December 20 - 26, 2022
Kari Lake Won Her Case Slam-Dunk Jupiter Proves a Much Smaller Sun than Astronomy Claims
But the Judge Didn't Award Her the Victory
Yet God Still Seems to Be Pointing to Her
If you're waiting for Jesus to return, see Post-Tribulation Rapture
Jupiter Proves a Much Smaller Sun than Astronomy Claims
It was nice while it lasted. Hall of Names is no longer showing the descriptions of the Coats of Arms presented at House of Names, but I have many of them recorded in my past updates from which to borrow.
I've mentioned several times that, when Sleeping Beauty (my 1979 dream) was hovering in a car, and because she fell asleep, she could have represented death-by-vaccine in that scene because the next two scenes had her in a rapture into the sky. She may have represented the Bride of Christ going up to the Wedding Feast, in this way of interpreting these scenes. I've shown that Weddings are linkable to Hicks', and Sleeping Beauty was played by a certain Miss Hicks.
In order to show a new thing, that the DOD (Department of Defence) can now be discovered in her hovering scene, I'll need to repeat that two ICE-cream girls in my life pointed to ECOhealth, the funder, by Fauci's signature, of bio-weaponry in Wuhan. When I sought a health-like surname to check whether God may have been pointing to "EcoHEALTH" using heraldry, it was amazing to find that Helts/Helds share the HICKson Coat, for by that time I was using Hicksons to prove that Miss Hicks fulfilled Sleeping Beauty because Hicksons show only eagle legs, which is in giant form (different colors) in the Coat of hover-like Hoovers.
To follow better, load Helts now to load and view other surnames on another Internet tab.
There is a good chance that the giant black eagle of the Ice surname is in the black eagle legs of the Hicksons and Helts/Helds. These eagle legs are in both colors of the giant eagle of Dutch Tromps while German Tromps/Trumps were first found in Mecklenburg with Ice's. Donald Trump is a murderer by vaccines to this day.
I was able to prove without a doubt that the ice-CREAM symbol pointed to Fauchys and Faux's/Fage's/CHOLLENS' (both first found in the same place) because the latter surname almost has the Coat of cream-like Cremers who in turn share the Chief of Kilpatricks. Miss Hicks married Mr. Kilpatrick.
Fauci's boss at the time that he was signing off Ecohealth money to Wuhan was Francis Collins, which underscores the Chollens variation of Faux's/Fage's, so unexpected that we can conclude a work of God with Fauchys having become married to the Chollens bloodline. I had been saying these things for quite a while, along with presenting the ECCO variation of Ice's to prove that the ice-cream pointed to ECOhealth, and it wasn't until months later that I found both Ice's and Hicks to come up as "Icke." That wildly helped to nail the pointers of God, through Sleeping Beauty, to the vaccine scheme conducted by Tony Fauci. The conductor is not necessarily the top boss.
I can now go to the Dod surname in case it points to the DOD, which makes sense because we know that bio-weapons are a Department-of-Defence product, and moreover Trump helped to disclose that the vaccine roll-out, and the murders associated with it, was a military operation. And the murder program included the military-produced "drug," Remdesivir.
Before going to the Dod write-up, I need to repeat that the Ice/Ecco/Icke Coat looks related to the Egg/EDGE Coat. Plus, I have it recorded many times that Eggs/Edge's were once said to be first found in Cheshire, where Eggertons and Dods were first found. Here's the Dod write-up: "The surname Dod was first found in Cheshire, at EDGE, a civil parish in the unitary authority of Cheshire West and Chester. George Ormerod (1785-1873) wrote the following about the family: 'About the time of Henry II., HOVA, son of Cadwgan DOT, married the daughter and heiress of the Lord of Edge, with whom he had the fourth of that manor.'" Isn't it amazing that Hova-like Overs/Offers were first found in Cheshire while Hovers are also Hoffers? Doesn't this make it appear that the hovering scene of Sleeping Beauty points to the DOD's part in rolling out the "ice-cream"?
In canada, trudeau was offering ice cream to children in return to agreeing to vaccinations. You can't get a more despicable killer than this. His reward looms over his head.
Back to ova-like Hova Dot. Ova = egg. It could be that the female ova, or the OVARies, are being ruined by vaccinations. Doesn't it look like God gave the ice-cream symbol to point even to the Eggs/Edge's of Cheshire? "Most flu shots and the nasal spray flu vaccine are manufactured using egg-based technology."
The Clubs/Clobbes', first found in Cheshire, are from "Clovis," son and heir of Merovingian king CHILDeric, explaining why Childs are in Club/Clobbes colors and format. The point is, the Eggs/EDGE's share the eagle, and the ADIGE river flows through the land of Este, which is where Merovingian kings traced themselves i.e. to the Veneti of the Este region. The point is, the Italian Este Coat shares the white eagle with Childs, Eggs/Edge's, and Ice-connectable English Charles' (probably descended from Charlemagne who descended from Merovingians). The further point is that the Adige river flows by lake Garda, which is itself beside Val TROMPia.
It's just amazing that the Hake's, who once came up as "Hykes," have the Club/Clobbes Coat in colors reversed who in turn share the FOOTless martlets of Dods/Dots (Cheshire with Foots). Having said that, French Charles' list Charlemagne's and Charlotte's to go with Sleeping Beauty, Charlotte Hicks, and the Coat of Charles'/Charlotte's is a different-colors copy of the Dod/Dot Coat. English Charles', with the giant Ice/Ecco/Icke eagle in colors reversed, have an "auget" motto term likely for French AUGE's/Augets, yet English Auge's/Aggs have the Hicks/Icke Coat in the colors and near-format of the Dod/Dot Coat.
There are a lot of people blaming Fauci for starting an AIDS pandemic, and so if we are wondering whether God arranged further pointers from the Dod/Dot surname, we could add that while Welsh Davids (Cheshire with Dods/Dots) were kin of AIDs/Ade's, the latter happen to share the black-on-white leopard head with Hovers/Hoffers, how absolutely neat and tidy is that? Hova Dot, husband of Miss Edge, at our service, how did I miss all of this until now? It tends to explain why Welsh Davids and Dods/Dots both share a "copia" motto term. The Adige river flows not far from the Kupa/COLAPis river, where I trace Cups/Cope's/COLPs in "copia."
Shortly to the north of the Kupa is Lesce while the Lesks are listed with the Less' suspect in the footLESS martlets of Dods/Dots. LESlie's, essentially sharing the Starlink Coat, were first found in Aberdeenshire with Cups/Cope's/Colps and Reeds while "copia" is shared by English Reeds. The Starlings/Starlincks (Suffolk with Towns/Tone's), with almost the LESlie Coat, point to Elon Musk's satellite system (Starlink), which the DOD military is using in the Ukraine war compliments of Musk. There are bio-weapons labs in Ukraine.
The Ticks/Tooks/Tucks have a "Militia" motto term that will encompass the Tonys later in this update, and so let's add here that Towns/Tone's are in Dod/Dot colors and format while TONbridge's were from Kent, where Ticks/Tooks/Tucks were once said to be first found. I'll show below how Tick link neatly to Tonys. The Tonbridge's share the crescents of SARS-like Saracens/Sarasins, and the SARS "virus" (not a real virus) was invented / patented by the military, I have heard (I think it was from David Martin), in 2002.
We might like to ask why Towns/Tone's share the Ice/Ecco/Icke eagle. The latter surname was first found in ROSTock, and Roosts/Rusts (Town colors) were first found in Kent while being in Bat colors and format. That can explain it, thus justifying the apparent Dod-Town-Tick link so that military-like "Militia" can become part of the discussion. I wonder whether the DOD spreads illnesses from bio-weapons using lab-infected ticks. The Bats share the brown Irish Gard wolf while English Gards were first found in Kent too, while Gards can be from lake Garda.
Another brown wolf is with the Arms of La Louviere, a place near Mons traceable to Emona near Lesce, but traceable also to a Louviers location of Tonys. Why do you think the ducks in the Arms of La Louviere are footLESS and beakless? The Tuck-like Ducks/Duckers and Tone-like TONSings/Tuns'/Toenniges' (share brown lion with Irish Collins') were first found in Westphalia together with the Allers who not only share the escutcheon of Holding/Holdens, but the latter have "ALLERions" defined as beakless eagles.
Welsh Davids almost have the Aid/ADE Coat because king David I of Scotland had a son who married ADa of Warenne. Compare "Ade" to the Edge/Adge variation of Eggs. Warrens were first found in Suffolk with Ice-connectable English Charles' and Ice-connectable Towns/Tone's. The U.S. military no doubt works with ICE at times, part of Homeland Security.
Dods/Dots have a "cautus" motto term while Cautes'/Cotta's/Cottons use a Shield of "fretty" to go with the "fret" of Overs/Offers. Plus, English Cottons were first found in Huntingdonshire with Henry, earl of Huntingdon, husband of Ada of Warenne. Just realized: the Fenders, suspect in the "DEFEND" motto term of Woods (Leicestershire with Tonys), use the otter while Others/Otters (= proto-Windsors) were likewise first found in Huntingdonshire. Department of DEFENCE.
Ahh, Dot-like Dottons: "Dotton, Somerset is now little more than a farm about 4.5 miles (7.2 km) from the mouth of the Otter." Beauty. The Otter river starts at Otterhead, a good place to track mythical UTHER Pendragon and the Utters/Otterburns. This river flows to near the Axe river to Seaton, and the Seatons have the Other/Otter crescents in colors reversed.
Dods/Dots were first found in Cheshire with the Savage's/Sava's and the Clubs in the Wood Crest. Dotten-like Duttons share most of the Berkshire Coat, and Windsor castle is in Berkshire. The Berkshire's add a fesse in the blue color of the Over/Offer bend, which works with Hova Dot! I touched the knee of hovering Sleeping Beauty, and the Knee's have the bend of Berkshire's in both colors. Berkshire's and Duttons share the gold fret with Overs/Offers (Cheshire). Dottons were first found in Devon with Bastards.
Another otter is with Beths/Beatons/Bee's who in turn share the lozenge of Fauci's. Beaton like Batons/Bastons share the black bat with Bats, and Bastard-branch Betters/Batters were first found in Berkshire with Fender-branch Windsors. The Bat-line Baths (possibly with a red Dotton Coat) are in the cross of bat- and horseshoe-using Randolphs. Bio-weapons by horseshoe bats. Windsors have a saltire colors reversed from the same of Lennox's/LevenAX's who in turn have another "defend" motto term. Battens/Badens (Somerset with Boarders) use AXE's. If the Lennox/Levenax Crest has the Boarder swords-in-saltire, then note that they are in the colors of the Windsor saltire.
The "In" motto term of Dods/Dots is probably for the Ince's/Ins' (Cheshire), a branch of Inch's/Hinch's (Perthshire, near Innis'/One's). This line is traceable to the Una/Oeneus river, beside the Kupa/Colapis. Hinch-like Hinkleys look like they use the Shield of English Charles'.
