missing water and help increase the density of the atmosphere (it has been long enough that I don't remember if the author suggested finding an asteroid with frozen gases such as nitrogen as well or not).
The increased water and atmospheric density would create a greenhouse effect increasing the ambient temperature.
I wish I could remember who the author was.
It may have been Larry Niven, but I'm not sure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691689</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, but was already assumed</title>
	<author>Creepy</author>
	<datestamp>1247589240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Huh?  Venus has a dense atmosphere - much denser than Earth's (something like being under 1km of water at the surface).  I believe you meant lost its water, not atmosphere.   While Venus is closer to the sun than Earth, it gets about one quarter the sunlight of Mercury yet has a higher maximum surface temperature to to the greenhouse gas effect.</p><p>So beyond just the heat, a human would need either liquid breathing or a rigid articulated pressure controlled suit, and liquid breathing has plenty of issues for any long-term use.  Something like the Libelle G-suit (body is in a rigid suit immersed in liquid, but still breathing air - the name means Dragonfly in German and is based on them) would probably not work for survival on Venus, but it could be used for higher acceleration to get there (or to Mars).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Huh ?
Venus has a dense atmosphere - much denser than Earth 's ( something like being under 1km of water at the surface ) .
I believe you meant lost its water , not atmosphere .
While Venus is closer to the sun than Earth , it gets about one quarter the sunlight of Mercury yet has a higher maximum surface temperature to to the greenhouse gas effect.So beyond just the heat , a human would need either liquid breathing or a rigid articulated pressure controlled suit , and liquid breathing has plenty of issues for any long-term use .
Something like the Libelle G-suit ( body is in a rigid suit immersed in liquid , but still breathing air - the name means Dragonfly in German and is based on them ) would probably not work for survival on Venus , but it could be used for higher acceleration to get there ( or to Mars ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huh?
Venus has a dense atmosphere - much denser than Earth's (something like being under 1km of water at the surface).
I believe you meant lost its water, not atmosphere.
While Venus is closer to the sun than Earth, it gets about one quarter the sunlight of Mercury yet has a higher maximum surface temperature to to the greenhouse gas effect.So beyond just the heat, a human would need either liquid breathing or a rigid articulated pressure controlled suit, and liquid breathing has plenty of issues for any long-term use.
Something like the Libelle G-suit (body is in a rigid suit immersed in liquid, but still breathing air - the name means Dragonfly in German and is based on them) would probably not work for survival on Venus, but it could be used for higher acceleration to get there (or to Mars).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691311</id>
	<title>Re:I had a weird thought</title>
	<author>Ozlanthos</author>
	<datestamp>1247587560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>it's because everyone thinks they are weird...and they know it.

<br>
<br>
-Oz</htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's because everyone thinks they are weird...and they know it .
-Oz</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's because everyone thinks they are weird...and they know it.
-Oz</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690717</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28696581</id>
	<title>If only Venus had formed in Mars orbit</title>
	<author>cjsm</author>
	<datestamp>1247567100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have always thought that if Venus had formed in Mars orbit, we would likely have a true second Earth in our solar system.  It would have been able to retain surface water.  It would have a significant atmosphere. What its atmosphere would be like, I don't have the expertise to hypothesize, but it would have evolved far differently than the current Venusian atmosphere.</p><p>The highest temperature ever recorded on Mars is 70F / 21C.  With an atmosphere and the greenhouse effect, a Venus in Mars orbit would be significantly warmer with less fluctuation and more stability.</p><p>It would truly have been a planet worth sending a manned mission to.</p><p>But why lament something that never existed?</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp;</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have always thought that if Venus had formed in Mars orbit , we would likely have a true second Earth in our solar system .
It would have been able to retain surface water .
It would have a significant atmosphere .
What its atmosphere would be like , I do n't have the expertise to hypothesize , but it would have evolved far differently than the current Venusian atmosphere.The highest temperature ever recorded on Mars is 70F / 21C .
With an atmosphere and the greenhouse effect , a Venus in Mars orbit would be significantly warmer with less fluctuation and more stability.It would truly have been a planet worth sending a manned mission to.But why lament something that never existed ?
   </tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have always thought that if Venus had formed in Mars orbit, we would likely have a true second Earth in our solar system.
It would have been able to retain surface water.
It would have a significant atmosphere.
What its atmosphere would be like, I don't have the expertise to hypothesize, but it would have evolved far differently than the current Venusian atmosphere.The highest temperature ever recorded on Mars is 70F / 21C.
With an atmosphere and the greenhouse effect, a Venus in Mars orbit would be significantly warmer with less fluctuation and more stability.It would truly have been a planet worth sending a manned mission to.But why lament something that never existed?
   </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690861</id>
	<title>Venutian granite</title>
	<author>BigHungryJoe</author>
	<datestamp>1247585520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>all my asshole neighbors with their terrestrial granite counter tops would be SO jealous</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>all my asshole neighbors with their terrestrial granite counter tops would be SO jealous</tokentext>
<sentencetext>all my asshole neighbors with their terrestrial granite counter tops would be SO jealous</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28697831</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, but was already assumed</title>
	<author>The\_mad\_linguist</author>
	<datestamp>1247573820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And what do we do with the excess atmosphere from Venus?  We ship it off to Mars, of course.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And what do we do with the excess atmosphere from Venus ?
We ship it off to Mars , of course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what do we do with the excess atmosphere from Venus?
We ship it off to Mars, of course.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691017</id>
	<title>Alright wrong wording.</title>
	<author>gubers33</author>
	<datestamp>1247586180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You got me, I wasn't trying to saying Venus didn't have an atmosphere, but its lighter gases (Hydrodren, Helium, Oxygen were all burned and or pull off) do to its close proximity to the sun. Leaving it with the dense gases which it is currently made of (Nitrogen and Carbon dioxide..maybe a little methane, but don't quote me I haven't taken an atronomy class since freshman year of college). So sorry in forgetting to say part of.</div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You got me , I was n't trying to saying Venus did n't have an atmosphere , but its lighter gases ( Hydrodren , Helium , Oxygen were all burned and or pull off ) do to its close proximity to the sun .
Leaving it with the dense gases which it is currently made of ( Nitrogen and Carbon dioxide..maybe a little methane , but do n't quote me I have n't taken an atronomy class since freshman year of college ) .
So sorry in forgetting to say part of .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You got me, I wasn't trying to saying Venus didn't have an atmosphere, but its lighter gases (Hydrodren, Helium, Oxygen were all burned and or pull off) do to its close proximity to the sun.
Leaving it with the dense gases which it is currently made of (Nitrogen and Carbon dioxide..maybe a little methane, but don't quote me I haven't taken an atronomy class since freshman year of college).
So sorry in forgetting to say part of.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28694199</id>
	<title>Re:I had a weird thought</title>
	<author>shadowbearer</author>
	<datestamp>1247599500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> That's an easy one...</p><p>Because we still waste too much money fighting each other over whose god has the biggest dick, and too little of those resources into getting ourselves off this planet and ensuring the survival of our ecology?</p><p>
&nbsp; The day the human race grows up and learns that it's real enemy is the universe - entropy - will be the day that we climb out of the cradle and learn what it means to grow up.</p><p>
&nbsp; Not likely any of us mortals at this point in time will see it.</p><p>SB</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's an easy one...Because we still waste too much money fighting each other over whose god has the biggest dick , and too little of those resources into getting ourselves off this planet and ensuring the survival of our ecology ?