I don't want to go too far afield with the heraldry here, but want to focus on additional pointers to the Department of Defence from the material thus far dealt with. The Dods/Dots probably share the colors and format of Hamons because Hamon de Masci was a ruler of Dunham-Massey in Cheshire, and while Eggertons (Hink lion?) have the Masseys in their write-up, Masseys (Cheshire) were from the Maezaei Illyrians on the Una/Oeneus river. Hamons were first found in Kent, where Ticks/Tooks/Tucks were once said to be first found who have a Coat connectable to the Hamon and Dod/Dot Coat. The reason I'm here is the "Militia" motto term of Ticks/Tooks/TOKE's/TOUQUE's/Tucks. It looks like a pointer to the military.
[Insert the day after writing here, while on the Thicks below. The DeTHICKs come up as "Detrick," and Fort Detrick is a military lab for bio-weaponry!!! Someone is snitching on Fort Detrick. Thicks are also Thackers while Thatchers/Thackers (Essex with Faux's and SARAh's/Sayers) share the "grasshopper" with Fauchys, you can't believe this snitching, but I do. Thatchers/Thackers share the giant moline of SARS-like Sarasins.
Detricks/Dethicks almost have the Yard Coat while Yards (Devon with a Seaton location) use a "Facta" motto term suspect with Faucets, first found in East Lothian with Seatons/Sittens, with Seins/Simm's, and beside the Sinclairs/SAINTs of Roslin. Sittens named Sitten at Sion, and while Sions/Some's/Swans (Dol colors) are also Sains, it can explain the SaraSAIN variation of French Sarasins/SaraSAINTs (Brittany with Dol). The new-to-me-now Sains'/Sansburys share the lozenge of Fauci's (not "Fauchy"), no guff at all. Face's (almost the Sarasin/Sarasain Coat) were first found in Northamptonshire with the Spinks sharing the eagle of SANS'/Sanchez's' in the Stanley motto. Sains'/Sansburys look like kin of Rinds (trace to the Rance river near Dol), Justins, Kepke's/Kopke's, Sonnys/Staneys and Stanleys.
Saracens are to Sharks. English Saints were first found in Yorkshire with SHARK-using Valiants while Vallans share the Sarasin moline, and the latter's moline is also red, the color of the Sibal moline, though the latter also have the moline of Face-related Segni's/Segurana's, the latter first found in Genoa with Fauci's. The related Seagars were once said to be first found in Norfolk with Haydens, and then while Scottish Vallans/Valence's just about have the bars of one Hayden Coat, the other Haydens almost have the Italian Vallan Coat. The "quieSCIT" motto term of Italian Vallans can go from Skits/Skeets to Skate's/Sheets (Norfolk).
For the record, Sains'/Sansburys (ANTELope connects to Les ANDELys) were first found in Gloucestershire. End insert]
Toke-like Touch's/Tough's/Tuffs and Tufts/Tuffs' were first found in Cheshire too. This is new and cool, for while my TOUCH-knee event of HOVERing Sleeping Beauty pointed to Knee's because they share the phoenix in Crest with Tufts/Tuffs', Taffs have the fretty of Caens (Dorset with Beautys) in colors reversed while the Caen motto is suspect with the Lee-connectable Lice's/Lees' who are in turn in the colors and format of Dods/Dots (Cheshire with Hicks-connectable LEGHs/Lee's and Overs/Offers) who in turn have HOVA Dot in their write-up. And here's the finale: while Taffs can be gleaned with the Face's, the Lice's/Lees' share the leopard FACE of Hovers/Hoffers!!!! Zikers, that's new and looks like it has belonged all these years with the hovering scene. Overs/Offers use fretty-like fret.
Caen is down the Orne river from Ferte-Mace, and Caen is in the Bessin where the Meschins originated. Orne's are Horns too, which can explain the horns on the Hover/Hoffer leopard face. Hicks use a "buck" head, and Bucks share the motto of Lice's/Lees'.
Masseys are said to have lived in Manche while a "maunch" is used by Tickhills/Tickle's, first found in Yorkshire with Ticks/Tooks/Tucks. The Tonys/Toeni's, from LES Andelys at the TOUQUES river, have the Tickhill/Tickle Coat in colors reversed. The Tony Coat is in the format, and half in the colors of, the LESS/Lesk Coat.
Repeat: The "In" motto term of Dods/Dots is probably for the Ince's/Ins' (Cheshire), a branch of Inch's/Hinch's (Perthshire, near Innis'/One's). Innis' (Moray with Bellys) share the boar head of Baileys, the latter first found in Northumberland with their Baliol branch, and with the Phoenix's/Fenwicks in the "phoenix" of the Tuft/Tuffs Crest. Baliols share the swords of Tows' while Touch's'/Tuffs are also Tows. Let's then go to the Tony write-up: "The Tony family lived in TOESny, 'in the commune of Gaillon, arrondissement of Louviers,...'" Louviers' share the checkered Shield of English VAUX's, a branch of Faux's that we saw above pointing to TONY Fauci. Scottish Vaux's were first found in East Lothian with FAUCets. English Louviers/Louvains (Kent with early Ticks/Tooks/Tucks) must have named Louvain (or vice-versa), near La Louviere.
The TOUS'/Tosini's are in the "tous" motto term of Bleds, from Bled, smack beside Lesce above. It's also smack beside ancient EMONa (far-left of map) while Mons, the Hainaut capital, is smack beside La Louviere.
The Director of Parliamentary Affairs at Health Canada, who pushed the vaccine programs, died of unknown causes, suddenly, at 35, and his family is telling people how proud they are of him for his work in quasi-forced vaccinations. This is the new way forward for the liberals, to deny that the vaccines they push are killing them. Hey, knock yourselves out, just keep six miles from me, and breathe the other way, just in case.
The deceased surname is, Exton. Extons/HECKsts/Hexts/Exts (Devon with Exeter and Exters), in Hickson colors, use axes suggesting the Axe river in Devon, and moreover the black tower in the Exton/Heckst Crest can be that of Higgins/Hicksons and Higginsons/Hickensons. Towers in colors reversed from the Exton/Heckst castle are used by Spice's (Devon) who are in turn in Trudeau colors and format. Do you ever think that even one person in his immediate family will cry out vaccine foul??? Are these people this brazenly foolish? YUP, we have seen it already repeatedly. I no longer care. If population control is desired by the dangerous fools, let the dangerous fools die off; let them weep in hiding, where nobody hears them, not even God. Nobody offers them pity because they are brazen and stupid all at once. Good people would cry out: no more vaccines, and good people would be happy to come along side them. The cold-hearted will be treated with cold hearts because nobody wants their cold hearts to rub off on them. Even if you tell them you love them, they will hate you for being anti-vaxx.
Board and Batten
In trying to get to know Musk's agenda, I've been asking which surnames use a footless martlet in the colors of the footless bird (looks like a martlet) in the Twitter logo. The Boards came to mind because they have white-on-blue martlets, one of the two color schemes for the Twitter logo.
Of the six goals that I scored in my youth in organized hockey, six goals that I claim were set up by God to point to some victory of ours in election fraud, three of them included the boards. The first two of those goals, in back-to-back games, were assisted by Steve Tarr, and the first goal (winning goal) allowed us to go to the championship match, which we won too. Tarrs were first found in Somerset with BOARDers/Borders and with the Shins/Chine's/Chings to which the first of those two goals pointed.
In the first of the six goals, my first ever in organized hockey (age 12), I planned on, and succeeded in, FLIPping the puck over the goalie's head. It looks like a pointer to flipped votes by Dominion Voting. He was the same goalie on whom I scored the first of the two mentioned above that took us to the championship. I can't remember that goalie's name, but I once knew it.
The winning goal I got on him was after Tarr's slap shot knocked him to the ice. The puck flipped over his head after hitting him square somewhere in the middle of his body. The puck went toward the net but stopped on the goal LINE. The Scottish Line's look like BOARDer kin.
[Insert -- After mentioning "winning goal" a few times later in this update, I decided to check for a Winning surname, and wow, Winnings/Winningtons not only share eight footless martlets (different colors) around the Shield's BORDER with Boards, but while both surnames use an escutcheon, the Winning/Winnington escutcheon is hollow because it's a BORDER!!! Can we believe it? End insert]
I was alone skating for the net with the goalie sprawled on the ice. I dropped to my SHIN pads in the excitement, with probably less than a minute to go in the game, and tapped it home across the goal line while sliding by the net and crashing into the boards. I was so excited to report that this goal pointed strongly to Mike Lindell, but since then, Lindell has mainly disappointed in the election-fraud fight. There's still hope in the future.
The "vireSCIT" motto term of Scottish Line's allows me to take things to Obama happily on his skateBOARD, in my 2017 dream where I was in Obama's billiard hall. The SKITs/Skeets (Ayrshire with Sheds) share the Coat of SKATE's/Sheets (Norfolk with Sched-branch Chads), you see, and they both share the potent cross of Chads while both Chadwicks and Chaddocks have a good reflection of the Board Coat. Plus, the same-colored potent cross is used by Brocuffs, a branch of Brocks who in turn have another "VireSCIT" motto term. Brocuffs and Brocks share the Chief-Shield color combo of Scottish Sheds/Sheddens.
However, I've not seen evidence that the Obama dream points to election fraud, though we wouldn't be surprised to find that it does for one or two of its scenes. I've been anticipating Musk's Twitter revelations on election fraud, but I have a fatalistic feeling that he's not bringing it out until the election-fraud cases are over in Arizona are over.
After I saw Obama on the skateboard, there was only one scene left, where Obama and I were in the BACKyard of his billiard hall, and was disappointed with his employee who's BACK was stressed. I crashed into the boards with my back. The back of the man in the Obama dream was originally conjectured to be one of the two James Bakers, one of them being the top but former FBI lawyer who was not only working with Twitter recently, but was reportedly obstructing the second Twitter File dump after the first came out about ten days ago. According to Bari Weiss, this James Baker was somehow in charge of what materials went out in the Twitter Files.
[Insert Wednesday night -- I've just seen a video on Gilligan's Island on bitchute. The title is,"WILL THE REAL MR. HOWELL PLEASE STAND UP." It has reminded me that one of the James Bakers was also pointed to by Miss Hicks on the morning she reminded me, by her mannerism, of Lovey Howell on Gilligan's Island. I don't remember all the details of that pointer, but I relegated it to this Obama dream's last scene.
The pointer came about because James Backus (i.e. like "James Baker") played Thurston Howell, Lovey's wife. As it turned out, Thurstons were first not only found in Suffolk with Howell-like Owls/Howells, but Thors/Tours have the Howell Coat in colors reversed. By now you know, if you've been reading in the past few updates, that Howells point to Arizona election fraud.
As Loveys are listed with Love's/Luffs, kin of Muscats/Musks, the James Baker that's apparently pointed to must be the one of Twitter and FBI. Plus here's a new and amazing thing, but first, let's repeat that Muscats/Musks and Loveys/Luffs were both once said to be first found in Suffolk i.e. with Owls/Howells and Thurstons. The new thing starts with the Lovey/Luff write-up: "However, two other sources disagrees with this generally accepted origin and in 'this name relates not to the tender passion, but is an old modification of the French LOUP, wolf.'" It's incredible that while English Tours have the Howell Coat (towers) in colors reversed, French Tours have a giant version of the three LOUPE towers, and the latter's Coat is a blue-Shield copy of the Howell Coat!!! I don't remember doing that before from the Lovey/Luff write-up. It appears that God set the heraldry up to go with the Howell couple on Gilligan's Island. End insert]
A theory is that Musk forced Baker to contribute to the release, or else Musk would punish him for breaking laws of the land while with Twitter, and although Baker may have started to release a thing or two against the FBI, he no doubt didn't want to...but, too late, Musk supposedly fired him, and some major damage to the FBI came forth since then.