  The day the human race grows up and learns that it 's real enemy is the universe - entropy - will be the day that we climb out of the cradle and learn what it means to grow up .
  Not likely any of us mortals at this point in time will see it.SB</tokentext>
<sentencetext> That's an easy one...Because we still waste too much money fighting each other over whose god has the biggest dick, and too little of those resources into getting ourselves off this planet and ensuring the survival of our ecology?
  The day the human race grows up and learns that it's real enemy is the universe - entropy - will be the day that we climb out of the cradle and learn what it means to grow up.
  Not likely any of us mortals at this point in time will see it.SB</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690717</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690729</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, but was already assumed</title>
	<author>jameskojiro</author>
	<datestamp>1247584860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So Venus lost it's atmosphere eh?   good thing it did because now we can send landers that don't have to worry about the 100X sea level pressures.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So Venus lost it 's atmosphere eh ?
good thing it did because now we can send landers that do n't have to worry about the 100X sea level pressures .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So Venus lost it's atmosphere eh?
good thing it did because now we can send landers that don't have to worry about the 100X sea level pressures.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, but was already assumed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247585340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Venus is actually quite terra-formable.  It does have an atmosphere, an extremely thick one at that, which has caused its high temperature.  It also has gravity closer to ours than the moon or Mars.  If we could turn the CO2 into O2 and usable carbon (like for soil), we could eventually live on it.  Wouldn't be easy, but probably more feasible than terra-forming Mars.<br> <br>Just because you are wrong and I called you out on it doesn't mean I am a Troll.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Venus is actually quite terra-formable .
It does have an atmosphere , an extremely thick one at that , which has caused its high temperature .
It also has gravity closer to ours than the moon or Mars .
If we could turn the CO2 into O2 and usable carbon ( like for soil ) , we could eventually live on it .
Would n't be easy , but probably more feasible than terra-forming Mars .
Just because you are wrong and I called you out on it does n't mean I am a Troll .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Venus is actually quite terra-formable.
It does have an atmosphere, an extremely thick one at that, which has caused its high temperature.
It also has gravity closer to ours than the moon or Mars.
If we could turn the CO2 into O2 and usable carbon (like for soil), we could eventually live on it.
Wouldn't be easy, but probably more feasible than terra-forming Mars.
Just because you are wrong and I called you out on it doesn't mean I am a Troll.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690577</id>
	<title>I thought of...</title>
	<author>Rah'Dick</author>
	<datestamp>1247584260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I read that title, I thought of the mythological Venus, not the planet. SCNR.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I read that title , I thought of the mythological Venus , not the planet .
SCNR .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I read that title, I thought of the mythological Venus, not the planet.
SCNR.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691025</id>
	<title>When it will the port it?</title>
	<author>140Mandak262Jamuna</author>
	<datestamp>1247586180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That technology using some particular wavelength of IT to see through? Do they have any plans to incorporate them into sun glasses?</htmltext>
<tokenext>That technology using some particular wavelength of IT to see through ?
Do they have any plans to incorporate them into sun glasses ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That technology using some particular wavelength of IT to see through?
Do they have any plans to incorporate them into sun glasses?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691719</id>
	<title>Heat and UV</title>
	<author>Roger W Moore</author>
	<datestamp>1247589360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem with Venus is that it is closer to the sun. Even if you converted Venus into Earth 2.0 it would almost certainly be too hot to live on. This means that you would need some way to cool the planet significantly as well as shield it better from the increased UV radiation. Not impossible but I'm not so sure it is a better target than Mars. The advantage of Mars is that you can build structures on the surface as a step towards terraforming and build up the process gradually. This is close to impossible on Venus. Mars may have some disadvantages (cooler, lower gravity) but I'm not sure that these are bigger problems than Venus'.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with Venus is that it is closer to the sun .
Even if you converted Venus into Earth 2.0 it would almost certainly be too hot to live on .
This means that you would need some way to cool the planet significantly as well as shield it better from the increased UV radiation .
Not impossible but I 'm not so sure it is a better target than Mars .
The advantage of Mars is that you can build structures on the surface as a step towards terraforming and build up the process gradually .
This is close to impossible on Venus .
Mars may have some disadvantages ( cooler , lower gravity ) but I 'm not sure that these are bigger problems than Venus' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with Venus is that it is closer to the sun.
Even if you converted Venus into Earth 2.0 it would almost certainly be too hot to live on.
This means that you would need some way to cool the planet significantly as well as shield it better from the increased UV radiation.
Not impossible but I'm not so sure it is a better target than Mars.
The advantage of Mars is that you can build structures on the surface as a step towards terraforming and build up the process gradually.
This is close to impossible on Venus.
Mars may have some disadvantages (cooler, lower gravity) but I'm not sure that these are bigger problems than Venus'.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692605</id>
	<title>Slashdot tags always amaze me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247593020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>When I see the title, before even looking at the tags, I know what they will be.
I'm not sure if that is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. polluting my mind, or if polluted minds are intrinsically drawn to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.</htmltext>
<tokenext>When I see the title , before even looking at the tags , I know what they will be .
I 'm not sure if that is / .
polluting my mind , or if polluted minds are intrinsically drawn to / .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I see the title, before even looking at the tags, I know what they will be.
I'm not sure if that is /.
polluting my mind, or if polluted minds are intrinsically drawn to /.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28698159</id>
	<title>Re:Misleading title</title>
	<author>jackchance</author>
	<datestamp>1247576220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i thought the same thing. i saw ".....venus, wet...... " and i <a href="http://www.hulu.com/watch/47604/saturday-night-live-digital-short-j-in-my-pants" title="hulu.com">jizzed in my pants</a> [hulu.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i thought the same thing .
i saw " .....venus , wet...... " and i jizzed in my pants [ hulu.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i thought the same thing.
i saw ".....venus, wet...... " and i jizzed in my pants [hulu.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690561</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691015</id>
	<title>Re:we always focus on mars</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247586180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I always figured we could build large floating cities in Venus' atmosphere, that would be almost literally floating. The region which is near Earth surface pressure has pretty reasonable temperature, too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I always figured we could build large floating cities in Venus ' atmosphere , that would be almost literally floating .
The region which is near Earth surface pressure has pretty reasonable temperature , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always figured we could build large floating cities in Venus' atmosphere, that would be almost literally floating.
The region which is near Earth surface pressure has pretty reasonable temperature, too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690995</id>
	<title>Re:I had a weird thought</title>
	<author>MyLongNickName</author>
	<datestamp>1247586060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am actually curious to see how this ends up getting modded. Troll? Funny? Insightful. My secret wish is for +5 Troll.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am actually curious to see how this ends up getting modded .
Troll ? Funny ?
Insightful. My secret wish is for + 5 Troll .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am actually curious to see how this ends up getting modded.
Troll? Funny?
Insightful. My secret wish is for +5 Troll.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690717</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28698299</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, but was already assumed</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1247577180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I recall reading that high up in the atmosphere the temperature wasn't so bad.</p><p>Once we have the technology to build floating cities, we'll be able to colonize venus without any terraforming.</p><p>And we'll probably have that technology before we get to Venus. See:</p><p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oNHD41MLMk" title="youtube.com">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oNHD41MLMk</a> [youtube.com]<br><a href="http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/09/07/12/1612230/Robotic-Glider-Set-To-Break-Autonomous-Flight-Records?art\_pos=1" title="slashdot.org">http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/09/07/12/1612230/Robotic-Glider-Set-To-Break-Autonomous-Flight-Records?art\_pos=1</a> [slashdot.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I recall reading that high up in the atmosphere the temperature was n't so bad.Once we have the technology to build floating cities , we 'll be able to colonize venus without any terraforming.And we 'll probably have that technology before we get to Venus .
See : http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = 5oNHD41MLMk [ youtube.com ] http : //hardware.slashdot.org/story/09/07/12/1612230/Robotic-Glider-Set-To-Break-Autonomous-Flight-Records ? art \ _pos = 1 [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recall reading that high up in the atmosphere the temperature wasn't so bad.Once we have the technology to build floating cities, we'll be able to colonize venus without any terraforming.And we'll probably have that technology before we get to Venus.
See:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oNHD41MLMk [youtube.com]http://hardware.slashdot.org/story/09/07/12/1612230/Robotic-Glider-Set-To-Break-Autonomous-Flight-Records?art\_pos=1 [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690807</id>
	<title>Re:I had a weird thought</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247585280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>because interplanetary travel comes at the cost of being confined to a small space?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>because interplanetary travel comes at the cost of being confined to a small space ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because interplanetary travel comes at the cost of being confined to a small space?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690717</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690561</id>
	<title>Misleading title</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247584200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Venus... Wet... Volcanic... - sounds like the perfect title for some strange alien porn<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Venus... Wet... Volcanic... - sounds like the perfect title for some strange alien porn : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Venus... Wet... Volcanic... - sounds like the perfect title for some strange alien porn :-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690717</id>
	<title>I had a weird thought</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247584800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is that so many people who dream of colonizing other worlds and traveling faster than light rarely leave their own houses?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is that so many people who dream of colonizing other worlds and traveling faster than light rarely leave their own houses ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is that so many people who dream of colonizing other worlds and traveling faster than light rarely leave their own houses?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28696335</id>
	<title>Re:I had a weird thought</title>
	<author>Dr. Spork</author>
	<datestamp>1247565900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe it's because the rebels in Star Wars are fighting in wars that are worth fighting. When we have one, I'll do my part to help.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe it 's because the rebels in Star Wars are fighting in wars that are worth fighting .
When we have one , I 'll do my part to help .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe it's because the rebels in Star Wars are fighting in wars that are worth fighting.
When we have one, I'll do my part to help.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28698109</id>
	<title>Re:Volcanic, or just really hot?</title>
	<author>PaganRitual</author>
	<datestamp>1247575860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well it was high up on a mountain top, and I believe they described it as burning like a silver flame.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well it was high up on a mountain top , and I believe they described it as burning like a silver flame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well it was high up on a mountain top, and I believe they described it as burning like a silver flame.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690593</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28694281</id>
	<title>Re:we always focus on mars</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247599860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>some sort of genetically engineered bug that sequesters all of the CO2 and H2SO4, and permanently precipitates it out, preferably leaving O2 and H2O. something that could live on top of the clouds and in them. there's a lot of energy in that atmosphere, and you're closer to the sun... which is actually good: something to work with. rather than being far from the sun and feeble with resources, like mars</p></div><p>You know... if we could do <b>that</b> then <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zyTm\_0D0uS8" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">Guhwobo wappah</a> [youtube.com] on our own planet wouldn't be such a big deal.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>some sort of genetically engineered bug that sequesters all of the CO2 and H2SO4 , and permanently precipitates it out , preferably leaving O2 and H2O .
something that could live on top of the clouds and in them .
there 's a lot of energy in that atmosphere , and you 're closer to the sun... which is actually good : something to work with .
rather than being far from the sun and feeble with resources , like marsYou know... if we could do that then Guhwobo wappah [ youtube.com ] on our own planet would n't be such a big deal .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>some sort of genetically engineered bug that sequesters all of the CO2 and H2SO4, and permanently precipitates it out, preferably leaving O2 and H2O.
something that could live on top of the clouds and in them.
there's a lot of energy in that atmosphere, and you're closer to the sun... which is actually good: something to work with.
rather than being far from the sun and feeble with resources, like marsYou know... if we could do that then Guhwobo wappah [youtube.com] on our own planet wouldn't be such a big deal.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690569</id>
	<title>crap...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247584200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That title would have been so much better if it was:</p><p>"Infrared Scan Of Venus' Southern Regions Hints At Wet, Hot Past"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That title would have been so much better if it was : " Infrared Scan Of Venus ' Southern Regions Hints At Wet , Hot Past "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That title would have been so much better if it was:"Infrared Scan Of Venus' Southern Regions Hints At Wet, Hot Past"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28693885</id>
	<title>Re:I had a weird thought</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1247598180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For the same reason people who think for sure they'd be a part of Star Fleet if it existed very rarely join the military. [...] All in all, a lot of people are dreamers rather than actual doers.</p></div><p>No, that's a bunch of shit. The fictional Enterprise is on a mission of peaceful exploration, trying to help people. That's not what the U.S. military does! Helping people only happens when it supports some concrete goal, take a look at history if you aren't in line with that one. I don't join the military because I don't want to support American imperialism. I would join something like Starfleet, for obvious reasons.</p><p>I think you're projecting.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Most people who cheer on the Rebels in Star Wars would never ever think of taking up arms against a hostile government.</p></div><p>Most people wouldn't recognize a hostile government if it shot them in the face.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For the same reason people who think for sure they 'd be a part of Star Fleet if it existed very rarely join the military .
[ ... ] All in all , a lot of people are dreamers rather than actual doers.No , that 's a bunch of shit .
The fictional Enterprise is on a mission of peaceful exploration , trying to help people .
That 's not what the U.S. military does !
Helping people only happens when it supports some concrete goal , take a look at history if you are n't in line with that one .
I do n't join the military because I do n't want to support American imperialism .
I would join something like Starfleet , for obvious reasons.I think you 're projecting.Most people who cheer on the Rebels in Star Wars would never ever think of taking up arms against a hostile government.Most people would n't recognize a hostile government if it shot them in the face .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the same reason people who think for sure they'd be a part of Star Fleet if it existed very rarely join the military.
[...] All in all, a lot of people are dreamers rather than actual doers.No, that's a bunch of shit.
The fictional Enterprise is on a mission of peaceful exploration, trying to help people.
That's not what the U.S. military does!
Helping people only happens when it supports some concrete goal, take a look at history if you aren't in line with that one.
I don't join the military because I don't want to support American imperialism.
I would join something like Starfleet, for obvious reasons.I think you're projecting.Most people who cheer on the Rebels in Star Wars would never ever think of taking up arms against a hostile government.Most people wouldn't recognize a hostile government if it shot them in the face.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690913</id>
	<title>All Summer in a Day</title>
	<author>pinkj</author>
	<datestamp>1247585760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bradbury was right about the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All\_Summer\_in\_a\_Day" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">wet part at least</a> [wikipedia.org]!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bradbury was right about the wet part at least [ wikipedia.org ] !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bradbury was right about the wet part at least [wikipedia.org]!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692649</id>
	<title>wrong</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247593260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if you actually converted venus's atmosphere to something approximating earth's, it wouldn't be as hot anymore. right now, venus is the same temp, pole to equator, night to day. but reduced, the atmosphere would be like living in the desert, you'd have very cold nights, and very hot days. and since a day on venus is 100 days long, it means you'd have a siesta culture where everyone stays inside midday, and inside midnight. dawn and dusk would be pleasant in between, and dawn and dusk would last weeks. ecologically, you'd grow your crops like they do in northern climes on earth, except that winter/ summer would actually be night/ day seasons</p><p>as for your unstable balance of o2 and carbon, thats pretty much earth, right now. i can walk into most any nonwater environment on earth and start an inferno by myself if i wanted to. and yet our biosphere has lasted a plenty long time, mainly because the biosphere maintains the balance. it would be maintained biologically the same way on venus</p><p>however, you do allude to low amounts of hydrogen, which is an issue. and you don't mention the lack of geomagnetism, another serious constraint (constant bombardment of deadly high energy rays: so you stay indoors)</p><p>but those constraints in my mind are certainly no worse than the constraints of low atmosphere, low gravity, and low temperature (mars)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if you actually converted venus 's atmosphere to something approximating earth 's , it would n't be as hot anymore .