We were in the backYARD of the billiard hall. The Yards happen to have a pelican while Pellicans were first found in Maine with Billiards/Billets while English Billets were first found in Devon (beside Boarders) with Yards and Board-like Berts who in turn are not only in Yard colors and format, but share the Coat of Board-like Burts exactly. The Burts were first found in Norfolk with the Skate's/Sheets (and Dunhams), and while the dream opened with a black SHEET covering all the tables, Obama was later on a skateboard, wherefore the backyard appears important partially for a pointer to Burt-like Boards i.e. they must have been branches.
Why would God point us to the Boards unless they could add to the revelation? For one thing, English Forts suspect in the "PerFORATus" motto term of Boards have quadrants in the colors of the split Board Shield, a good start. We then find that English Forts have a motto, "Fortis et auDAX" while Dachs'/Tax's share the crossed swords of BOARDers, how could we ask for more? There is more because Dax's/Ducks were first found in Somerset with Boarders and Backs (and Tarrs). There is still more because Dax's/Duck have red lion heads in the colors of the Duce/DUCEY lions, and the latter's Coat is that also of Sempers (Essex with red-lion Brocks) in the "Semper" motto term of Scottish LINE's. It tends to explain why the latter's crossed spears, with a star above it, looks connectable to the Boarder Coat. The latter's star is also the Dax/Duck star. How did the Scottish Line's become part of this heraldic set? Did God arrange it?
Did you realize why Duceys should be part of the above heraldic set? Keri Lake is at this time (Monday evening) embroiled in an election-fraud fight (in court) seeking to replace Doug Ducey as the Arizona governor.
I KNOCKed and POKEd the puck over the LINE and crashed into the boards, and Knocks/Knox's (Renfrewshire with Poke's/Pollocks) have a rising falcon. The rising falcon in the Dax/Duck Crest can indicate that ARIZONa is in view; see Risings/RISONs and Phoenix's in the last update for the reasons, and compare the Rising/Rison Coat to Scottish Poke's/Pollocks. The Pollock motto, "audacter" is linkable to the "audax" of Forts. Aude's have a blue-Shield version of PULITzer-like Pollets who are in turn in the Pool/Pole/Pull motto, and it just so happens that Pollets share the swords of Baliols and Tows' who were in the heraldic set above with phoenix-using Tufts/Tuffs'.
Musk is apparently quitting the lead role at Twitter because people have been DOXXing him. Dox's/Docks were first found in Staffordshire with Duce's/Duceys. Dox's/Docks are also Dorkseys, and Jack Dorsey was the Twitter CEO before Musk bought the company.
Back to the Board motto, "PerforaTUS," which had gotten us to Forts. The Tous'/Tosini's use a "man" wearing a "shirt" said to have "buttons," and Buttons/Bidens, sharing the chapeau in Crest with Dorseys, point to Joe Biden, quasi-central to the election-fraud fights. English Line's are in Shirt colors and format.
Something seems to be missing from these heraldic sets, perhaps the future will reveal. I won't say anymore for now, until warranted in the future. I'll look for this section at that time by searching "Twitter logo." That's where this heraldic section began, which is what took us to the footless Board martlet. Why should Musk's Twitter be in my winning, goal-line score, at the last minute of the game, and in the crash against the boards with my back? Again, this goal pointed very well to Mike Lindell's packet captures (from Hammer and SCOREcard), which failed us dismally so far, and so what could Musk add to that picture? The last update raised my hopes that a law suit against the new Arizona governor, brought by Sonny Borrelli, will amount to a victory.
It's 12:55 am Tuesday. I was just about ready for bed, and at the top of youtube there was a video telling that Kari Lake has been given the right to a trial. I wasn't expecting this. My senses were telling me that yet another Arizona judge would decide corruptly. If this judge found it hard to deny her the trial, it's hard to believe that the same judge won't let her win in a trial that allows her lawyer(s) to put forth evidence for two days later this week. But perhaps the judge is only being crafty, merely giving appearances of being fair for the time being. This judge has already shown his colors in opposing Lake's win by allowing her to scrutinize a handful of ballots chosen by the cheatin' election house. Every judge has a limit on how badly to destroy his own reputation by allowing corruption to blatantly rule his decision. Obamaites are infamous for ruining their own reputations, and dancing about it, like souls without souls.
Someone in the comments of the video says: "I like how even the local news headline is that Judge denies most of Kari Lakeís law suit. The big news is that 2 claims survive!" This judge appears to be on track of robbing her of her rightful win. The good news is that, if she loses the trial, she can appeal. The bad news is if she doesn't have enough erroneous/fraudulent votes to flip with what little the judge allowed her to advance with.
Someone else writes: "Lost eight out of ten [claims] and won only two that are far from a sure thing." There you go, the judge showing much willingness to tarnish his own judicial responsibilities and reputation. They are ruthless, and will treat Christians in this way if ever we be brought before them, which is why God needs to expose them and treat them before that time. Wait for God's hand to work, win or lose in this case. Kari Lake's suit, win or lose, along with Finchem's, is another couple of steps toward the exposure of the rabid dogs who have violated the laws of God. Unless they are allowed to act corruptly, God cannot punish them, and I think God prefers to punish after the wild dogs are exposed publicly puking on His system of justice, and upon his commands. Kari Lake, by the way, doesn't seem to be a Christian. Mark Finchem is.
Good morning Tuesday. While praying about this as soon as I got to bed last night, I remembered the morning of my hug with Mamie in the LAKE, the event that pointed to Kari Lake in the first place. This hug, or emBRACE, is discussed in various parts of the last few-to-many updates along with three events the night before. I don't remember waking up in the tent with her, or talking to her in the tent, or coming out of the tent. The first thing I remember of that day is having breakfast with her, and soon after walking along the PATH of the campsite toward the lake. I'll come back to the Paths/Petts/Perts momentarily.
Although I've mentioned the three events the day before, as well as the embrace in the lake, dozens of times, I may only have mentioned the breakfast two or three times. I don't how it escaped me to mention this breakfast as a central piece of work, a blind spot I suppose. The day before, she had gotten a bra symbol for the BRAE's/Brays because the emBRACE in the lake pointed to Brace's/Bras' with a good reflection of the Lake Coat. The Brae's/Brays use a "flax BREAKer"" to go with the Brace surname, you see.
I can now spot why I remember two scenes at breakFAST, for Fasts are in the motto of McLeods/LUTTs while Lutts'/Lute's share the Fast quadrants while McLeods/Lutts use flags to go with a FLAX breaker. It's a perfect set-up because the McLeod motto is, "HOLD fast," same as an embrace! Mamie and I were holding each other in the lake for the first time.
While thinking on these things in bed last night, I didn't know the Lute/Lutt write-up: "Today Lutley is an area of Halesowen in the West Midlands of England. The ancient PATHWAY named Lutley GUTTER runs through the area." The Chief-Shield colors of Brocks and Brocuffs (share "sphinx" with Hips') is shared by Gutters/Cutters while Kate's are also KatterBACHs, a possible pointer to Katie Hobbs, the one who fraudulently beat Kari Lake for the Arizona governorship.
In the sleeping bag, she made her arm quiver against me when I went in for a warm hug, and she then turned around to face the other way. Maybe I was being pushy, maybe I had invited myself into her sleeping bag, I simply can't remember how we got to that point. As I said, after she turned away, I hung my right arm around her waist, and started to go to sleep; it's all I remember of that event, and she was fine with my arm around her waist. The waist bone is connected to the hip bone, and Hips' (Norfolk with Fasts and Flags) almost have the Phoenix/Fenwick Coat for a pointer to Phoenix, Arizona, the chief part of Maricopa county now in the election-fraud news.
For new readers, let's repeat that Brae's/Brays use eagle LEGS to go with the moment that she sat on my legs around the camp fire the night before, and then while the Legg surname has a "TENTamine" motto term, the next event I remember after she sat on my legs was she and I preparing the sleeping bag in her tent. I've told that the Mine's in "tentaMINE" are also Menne's while Mens', who share a "God" motto term with BRACEbridge's, are also Mamie-like Mame's.
Back to Lute's/Lutts: "Philip de LotteLEG and Thomas de LutteLEGH, both recorded during the reign of King Edward I. Philip de Lotteleg (Luttley)...'...But Adam de Luittley, younger brother of Philip was grandfather of Sir William Luttley, Knight of Munslow Hall, Shropshire'..." We saw above that Lutley is in HALES-Owen, and then the Hales area of Shropshire is where Market Drayton of the Draytons were who not only have Hales colors, but an eagle leg in Crest. Shropshire is where LEIGHtons/Leytons were first found, beside the Leigh's/LEGHs/Leys of Cheshire.
It's important that Draytons and Hales' share English Fort colors because these Forts share the McLeod/Lutt castle. We are on the right path here. Market-Drayton is on the Shropshire border with Staffordshire, and Staffordshire is where Yardleys (share Lute/Lutt quadrants) were first found who figure into the path that Mamie and I look to the lake. I'll show you how-so momentarily, but just look at that fat "coincidence." The Path/Pett/Pert Crest is almost the one of Thicks/Thackers (both have bulrushes), first found in Staffordshire. Thicks recalls the Ticks ("Militia"), and the Tickhills with the Tony maunch in colors reversed. It was Dods/Dots who started the pointer to the military.
As Lute's/Lutts were first found in Worcestershire with Eggs/EDGE's who were in turn once said to be first found in Cheshire with their Dod/Dot kin, and with the Hales' to boot, let's add that Draytons of Hales share the giant Auger/ETCHes lion. The ADIGE river at lake Garda at our service.
The Leggs (not "Legh") almost have the Trump Coat, and Leggs were first found in Dumfries with the Bullys who happen to share the mascles of the PATHs/Petts/Parts who in turn have a stork in the BULrushes to hint at their relationship with Bully liners (Pitts have a stork too). This now explains why I can remember walking down the campsite PATH to the lake almost immediately after breakfast. Pitts share "ardua" with the "ardua PETIT" phrase of Malcolms/Columns, and Petits were first found in Kent with Paths/Petts/Perts.
Found the event in the 1st update in February, 2021: "Now, we are ready for the morning. It started ugly. I don't remember waking with Mamie or being in the tent that morning. I remember being alone at a picnic table with her, probably making breakfast, and the spiritual air was chilled. We didn't know each other,.." I don't know why I said "probably" making breakfast. I/we were definitely having breakfast, as I remember it, at that table. From the 4th update in November, 2021: "I don't often mention, but have at least a couple of times, that I remember having BREAKfast with Mamie before going to the lake. This plays well to prove the above, because Brechs/BREAKers are in the "flax breakers" of Brays/Brae's, believe it or not."
We would not have been in the tent together had she not sat on my legs, for we were not yet a couple at the time. We had only met once before at her party, when she and I crossed paths in her living room, and we took each other's hands for a slow dance i.e. we were quasi-embraced. I remember nothing at her place after the dance.