right now , venus is the same temp , pole to equator , night to day .
but reduced , the atmosphere would be like living in the desert , you 'd have very cold nights , and very hot days .
and since a day on venus is 100 days long , it means you 'd have a siesta culture where everyone stays inside midday , and inside midnight .
dawn and dusk would be pleasant in between , and dawn and dusk would last weeks .
ecologically , you 'd grow your crops like they do in northern climes on earth , except that winter/ summer would actually be night/ day seasonsas for your unstable balance of o2 and carbon , thats pretty much earth , right now .
i can walk into most any nonwater environment on earth and start an inferno by myself if i wanted to .
and yet our biosphere has lasted a plenty long time , mainly because the biosphere maintains the balance .
it would be maintained biologically the same way on venushowever , you do allude to low amounts of hydrogen , which is an issue .
and you do n't mention the lack of geomagnetism , another serious constraint ( constant bombardment of deadly high energy rays : so you stay indoors ) but those constraints in my mind are certainly no worse than the constraints of low atmosphere , low gravity , and low temperature ( mars )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if you actually converted venus's atmosphere to something approximating earth's, it wouldn't be as hot anymore.
right now, venus is the same temp, pole to equator, night to day.
but reduced, the atmosphere would be like living in the desert, you'd have very cold nights, and very hot days.
and since a day on venus is 100 days long, it means you'd have a siesta culture where everyone stays inside midday, and inside midnight.
dawn and dusk would be pleasant in between, and dawn and dusk would last weeks.
ecologically, you'd grow your crops like they do in northern climes on earth, except that winter/ summer would actually be night/ day seasonsas for your unstable balance of o2 and carbon, thats pretty much earth, right now.
i can walk into most any nonwater environment on earth and start an inferno by myself if i wanted to.
and yet our biosphere has lasted a plenty long time, mainly because the biosphere maintains the balance.
it would be maintained biologically the same way on venushowever, you do allude to low amounts of hydrogen, which is an issue.
and you don't mention the lack of geomagnetism, another serious constraint (constant bombardment of deadly high energy rays: so you stay indoors)but those constraints in my mind are certainly no worse than the constraints of low atmosphere, low gravity, and low temperature (mars)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692045</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749</id>
	<title>we always focus on mars</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1247585040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>but i always thought venus was a better target for terraforming</p><p>its easier to subtract out of venus' atmosphere than put in mars' atmosphere what isn't there. i didn't say EASY, i said EASIER</p><p>some sort of genetically engineered bug that sequesters all of the CO2 and H2SO4, and permanently precipitates it out, preferably leaving O2 and H2O. something that could live on top of the clouds and in them. there's a lot of energy in that atmosphere, and you're closer to the sun... which is actually good: something to work with. rather than being far from the sun and feeble with resources, like mars</p><p>again, this is in no way easy, but if we ever reach the technological acumen and sustained effort needed to terraform one of our neighbors, i really think venus is a much better target than mars. more available energy to work with, almost identical gravity profile, and the need to subtract something out of the atmosphere, rather than to somehow create what isn't there, which is a lot easier to do, logically</p><p>mars has a long and sustained following and fan base, in science fiction as well as real science, but venus is the real future of mankind's first off-world colonization (besides the moon), if we ever get to that level of sophistication to even consider the possibility</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but i always thought venus was a better target for terraformingits easier to subtract out of venus ' atmosphere than put in mars ' atmosphere what is n't there .
i did n't say EASY , i said EASIERsome sort of genetically engineered bug that sequesters all of the CO2 and H2SO4 , and permanently precipitates it out , preferably leaving O2 and H2O .
something that could live on top of the clouds and in them .
there 's a lot of energy in that atmosphere , and you 're closer to the sun... which is actually good : something to work with .
rather than being far from the sun and feeble with resources , like marsagain , this is in no way easy , but if we ever reach the technological acumen and sustained effort needed to terraform one of our neighbors , i really think venus is a much better target than mars .
more available energy to work with , almost identical gravity profile , and the need to subtract something out of the atmosphere , rather than to somehow create what is n't there , which is a lot easier to do , logicallymars has a long and sustained following and fan base , in science fiction as well as real science , but venus is the real future of mankind 's first off-world colonization ( besides the moon ) , if we ever get to that level of sophistication to even consider the possibility</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but i always thought venus was a better target for terraformingits easier to subtract out of venus' atmosphere than put in mars' atmosphere what isn't there.
i didn't say EASY, i said EASIERsome sort of genetically engineered bug that sequesters all of the CO2 and H2SO4, and permanently precipitates it out, preferably leaving O2 and H2O.
something that could live on top of the clouds and in them.
there's a lot of energy in that atmosphere, and you're closer to the sun... which is actually good: something to work with.
rather than being far from the sun and feeble with resources, like marsagain, this is in no way easy, but if we ever reach the technological acumen and sustained effort needed to terraform one of our neighbors, i really think venus is a much better target than mars.
more available energy to work with, almost identical gravity profile, and the need to subtract something out of the atmosphere, rather than to somehow create what isn't there, which is a lot easier to do, logicallymars has a long and sustained following and fan base, in science fiction as well as real science, but venus is the real future of mankind's first off-world colonization (besides the moon), if we ever get to that level of sophistication to even consider the possibility</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691597</id>
	<title>Define "quite terra-formable"</title>
	<author>Roger W Moore</author>
	<datestamp>1247588820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is the minor problem of the small fraction sulphuric acid and the small amount of nitrogen. If we really converted all the CO2 to O2 then fires would be a major concern. We would actually need to remove a large fraction of the atmosphere, add nitrogen (or other inert gas), filter out the H2SO4 and also find some way to massively increase the albedo to reduce the far greater heating from the sun.

If you can do all of that then you are right - Venus is terraformable. Short of them finding the cure for aging I doubt I'm going to live to see it happen though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is the minor problem of the small fraction sulphuric acid and the small amount of nitrogen .
If we really converted all the CO2 to O2 then fires would be a major concern .
We would actually need to remove a large fraction of the atmosphere , add nitrogen ( or other inert gas ) , filter out the H2SO4 and also find some way to massively increase the albedo to reduce the far greater heating from the sun .
If you can do all of that then you are right - Venus is terraformable .
Short of them finding the cure for aging I doubt I 'm going to live to see it happen though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is the minor problem of the small fraction sulphuric acid and the small amount of nitrogen.
If we really converted all the CO2 to O2 then fires would be a major concern.
We would actually need to remove a large fraction of the atmosphere, add nitrogen (or other inert gas), filter out the H2SO4 and also find some way to massively increase the albedo to reduce the far greater heating from the sun.
If you can do all of that then you are right - Venus is terraformable.