The last update explained that Sonny Borrelli, of the Arizona senate, was on the snow-cleared PATH of a dream that pointed to Arizona election fraud. As I said, Miss Peare, who was the first one to point to the Hips', worked at SONY electronics while she was yet dating Mr. Kepke, at the time that I was still going out with them.
While in bed last night thinking about these things, I remembered that Pett-like Pettys who share the Fast and Lutt quadrants have the full YARDley Coat, which now gets us back to the backYARD of Obama's billiard hall. The martlets of Pettys and Yardleys, in colors reversed, would be green, the color of the martlet of Yard-like Gards, which can explain why the only thing I remember after we were in the lake, was being on Mamie's front yard at her GARDen, a pointer to Val Trompia at lake Garda. These English Gards were first found in Kent with Paths/PETTs/Perts and Petits.
The Pert variation of Paths/Petts can go with the Rinds of PERTHshire who share the Sonny scallops. Rinds use "gillie flowers," and no doubt her front garden had flowers that she was tending to, likely watering them.
I can't remember whether she was with a hose at the garden, but it makes sense where House-like Hose's use full human legs, for she got a thigh symbol at her garden for reasons I've explained; it was the giant fox of Thigh's/Thy's that helped to convince me that Kari Lake was in view that day, for she worked for Fox news in Arizona until recently. And the leg-using Leaks almost have the Mens/MAME Coat. The snow-cleared path was at a house, and House's were to topic in the last update on account of it. A the Hose Crest is the red lion head of Muscats/MUSKs, it's amazing that Waters (Essex with Muschats and Bouchier's) share the Muschat Coat!
Therefore, I do think she was watering the garden, for Yards even use "water bougets"!!! I get it. Water bougets are heraldic water containers, code for Bouchier's (water bougets) and Buckets too, and it just so happens that one Bucket Coat is the BRECon Coat too while Brecons were first found in Angus with Gardens/Jardens and Jardins.
[Insert Friday night -- I've been saying for a year or more that French Jarrets share the Garden/Jarden Coat likely because they are branches, and here during Kari Lake's trial this midweek there was a Scott Jarrett who perjured himself concerning fraudulent, 19-inch ballets. Moreover: "Scott Jarrett, the Maricopa County Elections Director, admitted the printer settings were switched on Election Day to alter the ballot size." He didn't tell anyone until the trial forced it out of him. It therefore can appear that Mamie's garden event points to this Jarrett character. In this video (by Sweet Home Maricopa), where Jarrett is mentioned, the speaker says "it's in the judge's lap," interesting where Mamie sat on my lap the night before the garden event.
We can assume that this Jarrett character was in charge of assuring fraud in the 2020 election. Whereas nobody but locals knew of this piece of trash, his brazen face is now in the wide open. I watched him lie, I watched him repeatedly nod his head as he lied in trying to convince the viewer he was being honest. I watched him happy that questioning of him was over. I think he has the target of God on his back.
Jarrett lied on the first day of the trial by saying it wasn't possible for there to be 19-inch ballots, but on the second day, he was forced to admit he was well acquainted with them. Perjury is a LIE, and it just so happens that while Mamie got a thigh symbol at her garden, Lie's are listed with Leghs! Mamie sat on my LEG(s). Lie's/Legh's have an "aVEC" motto term while Vice's share the Knee stag head. She sat on my knees too.
The black boar head of Gardens/Jardens was coupled with the same of Babons many months ago, and Babons enter the discussion shortly below in an insert added yesterday. You will see in that update why Babon's father pointed to Kari Lake. I may as well repeat here that Jardins, first found in Angus with Gardens/Jardens, share the Tease/Thys stars, and Mamie pointed to those Tease's a hour or so after she sat on my lap. End insert]
Lakey-connectable Leaks share the engrailed Knee and Needham bend, important because she sat on my knees when she sat on my legs, and both Knee's and Needhams use the "phoenix" in Crest. One can see Intelligent Design in these heraldic sets.
[Insert Thursday -- Before continuing along this vein, I need to repeat that Mamie got a tease symbol in the tent the night before because the Thigh's/Thys are like the Tease/Tyes/Tigh surname, and the latter were first found in Nottinghamshire with the Mens-like Mansfields who not only named MAMESfelde there, but share a maunch (different colors) with the nearby, Tigh-like Tickhills. Ticks are Tooks too while Touch's/Tough's/Tuffs (branch of phoenix-sing Tufts) have the lion of TYsons/Tessons (Northumberland with Phoenix's/Fenwicks) in colors reversed. Tysons/Tessons are in House colors and share the Home/Hume lion while House's almost have the Rison Coat.
That was all repeated because Tease's can point to Musk's Tesla company, and because Tessels/Teasle's (Essex with Muschats), if we ignore their Essex Coat, nearly have the LEYland Coat while Leys are listed with Leghs. Then, while House-like Huttons were first found in Preston of Leyland, Prestons share the double Muscat/Musk fesses. In other words, this is all being repeated because there could be a pointer to Musk imbedded here amongst pointers to Kari Lake, though I admit it seems a stretch to go to Musk's electric-car company in seeking a pointer to Phoenix election fraud. Musk has taken much Tesla stock to fortify his purchase of Twitter, and I've read that he shifted dozens of Tesla workers to Twitter. We can even add here that Twitts/Thwaits share fretty on a cross (different colors) with Tuff-like Taffs.
Note that Musk has not released any election-fraud material from Twitter aside for a wee-wee (might have slipped out accidentally) against Katie Hobbs, which we might call a cold-shouldered tease toward us. Note that he has not allowed the full gamut of booted-off-Twitter accounts to return in time to disseminate Arizona-fraud news. Note that the period in which the Twitter Files have been dumped is perfect for focusing on election fraud thanks to Kari Lake, yet Musk has either been a cowardly stooge of the deep stage, giving into deep-state demands not to do election fraud, or he himself wants Democrats in power. Which of the two sounds most likely?
Teasle-like Twizells come from the Blake write-up while Scottish Blacks look related to Tweeds/Twiddys (Lanarkshire with early Blacks) and Teets/Tate's. The Blake's of Twizell castle share the Pavia martlets, and I've said a million times that Tease liners have got to be from the Tessin/Ticino river, location of Pavia, a place name I trace to Peebles (beside Lanarkshire), where Tweets of Tweedale were first found. Tweeds/Twiddys, sharing the LEVEnax and Peerless saltire, have the Tease/Tess/Teck saltire in colors reversed. Blacks were NERETva-river liners, and NERTHus was the goddess of the VARANgi-like Varni Germanics.
I can't be sure whether Twizells use minks, otters or wolverines, but while there is a Ukraine Mink/Min surname to go with pointers of Musk to Ukraine, English Minks are listed with the Mine's/Menne's to which Mamie pointed hard. Tweeds and Tweets bring us smack to the GLASgow of Renfrewshire theater, which is where my knock on Muschatov's glass window points hard. Miss Muschatov's surname, being Ukrainian, tends to point to the war with Moscow for obvious reason. While Lorraine's were from Maria of Kiev's Varangians (Ukraine), and while the Moselle river is at Lorraine, MOSLeys (look like Buckle kin) and Twizells are in the format of, and colors reversed from, Twizzels/THISTLEtons and Mossells (Suffolk with Buckle's). Paisleys at Glasgow have thistles. The hard-to-decipher Thistle surname now looks like a Ticino-river element after many variations of "Tessin" had been formed. Lorraine the babe had pointed hard as pavement to Pavia.
Mosleys (Mussel/Muscel colors) use sickles suspect with Sicilians, and Muschatov-like Mosca's were in Sicily within the Chiaramonte / Montechiaro family. Blacks were first found in Lincolnshire with Meschin-branch Mussels/Muscels (look like Moselle-river liners from Lorraine), and Paisley-branch Packs were first found in Sussex with Lorraine-related keeps and Mascals. The sharing of the black boar head between Mossells (Suffolk) and Babons/Bavents (Suffolk) suggests Babon, son of Mummolin at Chalons-en-Champagne near the Moselle. It just so happens that the Babon/Bavent Coat looks a lot like the Muscat/Musk Coat.
Mummolin is exactly to whom the BRACEbridge's (share Champagne Shield) trace to who entered the discussion with Mamie and I emBRACing in the lake. End insert]
The green martlet of Gards can then take us to the green martlet of Denvers/Anvers because Dominion Voting's U.S. headquarters is in Denver. It's original headquarters is at 215 SPADina road in Toronto's Chinatown, and I spoke on the mascle in the handle of the SPADE shovel because it's in the colors of the Path/Pett/Pert mascle.
The Petits (Kent with Rundels/ROUNDELs) are in the "ardua' petit" motto phrase of Malcolms/Columns, and Paths/Petts/Perts have a motto, "Ardens." German Eggs/Eggers share the blue ROUNDEL with Irish Arthurs. French Petits share the Auger/Etches lion. Recall the Eggs/Edge's and Auge's/Augets in the Charles motto, for Auge's/Augets are also Augers while English Augers/Etches' share an "agendo" motto term with Leaks. Augers/Etchels share the giant lion of Italian Forts, recalling that Boards took us to English Forts...who in turn share the giant castle of McLeods/Lutts who are now on the path that Mamie and I took to the holding of each other in the lake. Denvers/Anvers use a "Forte" motto term. English Forts are said to be from the Fortibus' who are in turn in Hose colors and format.
The Holds/Holts were first found in Bury of Salford with Ratcliffs, and I await some grand election-fraud revelation from John Ratcliffe. Will it ever arrive? Perhaps it already has arrived to Mike Lindell and Jovan HUTTON Pulitzer too, for while Huttons were first found in Lancashire with Salford, Salfords have a fesse-with-items in the colors of the fesse-with-items of Huttons.
Boarders/Borders were first found in Somerset with Shins/Chine's/Chings and Battens/Badens, and then German Battens/Bettins happen to share the crescents of Hoods/Hoots/HUTTs and Bristols. Bath is near Bristol. The latter's fesse-with-crescents is in the colors and format of the Hutton fesse-with-stag-heads. The latter's stag heads are in the colors of the Trudeau stags while Trudeau's had linked to Batten-connectable Bastards (share Batter/Better Coat), first found in Devon with Hoods/Hoots/Hutts, and with Spice's in Trudeau colors and format. That's interesting because it's now coming to light that China helped to elect trudeau with election fraud. I wonder how that worked.
The winning goal, which pointed to Mike Lindell partly with the Lind variation of Line's, was not only poked and knocked in, but it was a literal tip-in goal with the tip of my stick, because I was on my knees sliding past the net. And so I put it into the net pool-cue style (used only one hand on the stick), which recalls that I did take a shot on Obama's pool table with a pool cue. The point here is that Tipps'/TIPPINs share the Ratcliffe bull head exactly because both surnames were first found in Lancashire.
The "pheons" of Tipps'/Tippins can be a code for the Phoenix / Phone line. The Tipps/Tippin Chief is in the colors and format of the Ghent and Hood/Hood/HUTT Chiefs while Phone's use GAUNTlets. The Hood-branch Hodleys (share pelican with Yards) have the quadrants of Yardley-related Petty in colors reversed. Ghent-related Gaunts were first found in Kent with Paths/Petts/Perts and Petits while the latter share the Coat of Virgins (Kent) who are in the virgin in the Arms of Ghent'/Gaunt. The Ardens in the Path/Pett/Pert motto share the cinquefoil of Prestons (Warwickshire with Pettys) while Huttons were first found in Preston. Scottish Pettys were first found in PERTHshire, where we can expect Perts to derive from Pettys.
The Pool/Pull-beloved and Pulit-like Pollets use a "loyaulte" motto term to go with the "Forte en LOYalte" motto of Denvers/Anvers, what are the chances? Loys are listed with French Louis' (Lorraine) while McLeods were first found in Skye and Lewis while Welsh Lewis' were first found in Glamorganshire with Welsh Louis'. It begins to explain why McLeods share the Fort castle, and thus drags Denvers into the picture. Why so?
English Gards look like kin of Pullings/PULITs, the pointer to Jovan Pulitzer's part in the Phoenix audit of 2020. Repeat from above: "...Baileys, the latter first found in Northumberland with their Baliol branch, and with the Phoenix's/Fenwicks in the "phoenix" of the Tuft/Tuffs Crest. Baliols share the swords of Tows' while Touch's'/Tuffs are also Tows. Let's then go to the Tony write-up: 'The Tony family lived in TOESny, "in the commune of Gaillon, arrondissement of Louviers,..."'" Tonys were first found in Leicestershire with the Hose's, and Towns/Tone's are in the colors and format of Mansfields, who named MAMESfelde to which Mamie pointed who share the maunch (different colors) with Tonys. The Hose legs are about shared by Leicester-like Leaks who in turn share the Mens/Mame Chief-Shield colors.
Mansfields and Towns/Tone's are in the colors of the Tintons who use "royal tents" while Royals share the bend of Denvers/Anvers.
To repeat how the winning goal seemed to point to Mike Lindell, owner of My PILLOW, the team came out of the bench while I was crashing into the BOARDs, when I got up, the players PILEd on top of me so happy to win this game. The Pile's/Pilots can be gleaned as a branch of Pillows/Pilotte's, and while the latter are said to be from Chantrans in Burgundy, Burgundy is where Pilate's, Loge's and Loches'/Locks/DeLOGES' were first found while Lindells/Linds (connectable to Line's/Linds) use what I assume is a LOG.
Plus, Pillows/Pilotte's use cups for the Cups/Cope's while English Coppers/Coopers were first found in Sussex with Boards. The Copper/Cooper saltire is that of Messeys/Messier's in colors reversed who were in turn first found in Burgundy with the Poulos'/Pouls who use the Messey/Messier saltire with log-like "sticks". Mr. Poulos owns Dominion Voting, and I tipped the puck across the goal line with my STICK. English Messier's were first found in Lincolnshire with Pillows/Pilotte's. Aside from Mike Lindell not having any luck against election fraud, this set of heraldry is beautiful, promising.
Poulos'/Pouls use wings in the colors of Shaws (Perthshire with Wings/Winks) who in turn share the Pillow/Pilotte Coat. The Comyns/Comine's in the Shaw write-up, sharing the "dagger" with Shaws, have a blue-Shield version of the Stick Coat.
Plus, while Joe Oullette pointed to election fraud, the Aulnay (branch of Oullette's) in the Oullette write-up were likewise first found in Burgundy, and they happen to use the giant Pile/Pilot lion that's in smaller form in the Oullette Chief.
I'll repeat that when I was in the basement of Joe Oullette, his father showed me a small airplane he was building down there. He had the wings built separately, all riveted. I assume he was a PILOT, in other words, but we can even take this to PLAINs/Platters to which a paper plane pointed in the Obama dream. Amazingly, while Plains/Platters are in the colors and format of Plain-like Palins, the latter share the Pile/Pilot and Aulnay Coats!!!
[Insert -- I don't remember checking for a Denbigh surname, but it's listed with Danbys said to have named Denibi (Yorkshire with Dance's). It just so happens that Denbighs/Danbys share the Chief of Palins! That's a wow because I crashed into the boards with my back, and Bachs were first found in Denbighshire...which is why Denbighs were looked up a little later in this update while coming to Bachs. Palins were first found in Dorset, beside Dannys/Dance's, strongly suggesting that Denbigh was named by the Italian Dance's/Donnas' who have a good reflection of the Tarr Coat!!! Steve Tarr got the assist on the slide-by goal. The Denbighs/Danbys were a missing ingredient, for that goal, until now.
Wow, the Denbighs/Danbys use three chevrons (not conventional positioning) in the colors of the triple chevrons of COTYS'/ARCHdeacons!!! BEAUTY, for I trace Dance's/Donnas' to king Donnus, father of king COTTIUS!!! BEAUTY!!! These kings ruled at SUSa, not far from the ARC river (over the Cottian Alps from Susa). Arks/ARCH's were first found in Berkshire with SUSans. Tarrs show nothing but ten pale bars in the colors of the six pale bars of Coates'/Coats'! Stinger. Palins were first found in Dorset with the Caens (share white fretty with French Cotys'/Cotta's) whom I trace to the Ceno tributary of the TARo river. Tarrs were first found in Somerset (beside Dorset) with the Cave's sharing the fretty Shield (both colors) of Caens.
I see the Lice's/LEES' in the Caen motto, and so note KirkLEES from the Denbigh/Danby write-up: "Today Denby Dale is a village and civil parish in the metropolitan borough of Kirklees..." It just so happens that Kirklees' were first found in Suffolk with Plains/Platters (Coat much like that of Denbighs/Danbys). The write-up even mentions a Denbigh location: "Another branch of the [Denbigh/Danby] family was found in the parish of Shilton in Warwickshire. 'It was formerly the residence of a branch of the Denbigh family, whose ancient mansion is still remaining.'"
All-in-all, the Denbighs/Danbys have just helped to prove further that God arranged both the goal, and the heraldry to go together with the goal, so that other pointers from this goal could be seen as God's program in some way(s).
As I've suggested that some BATHing SUITs (e.g. Mamie's) point to Sewers/Suits, note that Bathers were first found in Denbighshire. End insert]
The beauty here is that the other Platters, first found in the same area (Suffolk/Norfolk) with Plains/Platters, have a SOTTERley location as one of their homes. It's beautiful because the paper plane on Obama's POOL table acted as the cue ball when I took a shot. Aiming for a red ball beside a corner pocket, I instead rifled the shot straight into the pocket...i.e. it was a sewer shot because Sewers/SUTERs are a pointer to Barry Soetoro, Obama's previous name.
And so note first how Shot-connectable Sewers/Suters are like "Sotterley," and then let's add that the Sewer/Suter Coat is a reflection of the Board Coat...explaining why Obama, in his business SUIT, was on a skateBOARD later in the dream. Suits are listed with Sewers/Suters. Suddenly, the paper plane is connecting to the election fraud in Arizona pointed to by Joe Oullette, but also to my crashing into the boards in a pointer to Mike Lindell's election-fraud fight (he's not given up yet).
The Sewers/SUITs/Suters were first found in Angus while the Chief of the Angus surname is shared with Suit-like Sweets/Sweits who in turn have a Coat like that of Singletarys who in turn share the Board martlets!!! Wow, that is a new thing; I've not realized that Sweets/Sweits can apply to Sewers like this. It's known that Obama's ancestor was Jonathan Singletary who changed his surname to "Dunham," the surname of Obama's mother! Bingo. And Singletarys share the antelope in Crest (different design) with Boards. Boarders share the swords of Siward-like Swords and Suter-connectable Shute's/Shots/Schute's while Scute's (not "Schute") were first found in Lancashire with Singletarys. The latter have three of the two Seward chevrons.
The Sweets thus seem to belong to the sewer on the POOL table, a thing I don't remember realizing, and it's helping to point to Obama. I've shown how Sweets can be from "Swietoslawa," daughter of the Pole, Mieszko I (a Piast), for Sweets look related to two Lambert surnames while Mieszko II is styled, "Lambert." She was also known as Sigrid, a name related to Sewer-like "Siward," and so Sewards share the double Sweet chevrons, apparently. Siward of Northumberland was a Dane, as was king Cnut, Swietoslawa's son.
Sewards were first found in Essex with the Passe's/Pascals who in turn share the lamb of English Lamberts, and moreover the Piast eagle (see it at Wikipedia) is colors reversed from the Pass/Pash/Pascal eagle. Pasi's/Pascals look like Line/Lind kin, you see.
The Sweet write-up has "Swet le Bone" while Bone's were first found in Sussex with Boards, and with Pasi- / Paisley-branch Packs (share Paisley/Pasley anchor), and with a Pashley location of English Pasleys. Moreover, I scored while sliding on my "shin bones," the symbol of Newtons who had a Sturminster Newton location at least roughly where the Shins/Chine's/Chings and Boarders were first found. The triple fesses of Shins/Chine's/Chings are red, the colors of the triple fesses of English Pasleys. The interesting thing here is that, as I've said a million times before, my next goal was the first goal of the championship game, and it came from a PASS from Steve Tarr as he got around the defenseman smack along the corner of the BOARDs.
English Pasleys were at Ticehurst (Sussex), and Ticehursts/Tice's are listed with Tiss'/Teece's/Teese's/Tyse's (Hampshire, beside Sussex). The interesting thing is that Tease's/Tyes' were first found in Nottinghamshire (probably named by Cnut) with Pashley-like Bashfords. I bashed into the boards with my Bash-like back after the slide-in goal, and the giant eagle of English Backs (Somerset) is in both colors of the eagle wings of Piast- and Pass-like Pasts. The lone two stars in the Chief of Welsh Bachs are the Sweet/Sweit Chief. It looks like it was a sweet goal because we saw the Sweets/Sweits above linking very well to Boards via Singletarys. Is God going to hand Obama a dire defeat at the last minute? I hope so.
I've neglected the following until now, which is an additional proof that Mamie in the lake points to Kari Lake, for while Mamie is the one with the tease and thigh symbol, Tiss'/Teese's share the Lakey chevron while the latter have a "VirtuTIS" motto term. It's not likely coincidental because "HosTIS" is used by Shirts/Shards who are mainly in Tiss/Teese colors and format.
Now watch. The Prime's suspect in the "praemium" motto term of Lakeys have a giant leg to go with Mamie sitting on my legs an hour or two before we were in a tent for a pointer to the "TENTaMINE" motto term of Leggs, and "MINErva" happens to be a motto term of Prime's while Mine's/Menne's look like a branch of Mens'/MAME's who in turn almost have the Leak/Leeks/Leakey Coat while the latter shares the bent, human leg of Prime's (Lincolnshire with Leaks/Leeks/Leakeys). Is that not an amazing set a heraldry for it's ability to stay on the events with Mamie and I on our first day of being a couple? Prime's have an owl in Crest.