Short of them finding the cure for aging I doubt I'm going to live to see it happen though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28695259</id>
	<title>Venus's, not Venus'</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247604960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I really people would learn the rules of the English language - they're not that difficult.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really people would learn the rules of the English language - they 're not that difficult .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really people would learn the rules of the English language - they're not that difficult.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28697551</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, but was already assumed</title>
	<author>Jarnin</author>
	<datestamp>1247571840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Venus is actually quite terra-formable.  It does have an atmosphere, an extremely thick one at that, which has caused its high temperature.  It also has gravity closer to ours than the moon or Mars.  If we could turn the CO2 into O2 and usable carbon (like for soil), we could eventually live on it.  Wouldn't be easy, but probably more feasible than terra-forming Mars.</p></div><p>Hah! Venus is not even close to being as easy to terraform Mars.<br>
<br>
Step 1. Cool down the planet. I suppose this could be done by placing a single huge or many smaller solar shades at the SOL-Venus L1.
<br>
Step 2. As the planet cools, the CO2 in the atmosphere will begin to freeze and fall to the surface. That dry ice needs to be sequestered into a more stable form, like calcium carbonite or maybe even diamond..
<br>
Step 3: Venus has a day that lasts 243 Earth days. The only way to speed up this rotation is to smack it with hundreds or thousands of big chunks of rock and ice (more on ice in a minute).<br>
Step 4: Venus is a very very dry planet. Mars is dry too, but for different reasons. The water on Mars is frozen. The water on Venus is gone, baked out of the planet, cracked with UV and had it's hydrogen blow into space. That means that you can't even easily make water on Venus because it doesn't have much hydrogen available. The good thing is, while you're doing step three you can be adding water back to the system in the form of comets and water-ice rich asteroids.<br>
<br>
OK, so now you have a colder planet with more water-ice than you started with and a day that isn't almost a year long. At this point, you're about even with Mars.<br>
<br>
So what is the value of another Earth-size planet in the terms of real estate, land development, resources, etc?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Venus is actually quite terra-formable .
It does have an atmosphere , an extremely thick one at that , which has caused its high temperature .
It also has gravity closer to ours than the moon or Mars .
If we could turn the CO2 into O2 and usable carbon ( like for soil ) , we could eventually live on it .
Would n't be easy , but probably more feasible than terra-forming Mars.Hah !
Venus is not even close to being as easy to terraform Mars .
Step 1 .
Cool down the planet .
I suppose this could be done by placing a single huge or many smaller solar shades at the SOL-Venus L1 .
Step 2 .
As the planet cools , the CO2 in the atmosphere will begin to freeze and fall to the surface .
That dry ice needs to be sequestered into a more stable form , like calcium carbonite or maybe even diamond. . Step 3 : Venus has a day that lasts 243 Earth days .
The only way to speed up this rotation is to smack it with hundreds or thousands of big chunks of rock and ice ( more on ice in a minute ) .
Step 4 : Venus is a very very dry planet .
Mars is dry too , but for different reasons .
The water on Mars is frozen .
The water on Venus is gone , baked out of the planet , cracked with UV and had it 's hydrogen blow into space .
That means that you ca n't even easily make water on Venus because it does n't have much hydrogen available .
The good thing is , while you 're doing step three you can be adding water back to the system in the form of comets and water-ice rich asteroids .
OK , so now you have a colder planet with more water-ice than you started with and a day that is n't almost a year long .
At this point , you 're about even with Mars .
So what is the value of another Earth-size planet in the terms of real estate , land development , resources , etc ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Venus is actually quite terra-formable.
It does have an atmosphere, an extremely thick one at that, which has caused its high temperature.
It also has gravity closer to ours than the moon or Mars.
If we could turn the CO2 into O2 and usable carbon (like for soil), we could eventually live on it.
Wouldn't be easy, but probably more feasible than terra-forming Mars.Hah!
Venus is not even close to being as easy to terraform Mars.
Step 1.
Cool down the planet.
I suppose this could be done by placing a single huge or many smaller solar shades at the SOL-Venus L1.
Step 2.
As the planet cools, the CO2 in the atmosphere will begin to freeze and fall to the surface.
That dry ice needs to be sequestered into a more stable form, like calcium carbonite or maybe even diamond..

Step 3: Venus has a day that lasts 243 Earth days.
The only way to speed up this rotation is to smack it with hundreds or thousands of big chunks of rock and ice (more on ice in a minute).
Step 4: Venus is a very very dry planet.
Mars is dry too, but for different reasons.
The water on Mars is frozen.
The water on Venus is gone, baked out of the planet, cracked with UV and had it's hydrogen blow into space.
That means that you can't even easily make water on Venus because it doesn't have much hydrogen available.
The good thing is, while you're doing step three you can be adding water back to the system in the form of comets and water-ice rich asteroids.
OK, so now you have a colder planet with more water-ice than you started with and a day that isn't almost a year long.
At this point, you're about even with Mars.
So what is the value of another Earth-size planet in the terms of real estate, land development, resources, etc?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28695031</id>
	<title>The water on venus may have never escaped.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247603880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Chances are, it's still present on the planet, all up in the clouds, mixed with sulfur from volcanic activity, and has resulted in a much thicker atmosphere.</p><p>I'm probably wrong but an earth-sized planet (it's smaller by a small margin) losing all its water and earth not losing it at all through space (water isnt that lightweight) leads me to believe all of venus' water that isnt trapped in minerals in the mantle (oxygen and hydrogen rich minerals) is more than likely in the atmosphere and unable to fall back to the surface due to the extreme heat at the surface.</p><p>Good chance that the reason for this may also be due to why Venus is rotating backwards, It may have experienced an event that we fear happening here. A very large asteroid that was headed for the sun may have hit Venus over 500MYA and causes a resurfacing event, and the heat from the blast vaporized all the water on the planet, and large amounts of sulfur from the resurfacing event mixed with the clouds.</p><p>Who knows, Venus may be in the middle of being "reborn" for all we know. Similar to the event that's theorized to have formed the moon in regards to earth. Something huge hit Earth, and the planet was resurfaced.</p><p>Hell, it could have been a moon in Orbit around venus that collided for all we know, something HUGE had to have collided with Venus at some point to cause the rotation to not only slow down to 243 Earth days, but to go in reverse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Chances are , it 's still present on the planet , all up in the clouds , mixed with sulfur from volcanic activity , and has resulted in a much thicker atmosphere.I 'm probably wrong but an earth-sized planet ( it 's smaller by a small margin ) losing all its water and earth not losing it at all through space ( water isnt that lightweight ) leads me to believe all of venus ' water that isnt trapped in minerals in the mantle ( oxygen and hydrogen rich minerals ) is more than likely in the atmosphere and unable to fall back to the surface due to the extreme heat at the surface.Good chance that the reason for this may also be due to why Venus is rotating backwards , It may have experienced an event that we fear happening here .
A very large asteroid that was headed for the sun may have hit Venus over 500MYA and causes a resurfacing event , and the heat from the blast vaporized all the water on the planet , and large amounts of sulfur from the resurfacing event mixed with the clouds.Who knows , Venus may be in the middle of being " reborn " for all we know .
Similar to the event that 's theorized to have formed the moon in regards to earth .
Something huge hit Earth , and the planet was resurfaced.Hell , it could have been a moon in Orbit around venus that collided for all we know , something HUGE had to have collided with Venus at some point to cause the rotation to not only slow down to 243 Earth days , but to go in reverse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Chances are, it's still present on the planet, all up in the clouds, mixed with sulfur from volcanic activity, and has resulted in a much thicker atmosphere.I'm probably wrong but an earth-sized planet (it's smaller by a small margin) losing all its water and earth not losing it at all through space (water isnt that lightweight) leads me to believe all of venus' water that isnt trapped in minerals in the mantle (oxygen and hydrogen rich minerals) is more than likely in the atmosphere and unable to fall back to the surface due to the extreme heat at the surface.Good chance that the reason for this may also be due to why Venus is rotating backwards, It may have experienced an event that we fear happening here.
A very large asteroid that was headed for the sun may have hit Venus over 500MYA and causes a resurfacing event, and the heat from the blast vaporized all the water on the planet, and large amounts of sulfur from the resurfacing event mixed with the clouds.Who knows, Venus may be in the middle of being "reborn" for all we know.
Similar to the event that's theorized to have formed the moon in regards to earth.
Something huge hit Earth, and the planet was resurfaced.Hell, it could have been a moon in Orbit around venus that collided for all we know, something HUGE had to have collided with Venus at some point to cause the rotation to not only slow down to 243 Earth days, but to go in reverse.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692159</id>
	<title>Re:I had a weird thought</title>
	<author>MBGMorden</author>
	<datestamp>1247591160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For the same reason people who think for sure they'd be a part of Star Fleet if it existed very rarely join the military.</p><p>Most people who dream of flying a star ship will never go about taking up flying the planes that we DO have available to us.</p><p>Most people who cheer on the Rebels in Star Wars would never ever think of taking up arms against a hostile government.</p><p>All in all, a lot of people are dreamers rather than actual doers.  As a person who still is a fan of Sci-fi - your sentiment is one that I realized myself a while back, and I've personally chosen to make an active attempt to enjoy and accept the time I live in, and the technology available to me.  While fun in it's own way, if all you do is look wishfully towards a future that we'll never see (and likely won't quite materialize the way we envision it anyways), then life gets kind of boring after a while.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For the same reason people who think for sure they 'd be a part of Star Fleet if it existed very rarely join the military.Most people who dream of flying a star ship will never go about taking up flying the planes that we DO have available to us.Most people who cheer on the Rebels in Star Wars would never ever think of taking up arms against a hostile government.All in all , a lot of people are dreamers rather than actual doers .
As a person who still is a fan of Sci-fi - your sentiment is one that I realized myself a while back , and I 've personally chosen to make an active attempt to enjoy and accept the time I live in , and the technology available to me .
While fun in it 's own way , if all you do is look wishfully towards a future that we 'll never see ( and likely wo n't quite materialize the way we envision it anyways ) , then life gets kind of boring after a while .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the same reason people who think for sure they'd be a part of Star Fleet if it existed very rarely join the military.Most people who dream of flying a star ship will never go about taking up flying the planes that we DO have available to us.Most people who cheer on the Rebels in Star Wars would never ever think of taking up arms against a hostile government.All in all, a lot of people are dreamers rather than actual doers.
As a person who still is a fan of Sci-fi - your sentiment is one that I realized myself a while back, and I've personally chosen to make an active attempt to enjoy and accept the time I live in, and the technology available to me.
While fun in it's own way, if all you do is look wishfully towards a future that we'll never see (and likely won't quite materialize the way we envision it anyways), then life gets kind of boring after a while.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690717</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691353</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, but was already assumed</title>
	<author>Bemopolis</author>
	<datestamp>1247587740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If we could turn CO2 into useful oxygen and free carbon, don't you think we'd be doing it here on Earth first?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If we could turn CO2 into useful oxygen and free carbon , do n't you think we 'd be doing it here on Earth first ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If we could turn CO2 into useful oxygen and free carbon, don't you think we'd be doing it here on Earth first?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28694243</id>
	<title>Re:we always focus on mars</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247599740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A big problem with Venus is that the venusian day takes 116 earth days which would make plants, animals and insects die pretty quickly (unless you bioengineer their metabolic cycles somehow)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A big problem with Venus is that the venusian day takes 116 earth days which would make plants , animals and insects die pretty quickly ( unless you bioengineer their metabolic cycles somehow )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A big problem with Venus is that the venusian day takes 116 earth days which would make plants, animals and insects die pretty quickly (unless you bioengineer their metabolic cycles somehow)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692789</id>
	<title>Now the number one planet to study</title>
	<author>Shadowmist</author>
	<datestamp>1247593800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If this is true, Venus is now the number one planet to study.  If it started out to be that much more Earthlike than we had previouly figured out to be than we need to know what happened to turn a potential Twin Earth to Hell. And is Earth going towards the same route and how much may Humanity have to say about it one way or the other?  Why is it's rotation so slow?  (Little known factiod, the extra weird thing about Venus' rotation is that it is locked to Earth in that whenever it is at closest approach to our world, it is always showing the same side)</htmltext>
<tokenext>If this is true , Venus is now the number one planet to study .
If it started out to be that much more Earthlike than we had previouly figured out to be than we need to know what happened to turn a potential Twin Earth to Hell .
And is Earth going towards the same route and how much may Humanity have to say about it one way or the other ?
Why is it 's rotation so slow ?
( Little known factiod , the extra weird thing about Venus ' rotation is that it is locked to Earth in that whenever it is at closest approach to our world , it is always showing the same side )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this is true, Venus is now the number one planet to study.
If it started out to be that much more Earthlike than we had previouly figured out to be than we need to know what happened to turn a potential Twin Earth to Hell.
And is Earth going towards the same route and how much may Humanity have to say about it one way or the other?
Why is it's rotation so slow?
(Little known factiod, the extra weird thing about Venus' rotation is that it is locked to Earth in that whenever it is at closest approach to our world, it is always showing the same side)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28702581</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, but was already assumed</title>
	<author>Diabolus Advocatus</author>
	<datestamp>1247667900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Except that the atmospheric pressure it 90 time that of earth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except that the atmospheric pressure it 90 time that of earth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except that the atmospheric pressure it 90 time that of earth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692425</id>
	<title>Kinda puts a kink in Gaia theory though</title>
	<author>Liquidrage</author>
	<datestamp>1247592240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Assuming life was able to start there in the first place (and given large amounts of water and the right temperature, it seems possible it could had).
Organisms that thrived on excess CO2 and helped trapped excess CO2 should have flourished and helped regulate the atmosphere.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Assuming life was able to start there in the first place ( and given large amounts of water and the right temperature , it seems possible it could had ) .
Organisms that thrived on excess CO2 and helped trapped excess CO2 should have flourished and helped regulate the atmosphere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Assuming life was able to start there in the first place (and given large amounts of water and the right temperature, it seems possible it could had).
Organisms that thrived on excess CO2 and helped trapped excess CO2 should have flourished and helped regulate the atmosphere.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690709</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690837</id>
	<title>The Roman goddess of love.</title>
	<author>jbezorg</author>
	<datestamp>1247585400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...and the submission's title.</p><p>There's a joke here. I just know it...</p><p>Think... think... think.... </p><p>Nope, can't think of one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...and the submission 's title.There 's a joke here .
I just know it...Think... think... think.... Nope , ca n't think of one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...and the submission's title.There's a joke here.
I just know it...Think... think... think.... Nope, can't think of one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28695243</id>
	<title>Re:wrong</title>
	<author>Sparklepony</author>
	<datestamp>1247604900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>as for your unstable balance of o2 and carbon, thats pretty much earth, right now. i can walk into most any nonwater environment on earth and start an inferno by myself if i wanted to. and yet our biosphere has lasted a plenty long time, mainly because the biosphere maintains the balance. it would be maintained biologically the same way on venus</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

I think you're underestimating the magnitude of the difference here, and just how reactive that much pure oxygen would be. The Apollo 1 fire happened because the capsule was filled with slightly more than one atmosphere of pure oxygen, which made anything remotely flammable turn into a blowtorch the moment it ignited. This would be more than an order of magnitude worse than that. And the planet wouldn't cool down appreciably until after you'd got rid of the atmosphere, so it'd still be hot enough to melt lead while you're starting to introduce both high-pressure oxygen and a fuel source to the environment. Photosynthetic life might help maintain a livable environment <i>after</i> you've made it livable, but it's not going to get there by itself - no way no how. Sagan himself retracted the idea in his book <i>Pale Blue Dot</i>.