It was my desire to emBRACE Mamie (I initiated it) in the lake that pointed to Kari Lake, and Prime's were first found in Lincolnshire with the BRACEbridge's who were themselves from MUMmolin, which can explain "praeMIUM" of the Lakeys. And my the way, the latter were first found in Stirlingshire with Chappes'/Cheaps and bauds, both of whom were pointed to my a Russian medallion found on the hood of my Jeep in Bracebridge. Bracebridge's use so-called "vair" fur, and French Vairs/Fers' were first found in Burgundy with Prime-like Primo's/Primeau's, Legg-like Loches/Desloges' and Loge's, and Poulos'.
I'm going to suggest that the Scottish CHAMPagne's (Leicestershire with leg-using Hose's), who share the Bracebridge Shield, were a Chappes branch. The Verona's, showing a vair variation, were first found in Ile-de-France with French Chappes'. Verona's/Vairs share the fish in base with the Neils/NIHILLs suspect in the "Nil" motto term of Prime's, and in the "nihil" motto term of English Vere's/Vairs. "Vero" is shared between the Vere/Vair and Bouillon mottoes, and the latter, sharing the Moor head with French Chappes', were first found in Auvergne with French Bauds while the MEDALlion pointed to Scottish Bauds (Medal kin), first found in Stirlingshire with Lakeys and Chappes'/Cheeps. However, I can't fathom what a Russian medallion could have to do with Arizona election fraud.
This is where I tried for a Winning surname as per the winning goal, and this is where I put the highly-amazing insert above with the Winning/Winnington surname. This surname is said to descend from CROXtons, and the Arms of Chalons-en-Champagne, home of Mummolin, is the Scottish CROZier Coat, explaining the crozier in the Bracebridge Crest. French Croziers were first found in Auvergne with French Bauds and Bouillons while Scottish Bauds love the Ships ("bellows") who in turn love the Bello's/Bellows/BALLOTs (Cheshire with Winnings and Croxtons!), is that not amazing where "bello" is a Bouillon motto term? We just pointed to fraudulent ballots while pointing to Kari Lake.
French Champagne's share the potent feature, which is known to be taken from the tops of Crozier-connectable crutches, with Avezzano's, and the latter were first found in SARDinia to go with the Shard variation of Shirts who connected above to Lakeys. The latter love the Hollys who share the dog of English Halls/Hole's (Lincolnshire with Leaks/Leakeys, Prime's, Bracebridge's, Crutch-branch Croce's/Cross', and the Blacks having a "crux" motto term).
The additional beauty with the Winnings/Winningtons is that their Croxton ancestry because Croxtons (beside Shropshire) share the giant lion of English Jarrets (Shropshire) while French Jarrets (Brittany with the Shropshire Alans) share the Coat of Gardens/Jardens to whom Mamie pointed on the day she was pointing to Kari lake. The Gardens/Jardens and Jarrets share the Babon boar head while Babon was a son of Mummolin.
It's known that Eschyna de Molle married both an Alan from the Dol Alans, and a Robert Croc, making it more certain that Croxtons share the Jarret lion. We saw Scott Jarrett, the "pimp" in charge of the Arizona's election day, lying in court about (hoping to hide) his knowledge of the fraudulently-printed ballots.
But there is more because Gardens/Jardens and Jardins were first found in Angus with the Sewers/Suits who were in the Obama dream with the skateBOARD because Sewers/Suits and Boards have similar Coats, and then I showed in an insert above why Winnings/Winningtons were related to Boards and Boarders. Jardins share the stars of Italian Amori's, first found in SARDinia, and Winnings/Winningtons were first found in Cheshire with Shirts/SHARDs. The latter can be gleaned as kin of Harcourts, first found in Oxfordshire with English Amore's and Damorys/Amori's.
As it was a last-minute goal, I've got to suggest that God may be working on, in Arizona, doing a last-minute victory for the 2024 election. Apparently, the whole Arizona election-fraud system will be blown more wide open than it is already.
[Insert -- While I've already become disillusioned with Lindell, he just fortified my dislike of him this week by saying he wants to check whether Ron DeSantis cheated in Miami-Dade to win the 2022 election. Lindell is doing this for fear that DeSantis may be running for the presidency, for Lindell is a Trump supporter.
On a Bannon-show clip I saw this week, Lindell admitted to Bannon that he's putting up the money for the Lake legal team, which could suggest further that Trump wants her to be his running mate. End insert]
While "Aulnay" looks like "Alan," the English Alans have the fesse of Lance's/LANGRES' (Norfolk with Alans of Mileham) in colors reversed, and here we can add that Pollock-like Poulos'/Pouls are said to have been at Langres. The father of the Pollocks was a vassal of the Dol Alans. English Alans were first found in Shropshire with Pillow-like Plows who in turn share the Dole fleur-de-lys.
German Langs/Langers share the pelican with Alan-line Stewarts and Pullys/PULITs while Pools are also Pulls, and Pully-beloved Pellicans, first found in Maine with BILLIARDs, share the tower of Howells to which Joe Oullette pointed. Joe's father points to Plains/Platters on Obama's POOL / billiard table, and Plains/Platters were first found in Suffolk with Owls/Howells. Billiards are also Billets while English Billets, sharing the BALLOT Coat, were first found in Devon with Maine's, with English Stewarts, and with the Tours/Thors having the Howell Coat in colors reversed. French Tours were first found in Languedoc with French Alans.
Lorraine is the one who points to Mark Finchem when I bumped into her at the Finch subway station while I was there with Joe Oullette, and here we can add that her bus stop, where I met her for our first date, had pointed to Pepin of Landens, and especially to the Landen/Landers a couple of years before knowing that Landrys were first found in the Bar area of Lorraine. The point here is that the six Landen/Lander pale bars, in different colors with Langfords and Longfords, are shared by Langleys, which not only goes well with Poulos' of Langres, but can point the Langley, Virginia, headquarters for the CIA.
Pepins were a Pipe branch, and I showed how OulLETTE's connect to Pipe-beloved Letts/Late's, and Letters. Six letters of the alphabet are used by English and Scottish Langs.
Joe's brother, in whose apartment I moved as little as a week after seeing Lorraine at Finch, is PAUL. Palins are also Pauleys, and Paula's/Paulins/Paule's were first found in Burgundy with Poulos' and Pilot-branch Pilate's (Pile's/Pilots share Palin/Pauley Coat). Paula's/Paulins/Paule's share the giant rooster of French Galli's who in turn share the Chief of French Alans/ALENGs and Italian Paulins who in turn probably share the cup of Pillows/Pilotte's.
French Chance's are said to have married Knightlys (Staffordshire with Pipe's) who almost have the Coats of Langfords and Knights (Suffolk with Owls/Howls and THURstons). French Chance's were first found in Thurston-connectable TOURaine, in Savoy with Galli-branch Gays. The Shoe's have a knight and share the tree with French Chance's, tending to suggest the Chance-Knightly marriage.
The video below shows how the judge intends to rob Kari Lake with an illegal demand. The judge is demanding that the Lake side prove that the voting machines were intentionally broken down, but this is ludicrous, a crime from the judge because he knows darn well that the only thing needed is to prove that the broken machines robbed her of votes. She should be easily able to appeal this case due to this over-reaching demand.
I have a few science sections after the news, if you're interested, a lot of ideas you've not heard before if you haven't heard them from me already.
If you like hopium, here's a law suit that looks like it's going imminently to the supreme court of the United States that hits upon a congressional conspiracy to protect election fraud. I'm not going to comment at this time on this video because it could be a Mike Lindell II project, sort of like a faked nuclear bomb that goes off like a wet fire cracker in the end in order to dishearten Christians:
Part 7 of the Twitter Files was out on Monday (19th), and here Michael Shellenberger shows more on how the FBI pressed Twitter buttons to affect Democrat politics, a terribly shameful agenda for which Americans will possibly never recover on the PR world stage. The United States has become a third-world banana with gorilla tactics. The whole world sees it, but this is by far a better thing than to hide the filth because normal people worldwide can begin to assist in pointing the guilty finger to the Democrat party. It's a good thing when the real nature of ever-faking liberals worldwide is revealed.
Musk this week has apparently called for the end of the Twitter Files, for this week Musk has signalled that he "wants" not to be the Twitter CEO any longer. It appears that he's either bowing out due to threats from the deep state, or he's working with the deep state for some grand scheme to first show the people that the government is in charge of censorship, and there's nothing the people can do about it, making the people go nuts. Musk "decided" on quitting as the Twitter boss based on a Twitter pole he claims to have conducted, which looks very bogus purely to give himself an excuse to bow out.
If true that Ukraine has recently sent missiles deep into Russia, then it gets harder to maintain the suggestion that Moscow and NATO have been in secret agreement to harm Germany together this winter as a first step to weakening other European sovereigns. The problem is, I can't trust anything to be the full truth that comes to me/you in the common news. Did Ukraine really send the missiles into Russia that were reported? All of them? Photos in the news prove nothing. I still do not believe that the Putin we see on television is the real Putin.
One thing we need to do is to decipher whether the Schwabites are for or against the state of Israel when ruled by its right wing, such as Netanyahu. How many Rothschild member would support Schwabism over Israel's right wing? Could pro-Israeli Rothschilds be used as God's donkeys to lessen persecution against us by the anti-Christ? Couldn't we expect pro-Israeli Rothschilds, and other powerful Israeli elements, to frustrate Schwabite globalist programs if Schwabites (by whatever name) decided to side with the anti-Christ invasion?
Communism is by default atheistic, and Schwabism is, like Fabianism, atheistic communism. Daniel 11:36-38 says the anti-Christ will be an atheist. Rothschilds were behind Russian communism, and were instrumental with Fabianism, and yet there is a Rothschilian-size dilemma where Rothschilds, and even the American military, have historically supported Israel. Anybody see a worldwide schism about to break out with the appearance of the anti-Christ? Won't that play to our favor? Won't that cause two enemies of Christianity to focus their resources on cancelling each other? We should perhaps keep tabs on whether Netanyahu supports Schwabism. If he doesn't, it might explain why Musk seems to be moving away from some Schwabian doctrines. But is he? It's hard to make a decision based on the little I know of his doings, but I'm growing in knowledge thereof now that I think God is pointing to him.
Is God going to raise some donkeys who work in our favor? Or will Musk turn out to be our nightmare? A few donkeys plus the four horsemen could pre-occupy the anti-Christs with some deep troubles so that they leave us alone, in large part, to eke out our tribulation existence. The reason I entertain what could be construed as drastic theories is that much will be deception in the last years, and so whatever someone portrays himself to be may be the very opposite of what he is, by design. He has a plan to portray himself as a friend to some portion of the public when in fact he is their foe, or at best using and abusing them. Expect it from the False Prophet, and similar others.
By the way, in case you ever have a wood stove, I've been learning to do a good thing each night. Throughout December, I've been living in a home that is 55-60 degrees morning to supper time, no heat at all unless I'm drying some foods on the stove. About 6:30 pm on average, the wood stove is fired up, and after it runs for three or four hours, the temperature is about 70 degrees. The new thing is to open the door to the stove when most of the last load of wood has burned away, when the stove is very hot inside, and the coals are glowing good. Rather than just let most of that heat go slowly up the chimney, it pours out the open door and raises the temperature very quickly a couple of degrees. It's a bonus for making it a little warmer in the morning.
You might ask: why not leave the door open at all times if it gets so much heat into the room? Because, leaving the door open continually won't let the inside of the stove get very hot at all, the wood therefore doesn't burn as well, and air from within the room goes up the chimney too. But when the stove is very hot, that's the time to open the door. It can be opened two or three times per day, depending on how long the wood is burning per day.
Election fraud is hardly anyone's fight in social media, as if the truthers do not understand how vastly important this issue is for winning some major battles against the deep state. I think God understands it, and I've been thinking He aims to defeat election fraud to some great extent. Watching to see how that pans out. Hoping I'm not wrong about this prediction.
Here's the true Joe Biden who does not have the facial features nor mannerisms of the one we've seen since a few years ago:
Dr. John Campbell is still on our side now, and still not booted off of youtube. He's worried because, after three vaccines, he's got high blood pressure. I like the way he is right now as far as I've seen of him. He seems sincerely on-the-ball, I'm very surprised with his humility to confess error, even if a little on the slow side in past months:
The time has arrived when the hospitals will be directed to cease testing for COVID because the scam is working against vaccinations by revealing that most of the people testing positive, or appearing to have a virus, have been vaccinated. BACKFIRE. Although the study below is only a local one, it shows once again that more people are catching viruses (not necessarily COVID as claimed), or virus-like illnesses, the more they are vaccinated. It tends to verify that the COVID "vaccines" remove immune-system efficiency, the very opposite of what the criminals claimed and continue to claim.
Twitter Files 8 came out Tuesday, now against the military, which I like to see from Musk. "3. But behind the scenes, Twitter gave approval & special protection to the U.S. militaryís online psychological influence ops. Despite knowledge that Pentagon propaganda accounts used covert identities, Twitter did not suspend many for around 2 years or more. Some remain active." Psy-ops from the military? You don't say? Boy, should we like to know what these operations look like, and why. Unfortunately, this seems to be about operations in wars overseas, not aimed at Americans internally. I'd like to know what the military does digitally to deceive Americans.
Also: "8. One Twitter official who spoke to me said he feels deceived by the covert shift. Still, many emails from throughout 2020 show that high-level Twitter executives were well aware of DoDís vast network of fake accounts & covert propaganda and did not suspend the accounts."
Or: "14. In August 2022, a Stanford Internet Observatory report exposed a U.S. military covert propaganda network on Facebook, Telegram, Twitter & other apps using fake news portals and deep fake images and memes against U.S. foreign adversaries." In that case, fake photos are being used also to fool Americans. Anything faked on social media for the field of world news is fakery also against the American people. Nothing you hear from the U.S. military can be trusted. You never know when it's telling the truth or lying. What a diabolical quagmire, because it lies horribly, to make people fear terrible things that are not really there. The military and CIA together create monsters in the news that do not exist. One of those monsters now being produced are Christian terrorists.
So, the very "angels" crying the blues about conservative disinformation are the ones supporting Middle-East disinformation intended to win wars. Why, then, should we be surprised if the same angels put out disinformation in their war against conservatives? They fight with disinformation because it comes natural to them. They are the deep fakes.
Revolver headline: "Photos show Elon hanging out with Jared Kushner at the World Cup finalÖ" Is it a faked photo to do damage to Musk? They both stand beside a bunch of Arabs. If it's not a fake, it suggests that Musk is a pro-Israeli operative, and had something important to say to Kushner. The latter's building is at a 666 address, since changed to a smaller number (660 or higher) since Trump became the president. They say Kushner's not on-board all of Trump's policies. I don't follow Kushner news, but he could wanted to see more military power in Ukraine and Syria, as even Israel has wanted, which Trump was not willing to provide. I tend to think that NATO will go anti-Israeli soon. Then what? Schism. The dividers will be divided. The deceivers will deceive one another. Dragon will slay dragon. He who kills with the bomb shall be killed with the bomb. He who makes others afraid shall fear like a tangled bundle of nerves.
Hopefully, the food, diesel and electricity shortages that crop up in the news from time to time are just fake, military news.
Rick Wiles on the first segment of Tuesday's show is talking my language:
I'm wondering why Kari Lake attended the faggot-celebrating event at Mar-a-Lago. If she's wanting to be Trump's vice-president, then I will probably consider any Christian thing she says as not genuine, political speak, lip service.
Below is part of the first day's proceedings in Lake's case, where the defense, the bad guys, are having a happy partnership with the judge because the judge has wrongly maintained that the Lake side needs to prove INTENT, from the voting center, to defraud / minimize the Republican voters. This is an over-reach by this court because, as I assume it should be, the case is not for suing the voting center for personal damages, nor prosecuting the voting center for criminality, but is, surely, an election-correlated case seeking to show that Kari Lake's voters -- the people -- could easily have won the election whether or not there was intent. I cannot understand why it's necessary to prove intent with such a goal, and the judge knows that Ms. lake only wants to show that the election was vastly unfair to her:
The judge allowed the Lake team to receive about 100 ballots for scrutiny, chosen by the cheats in charge of elections, and somehow by a wild miracle or something else, almost 50 of them had evidence of fraud by being a 19-inch tall print job (on 20-inch paper). The claim by the Lake team is that this is proof that some sloppy group created fake ballots.
Word is that the voting machines automatically rejected the 19-inch ballots, and so we might assume further that the cheats handed the empty 19-inch ballots mainly to Republicans (to fill out) so that the machines would spit them out for human tampering. The theory now is that the many machines once reported as malfunctioning were not malfunctioning at all, but were rejecting 19-inch ballots. The very good news is that this trick won't likely be tried in a massive way elsewhere. However, a little fraud this way, a little that way, amounts to a lot of fraud.
I suppose the cheating side might try to argue that the 19-inch ballots was just a malfunction at the printing process, but the Lake side is saying that the printer doesn't print one inch short unless someone programs the computer to do so, but anyone so doing, without just cause and without notification to the election house, would be a prime suspect for criminality. The cheating side has not come forward at any time to report that the election house deliberately printed short ballots for a good reason. Plus, if someone did print them an inch short for just cause, that person or team would have been required to re-program the machines' ballot-scanning feature to accept both 19- and 20-inch ballots, yet the machines apparently did not receive the 19-inch ballots. The cheats may have since re-programmed the machines to accept the short ballots in order to deceive the courts into thinking that everyone's 19-inch ballot was properly and normally accepted.
On Christmas eve, the judge let out his decision that there was insufficient proof of misconduct, by the election workers, to overturn the election, which is hideously ignorant in light of the 19-inch ballots alone, on top of everything else. In short, Ms. Lake lost the case due to a swine i.e. the judge wallowing in Democrat grime. All along in the pre-trial and trial, he pretended to be fair, knowing all along he wasn't going to grant anything, and the way he chose to go about it was to eradicate most of her claims for trail, not knowing that the 19-inch ballots would crop up in that trial to nail him to the wall as a devil. His surname, Thompson, is the same surname of an Arizona judge who spoiled an Arizona election case in 2020, probably the same judge.
Here's the perjury by Scott Jarrett:
At 7:25 above, Jarrett admits that if a 19-inch ballot were handed to voters, "yes, it would have been a mistake," but the judge sees not much here for handing Lake the court victory because it was only a "mistake," that's how's that pig is playing this game. Any real judge can see that a ballot one-inch short, made void thereby for reception by a voting machine, is not easily a mistake, but is easily an intentional piece of criminality. But even if it were a mistake to the tune of spoiling votes at 70 voting locations, DUH, the judge sees insufficient proof from Lake's lawyers to show that the voting house spoiled the election win for Lake, since 72-percent of voters on election day were Republican, and only 19-percent were Democrat.
Jarrett keeps calling the 19-inch ballots "shrink-to-fit," as if there was a good reason to produce them, but the facts are that all ballot paper was 20 inches long, including the ones with print spanning 19 inches. Therefore, there is no good reason to shrink the print span to 19 inches because the paper was as long for those ballots as for the regular ballots. On top of this, the election house broke the law by not keeping a proper chain of custody, to be expected when fraud is in play, but the judge saw nothing particularly suspicious with that; just a little honest mistake is how he would describe it if he had to attempt the description. He probably didn't attempt it to incriminate himself less.
By Thursday night, end of the trial, it was painfully obvious that Fox global was not permitting coverage of the trial nor even hyping the news of it.
I think it's interesting that the judge waited for Christmas eve to let out his decision because I first saw Miss Hicks at church, on a Sunday, on Christmas day (1994), at a church on the Leakey road. Here's from the second update of this month: "The church in Barksdale that Mrs. Deeter and Mr. Kilpatrick attended was previously on the Ranch = Leakey road, in 1994 when I first saw Mrs. Kilpatrick there." The Leaks/Leakeys use a bent, human leg, as do the Prime's suspect in the "praemium" motto term of Lakeys (not "Leakey"), and the latter use "holly" probably because Hollys have a reflection of the Lake Coat! I'm impressed with this because, although I can't see why-so, it seems that God arranged for me to first see Sleeping Beauty on the Leakey road for to point to this court case which Ms. Lake just lost. Here's from the 2nd update in August, 2019: "I ended up purchasing [land] from a post-tribulationist Christian who attended the same church as Miss Hicks, which is why I first saw her on a beautiful, sunny Christmas day (tee-shirt weather In Texas)..."
What am I to make of it? As the final scene in the Sleeping Beauty dream was Miss Hicks and I rising into the sky, while Risings are also Risons, can that scene also point to something good that God has planned for Rison-like ARIZONa? I was standing at the car DOOR while she was hovering inside a Kari-like car immediately before rising. Ignoring the Holly roundels, Carys (Somerset with Hicks of Clapton) are in the format of, and colors reversed from, Hollys (Norfolk with Risings/Risons), and nearly in the format of Lake's; all three surnames share the Clapton bend, and while Juliana Arthur of Clapton married Mr. Hicks, Arthurs use "rests" while Restons (look related to Doors) were a Rising/Rison branch. The Hollys share red roundels with Shirts (Cheshire with Claptons) who themselves have a reflection of the Lakey Coat. Beauty's car was on a beach while Beach's share the Clapp/Clapper Shield. There's nothing to do but watch Arizona and Ms. Lake's appeal to a higher court.
Comments on Day 2 of the Lake trial starts at 2hr:58min here, after some of the trial is shown:
On Thursday morning, Revolver news had a link to the Twitter Files 9, then removed it shortly afterward. Hmmm. This dump said that Twitter's management was literally satanist. This dump came on the same day that TruNews had the following headline from the day's news elsewhere: "SOCIALIZED MEDIA: HUNDREDS OF ISRAELíS UNIT 8200 EX-SPIES WORK FOR FACEBOOK, GOOGLE, MICROSOFT" That could explain why Musk may have (don't know that he did) shot down Twitter Files 9 in case news readers weld Israeli Intelligence to the satanism that some claim to pervade the house of Rothschild historically.