</p><p>
One of the proposals I've seen that seems much more plausible is to refine calcium and magnesium metal from extravenusian sources such as the Moon or asteroids, and bombard the planet with ingots of it. Calcium and magnesium metal can react with carbon dioxide to form solid carbonates. You'd still need an enormous amount of it, though, and I'm not 100\% sure on whether even inorganic carbonates would be stable at Venusian temperatures.

</p><p>Alternately, you could perhaps colonize Venus as-is using aerostat cities. At an altitude of 50 kilometers above Venus' surface the atmospheric pressure is about the same as sea level on Earth and the temperature is in the 0-50 degree C range, the most Earthlike conditions you can find anywhere in the solar system outside of Earth itself. What's more, an Earthlike oxygen-nitrogen mix is lower density than Venus' carbon dioxide atmosphere, so your balloon city would be able to float using nothing but its own internal air as a lifting gas. A spiffy idea, IMO.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>as for your unstable balance of o2 and carbon , thats pretty much earth , right now .
i can walk into most any nonwater environment on earth and start an inferno by myself if i wanted to .
and yet our biosphere has lasted a plenty long time , mainly because the biosphere maintains the balance .
it would be maintained biologically the same way on venus I think you 're underestimating the magnitude of the difference here , and just how reactive that much pure oxygen would be .
The Apollo 1 fire happened because the capsule was filled with slightly more than one atmosphere of pure oxygen , which made anything remotely flammable turn into a blowtorch the moment it ignited .
This would be more than an order of magnitude worse than that .
And the planet would n't cool down appreciably until after you 'd got rid of the atmosphere , so it 'd still be hot enough to melt lead while you 're starting to introduce both high-pressure oxygen and a fuel source to the environment .
Photosynthetic life might help maintain a livable environment after you 've made it livable , but it 's not going to get there by itself - no way no how .
Sagan himself retracted the idea in his book Pale Blue Dot .
One of the proposals I 've seen that seems much more plausible is to refine calcium and magnesium metal from extravenusian sources such as the Moon or asteroids , and bombard the planet with ingots of it .
Calcium and magnesium metal can react with carbon dioxide to form solid carbonates .
You 'd still need an enormous amount of it , though , and I 'm not 100 \ % sure on whether even inorganic carbonates would be stable at Venusian temperatures .
Alternately , you could perhaps colonize Venus as-is using aerostat cities .
At an altitude of 50 kilometers above Venus ' surface the atmospheric pressure is about the same as sea level on Earth and the temperature is in the 0-50 degree C range , the most Earthlike conditions you can find anywhere in the solar system outside of Earth itself .
What 's more , an Earthlike oxygen-nitrogen mix is lower density than Venus ' carbon dioxide atmosphere , so your balloon city would be able to float using nothing but its own internal air as a lifting gas .
A spiffy idea , IMO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>as for your unstable balance of o2 and carbon, thats pretty much earth, right now.
i can walk into most any nonwater environment on earth and start an inferno by myself if i wanted to.
and yet our biosphere has lasted a plenty long time, mainly because the biosphere maintains the balance.
it would be maintained biologically the same way on venus


I think you're underestimating the magnitude of the difference here, and just how reactive that much pure oxygen would be.
The Apollo 1 fire happened because the capsule was filled with slightly more than one atmosphere of pure oxygen, which made anything remotely flammable turn into a blowtorch the moment it ignited.
This would be more than an order of magnitude worse than that.
And the planet wouldn't cool down appreciably until after you'd got rid of the atmosphere, so it'd still be hot enough to melt lead while you're starting to introduce both high-pressure oxygen and a fuel source to the environment.
Photosynthetic life might help maintain a livable environment after you've made it livable, but it's not going to get there by itself - no way no how.
Sagan himself retracted the idea in his book Pale Blue Dot.
One of the proposals I've seen that seems much more plausible is to refine calcium and magnesium metal from extravenusian sources such as the Moon or asteroids, and bombard the planet with ingots of it.
Calcium and magnesium metal can react with carbon dioxide to form solid carbonates.
You'd still need an enormous amount of it, though, and I'm not 100\% sure on whether even inorganic carbonates would be stable at Venusian temperatures.
Alternately, you could perhaps colonize Venus as-is using aerostat cities.
At an altitude of 50 kilometers above Venus' surface the atmospheric pressure is about the same as sea level on Earth and the temperature is in the 0-50 degree C range, the most Earthlike conditions you can find anywhere in the solar system outside of Earth itself.
What's more, an Earthlike oxygen-nitrogen mix is lower density than Venus' carbon dioxide atmosphere, so your balloon city would be able to float using nothing but its own internal air as a lifting gas.
A spiffy idea, IMO.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692649</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691983</id>
	<title>Re:I had a weird thought</title>
	<author>martas</author>
	<datestamp>1247590380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>well, it's an all or nothing attitude. if i can't walk in a park that's on a planet on the other side of the galaxy, then i wont walk in any park at all!</htmltext>
<tokenext>well , it 's an all or nothing attitude .
if i ca n't walk in a park that 's on a planet on the other side of the galaxy , then i wont walk in any park at all !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well, it's an all or nothing attitude.
if i can't walk in a park that's on a planet on the other side of the galaxy, then i wont walk in any park at all!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690717</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28693557</id>
	<title>I replyed that this was a miswording</title>
	<author>gubers33</author>
	<datestamp>1247596740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Further down, if you would like to look, but I meant to say part of its atmosphere, which include the lighter elements of Oxygen, Helium, and Hydrogen. This left the denser elements which it consists of now(Nitrogen and Carbon dioxide.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Further down , if you would like to look , but I meant to say part of its atmosphere , which include the lighter elements of Oxygen , Helium , and Hydrogen .
This left the denser elements which it consists of now ( Nitrogen and Carbon dioxide .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Further down, if you would like to look, but I meant to say part of its atmosphere, which include the lighter elements of Oxygen, Helium, and Hydrogen.
This left the denser elements which it consists of now(Nitrogen and Carbon dioxide.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692045</id>
	<title>Re:we always focus on mars</title>
	<author>Sparklepony</author>
	<datestamp>1247590680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>but i always thought venus was a better target for terraforming.
its easier to subtract out of venus' atmosphere than put in mars' atmosphere what isn't there. i didn't say EASY, i said EASIER.
some sort of genetically engineered bug that sequesters all of the CO2 and H2SO4, and permanently precipitates it out, preferably leaving O2 and H2O. something that could live on top of the clouds and in them.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>

Actually, no, it's way harder to terraform Venus than it is to terraform Mars. The "just introduce algae" idea was proposed in 1961 by Carl Sagan, before the full extent of just how awful Venus' atmosphere was was fully appreciated. Venus has 90 atmospheres worth of carbon dioxide, and pretty much no available hydrogen. If you want to convert carbon into <i>organic</i> molecules, you need to have hydrogen - carbon alone is not sufficient. But if by some chance you did somehow convert 90 atmospheres worth of carbon dioxide into carbon and oxygen, what you'd wind up with is a furnace-hot planet with <i>60 atmospheres of pure oxygen</i> and a layer of <i>flammable</i> carbon several hundred feet thick. This is not a stable situation, it'll go right back to the way it is now very quickly and spectacularly (though since the carbon would have been burning as fast as it's produced you'd never get such an extreme disequilibrium in real life). The permanent sequestration of all that carbon dioxide will require the addition of more material to the planet's atmosphere from the outside than would be required to give Mars a whole new atmosphere from scratch.

</p><p>
Furthermore, once you've given Venus an Earthlike atmosphere, there's another issue to consider; Venus has a rotation that's 243 Earth days long. Night lasts for 122 days on Venus. Without its ultra-dense atmosphere to convey heat around it's going to get extremely cold in the dark. We'll have to come up with a whole new ecology to endure those conditions and it doesn't sound all that fun for human inhabitants.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>but i always thought venus was a better target for terraforming .
its easier to subtract out of venus ' atmosphere than put in mars ' atmosphere what is n't there .
i did n't say EASY , i said EASIER .
some sort of genetically engineered bug that sequesters all of the CO2 and H2SO4 , and permanently precipitates it out , preferably leaving O2 and H2O .
something that could live on top of the clouds and in them .
Actually , no , it 's way harder to terraform Venus than it is to terraform Mars .
The " just introduce algae " idea was proposed in 1961 by Carl Sagan , before the full extent of just how awful Venus ' atmosphere was was fully appreciated .
Venus has 90 atmospheres worth of carbon dioxide , and pretty much no available hydrogen .
If you want to convert carbon into organic molecules , you need to have hydrogen - carbon alone is not sufficient .
But if by some chance you did somehow convert 90 atmospheres worth of carbon dioxide into carbon and oxygen , what you 'd wind up with is a furnace-hot planet with 60 atmospheres of pure oxygen and a layer of flammable carbon several hundred feet thick .
This is not a stable situation , it 'll go right back to the way it is now very quickly and spectacularly ( though since the carbon would have been burning as fast as it 's produced you 'd never get such an extreme disequilibrium in real life ) .
The permanent sequestration of all that carbon dioxide will require the addition of more material to the planet 's atmosphere from the outside than would be required to give Mars a whole new atmosphere from scratch .
Furthermore , once you 've given Venus an Earthlike atmosphere , there 's another issue to consider ; Venus has a rotation that 's 243 Earth days long .
Night lasts for 122 days on Venus .
Without its ultra-dense atmosphere to convey heat around it 's going to get extremely cold in the dark .
We 'll have to come up with a whole new ecology to endure those conditions and it does n't sound all that fun for human inhabitants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but i always thought venus was a better target for terraforming.
its easier to subtract out of venus' atmosphere than put in mars' atmosphere what isn't there.
i didn't say EASY, i said EASIER.
some sort of genetically engineered bug that sequesters all of the CO2 and H2SO4, and permanently precipitates it out, preferably leaving O2 and H2O.
something that could live on top of the clouds and in them.
Actually, no, it's way harder to terraform Venus than it is to terraform Mars.
The "just introduce algae" idea was proposed in 1961 by Carl Sagan, before the full extent of just how awful Venus' atmosphere was was fully appreciated.
Venus has 90 atmospheres worth of carbon dioxide, and pretty much no available hydrogen.
If you want to convert carbon into organic molecules, you need to have hydrogen - carbon alone is not sufficient.
But if by some chance you did somehow convert 90 atmospheres worth of carbon dioxide into carbon and oxygen, what you'd wind up with is a furnace-hot planet with 60 atmospheres of pure oxygen and a layer of flammable carbon several hundred feet thick.
This is not a stable situation, it'll go right back to the way it is now very quickly and spectacularly (though since the carbon would have been burning as fast as it's produced you'd never get such an extreme disequilibrium in real life).
The permanent sequestration of all that carbon dioxide will require the addition of more material to the planet's atmosphere from the outside than would be required to give Mars a whole new atmosphere from scratch.
Furthermore, once you've given Venus an Earthlike atmosphere, there's another issue to consider; Venus has a rotation that's 243 Earth days long.
Night lasts for 122 days on Venus.
Without its ultra-dense atmosphere to convey heat around it's going to get extremely cold in the dark.
We'll have to come up with a whole new ecology to endure those conditions and it doesn't sound all that fun for human inhabitants.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581</id>
	<title>Interesting, but was already assumed</title>
	<author>gubers33</author>
	<datestamp>1247584260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is just a confirmation of my astronomers hypothesis, many believe that Venus was much like Earth before it was overheated and lost its atmosphere being too close to the sun. I mean it is great that we continue to discover various parts of the universe, but Venus does very little for us seeing that it is in no way habitable because of the extreme heat no almost no atmosphere.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is just a confirmation of my astronomers hypothesis , many believe that Venus was much like Earth before it was overheated and lost its atmosphere being too close to the sun .
I mean it is great that we continue to discover various parts of the universe , but Venus does very little for us seeing that it is in no way habitable because of the extreme heat no almost no atmosphere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is just a confirmation of my astronomers hypothesis, many believe that Venus was much like Earth before it was overheated and lost its atmosphere being too close to the sun.
I mean it is great that we continue to discover various parts of the universe, but Venus does very little for us seeing that it is in no way habitable because of the extreme heat no almost no atmosphere.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690803</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting, but was already assumed</title>
	<author>Opportunist</author>
	<datestamp>1247585280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Umm... someone correct me, but doesn't Venus have a pretty THICK atmosphere, rather? Just with insane pressure and a composition that would even make smog-accustomed LA residents refuse to take a breath?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Umm... someone correct me , but does n't Venus have a pretty THICK atmosphere , rather ?
Just with insane pressure and a composition that would even make smog-accustomed LA residents refuse to take a breath ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Umm... someone correct me, but doesn't Venus have a pretty THICK atmosphere, rather?
Just with insane pressure and a composition that would even make smog-accustomed LA residents refuse to take a breath?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690595</id>
	<title>maybe it's just me but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247584320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that title sounds so subliminally suggestive, lol</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that title sounds so subliminally suggestive , lol</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that title sounds so subliminally suggestive, lol</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692009
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691689
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28698299
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691425
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690977
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28702581
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28698159
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690561
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691719
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28696335
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692159
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691983
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692897
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690561
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28693991
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690561
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691597
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690765
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690571
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690995
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690803
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28694281
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28694243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690621
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690571
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692015
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28697831
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28695243
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692649
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692045
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28697551
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691353
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691311
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692425
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690709
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690729
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691015
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28693885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692159
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28698109
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690593
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_14_1356208_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28694199
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690717
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_14_1356208.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690569
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_14_1356208.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690593
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28698109
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_14_1356208.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690861
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_14_1356208.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690581
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691689
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690821
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28697831
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691353
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28698299
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690977
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691425
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28702581
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691597
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28697551
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690803
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690729
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_14_1356208.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690561
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692897
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28693991
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28698159
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_14_1356208.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690759
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_14_1356208.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690749
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691015
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28694281
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692045
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692649
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28695243
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692009
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28694243
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691719
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692015
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_14_1356208.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690571
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690621
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690765
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_14_1356208.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690717
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690995
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691311
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28691983
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692159
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28693885
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28696335
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28694199
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690807
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_14_1356208.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690709
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28692425
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_14_1356208.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28695259
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_14_1356208.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_14_1356208.28690577
</commentlist>
</conversation>