Background for the headline story above is between 46th and 59th minutes. What comes after the 59th minute is worse, deeper, than the FBI-Twitter partnership, the wholesale censorship control (but also other controls) of facebook and google by Israel:
Just look at this snake, such a typical, fraudulent liberal:
For evidence that the poison vaccines are going to be foisted upon the world in the next decade, see Dr. John Campbell, now enlightened, yet still riding the fence by advertising his thinking that vaccine companies might come clean for a change:
You need to watch the video below with Klaus Schwab and George Soros in mind, because both are in favor of a China-led world order along with trudeau and Biden. I assume that this is going to start a schism with those who purely want a European new world order, but, in any case, this video is telling us further that China is seeking to push another faked, global pandemic, though Campbell hasn't the guts or the righteous stuff to just say so (he may be playing to both sides of his audience):
Campbell is telling us between his lines that politicians who push the vaccines are getting paid as part of the vaccine profits, from tax payers of course because the governments use tax dollars to buy the vaccines, and that's why the governments always buy ten times more than they will need. This is a shameful program of global theft, and on top of these things we can guess that the cost of the vaccines is sky-high unjustifiably in order to increase profits for all involved. Campbell himself profits greatly by this scandal because of the many people who watch his show.
On Remdesivir causing slow deaths by ruining kidneys. In this video you will hear that while a Remdesivir treatment is about $3,000, the United States government pays hospitals more than that to administer it, and so we need to ask why the government would take such a large loss to administer it. It's not a loss if they kill off the aged and thus alleviate pension money. That's my best explanation for taking the initial loss.
Almost 50 American bio-labs in Ukraine admitted to after full denial. Chances are, the worst of them have not been admitted to:
Here's another article in case you need it, in the next year or two, to avoid forced vaccination in a court. This one has a study in which everyone receiving the boosters had some degree of heart spoilage:
Keep eyes on the province of Alberta in case it becomes a tribulation haven. The leftist article below (portrays the new Alberta premier as extreme) can explain why that might be so. I don't think there's a liberal bastion anywhere on the U.S. side of Alberta. Eastern BC (adjacent to Alberta) might itself be a conservative region. Lots of hills, mountains and wide-open spaces in this area, and lots of wood for cold winters. There's the neighboring cushion of Saskatchewan too, with lots of garden / flat land, between Alberta and Ottawa. Manitoba, to the east of Saskatchewan, has endless lakes for endless rivers. LOTS OF ROOM for Christians who do no harm. Think about it, because "crown land" belongs to the people, and if the crown (Ottawa) forces people to receive what the Bible forbids, then God will support the people making-do on crown land apart from owning deeds there.
Jesus believed in Adam and Eve, and never criticized Genesis. The following suggests that more than half of pastors have become shaky, at best, on Genesis. I can understand that, if we use our human/reasoning powers, but there needs to come a time when we do not lean on our own understanding, where things are too high for us to attain. In those cases, we need to trust what Jesus says:
JJ Thomson Was Correct, and Rutherford Was a Fool
I haven't proof-read any of the following science sections, take them as-is.
I did some more atomic science in the last update concerning the impossibility of so-called "fusion." In this update, I want to show how the pudding theory of atoms is actually correct. To see this theory, it's at the 3:35 point of this video below. Once you get to Rutherford's orbiting electrons, you would be wise to ignore the whole junk heap, or at least not to try to wrap your head around it, simply because it's an impossibility for electrons to orbit protonic cores.
Orbiting electrons were chosen by the evolutionist fools who wanted to envision the entire universe with speedy atomic particles having obtained their speed from a big creative explosion. They never slow down, they tell us like fools, because "energy cannot be destroyed." That phrase is a trick. Particles slow down when they collide, but that's not a destruction of energy at all. Instead, it's a consequence of collisions. In a collision of two particles, each particle sends energy into the other, and that energy is used up (not the same as "destroyed") to slow both particles. That's the fact that they refuse to apply to atomic particles. IGNORE THEM, or they will make you go crazy in "quantum mechanics." You've been warned.
The pudding theory you saw in the video above is essentially how I describe my atomic model, which can be found both in the last update and in the 4th update of last month (click link at top-left of this page). Thomson did a great job trying to envision the atom not knowing anything of electrons. In order to make his theory more correct than the way it's portrayed in the drawing, the "pudding" needs to be viewed as the spherical, positive field from a central proton at the core of the pudding.
Plus, rather than having the electrons only around the perimeter of the pudding, the electrons are trapped in all the space within an atomic sphere, aside from the space taken by the proton. Rather than orbiting electrons, the electrons of a true atom are imbedded in the positive sphere, trapped by the positive force, and yet a good compliment of the electrons, especially the outer ones, are not in contact with each other, or with the proton, due to their inter-repulsion forces. Those electrons hover in space, in "contact" with each other only by their repulsion field. I explained this in the last update.
In the video below, we see a claim that a few thousand platinum atoms have been "photographed" by an electron microscope. I don't have any disagreement with it because all the atoms are spheres, and we see no orbiting electrons of course:
One can see the atomic spaces between atoms, or at least envision the spaces. That's where free electrons enter into and move through a material. Nothing can stop free electrons (not captured by protons) from passing through any material because free electrons are the true definition of heat. No material can stop heat from passing through it.
You are not seeing a true photo of these atoms, but the best that the electron microscope can gather. The true definition of light is a wave through the medium of free electrons in the air. The entire atmosphere is filled with free electrons that stream from the sun as the so-called solar wind. Sunlight is a wave through this medium of free electrons, the aether, that is, that Einstein and Rutherford, two orbital-electron fools, claimed did not exist. They preferred the photon-bullet view of light because they were fools. They lied to the world, and to this day does the lie goes forth.
I don't know much about an electron microscope's workings, but note how the video above defines it as a "beam of electrons." Well, a light wave is at least similar because it begins with the motion of an electron in an atom. The motion of the electron moves across the free electrons of the aether. The "beam of electrons" from the electron microscope can either be a true light wave, or shots of electrons that travel long distances like bullets from the gun to the target. In a true light wave, the electron that starts the wave doesn't even need to leave the atom upon which it is jiggling or bouncing i.e. it's not traveling a far distance.
Regardless of which two options defines the beam of electrons for the electron microscope, I'm guessing that it can see smaller items because the gun shoots a low number of light waves per unit time. Typical white light from a filament has low voltage and high amps, and too much amperage floods the microscopic world, or so is my guess, with too much light, making for glare and blur due to too many light waves reflecting back to the camera lens. But the electron microscope can have tens of thousands of volts so as to drastically decrease the amps (defined as electron bullets per unit time), and my guess is that this takes out the glare, allowing one to get a crisper reflection of light from the microscopic world. High voltage means a harder shot of electrons into the atoms being studied.
The beam of free electrons from the microscope strikes an atomic surface and reflects back light because light is always formed by pressing free electrons into atoms, which excites the atoms i.e. causes their captured electrons to jiggle or bounce around, which is what causes light waves to reflect back out of the atoms. Thus, the electron microscope proves that light is formed by electron emission, no photons needed in defining light. Every jolt of a captured electron toward the aether forms a "quanta" of light, no photon is present, no incomprehensible theory is needed to grasp this.
The fools have totally screwed your thinking when they define light "frequency." They should use another term because it literally means "number per unit time." Increasing the volts reduces the frequency of electrons shot out. Higher volts is a harder shot of electrons but fewer per unit time.
"Wave length" is the stupidest thing next to "orbiting electron." If you have wrapped your mind around "wave length," you are crazy. You are believing a fantasy. There is no such thing as a wave length. There is only interval. How much interval between waves? The higher the amps, the higher the frequency of light waves, and consequently the shorter the interval between waves. You are now reading pure English, you can grasp this. The fool speaks the language of demons.
In my opinion, violet light is the high voltage light (penetrates deeper into atoms), and red light is the low voltage light. However, light from the sun is not shooting out as would light from a light-shooting instrument fed from an electrical wire allowing the voltage and amps to be altered. My thinking is that, from the sun, the high-voltage waves are also high frequency waves, and low-voltage waves have low frequency, similar to a water hose shooting more water molecules per unit time when the force of the water flow is greater. Voltage is the specific force behind the flow.
A normal light bulb connected to a 24-volt wire will glow toward the red, mild, not brilliant white as with a 120-volt wire. The electrons, though flowing five times more numerous per unit time, are coming out of the filament more mildly when pushed by 24 volts of force. The light from the 24 volt wire doesn't light up the room much. It's weak light as it strikes atoms in the room, and thus the struck atoms in the room reflect weak light in return.
The experts tell you that the rainbow colors passing through a glass prism are all innate in the white ray of light that reaches the prism. I'm going to disagree with that, and claim that the different colors are formed by the prism itself because the white ray passes through a different distance of glass, thanks to the shape of a prism, and thus the light waves moving through the glass (i.e. around the periphery of each glass atom) are slightly different in force and frequency, thus causing different colors.
The experts suggest that there is a red wave inside the white wave from the sun, and that the prism separates that wave from the others. I say wrongo. I will agree that the sun's light is made of infinite colors in the sense that it comes with different strengths of light waves, but I say that, where we see the red wave in the prism, all the colors are passing through that part of the glass, but the glass reduces the overall strength of all waves so that it they together register as red to our eyes. Ditto for the formation of all the colors in the prism: they all receive and transmit all the colors from the sun, but reduce them in strength/power.
It is my further claim that the flow of electricity in a metal wire is the flow of captured electrons, atom-to-atom, and flowing especially across the outer periphery of the atoms, where captured electrons are held to protons the weakest. The deeper captured electrons (per atom) do not move, in my opinion, but are locked in merger with neighboring atoms so that while captured electrons transfer atom-to-atom as electricity, the atoms do not budge. You can prove that atoms do not budge because a nick in the wire never changes shape while electrical flow comes past it.
In the same way, transparent materials allow light waves to flow across the periphery of the atoms, or so is my guess, because the light could not get through if it moved throughout all of the captured electrons...because the light waves would then hit the brick walls of the many protons. The difference between a transparent and opaque material is that transparent materials allow light to travel in circles around the periphery of the atoms, never striking protons. Ditto with air atoms or atoms of any transparent gas.
My guess is that atoms permitting transparency have "hard" electron "crusts" sitting upon the protonic surface which will not receive the energy of the light wave. Instead, the electron crusts deflect the wave through electrons higher up from the protonic surface, the ones more weakly held to the proton, and thus through electrons more conducive to allowing waves to pass.
Gas atoms are not in contact. How does the light get through the atmosphere? Well, you've just started to learn that light is indeed a wave though electrons, both captured and free. Every single light wave entering one air atom must, by force of no other theory possible, circle around the atom's outer electrons. All waves striking that one atom do the same. As they enter on the sun-facing-side of the air atom, they all exit at the precise opposite side of the atom because the waves cause captured electrons to jolt-out at that spot. Where do they jolt out? Into the air, of course. Thus, due to these jolts into the air, the same waves now proceed through the free electrons in the air until they strike another air atom, and so on: the light waves thus continue in a STRAIGHT line from sun to earth, aside from some minor deviation caused by wind i.e. from moving air atoms (the speed of the wave is so fast (186,000 mps) that moving air atoms barely distorts the light).
The photon theory of light is a fool's game because a photon is a bullet. The fools lie to you because no matter how small they claim the photon to be, it's going to hit an air atom, and thus it'll deflect one way or another, and by the time it reaches your eye, if ever it does, you would see a blur in every direction. The sun would not longer be a round ball to your eye.
You cannot be so dumbo as to think that a photon striking an atom will be tossed out of the atom, by the orbiting electron, in exactly the same direction from which it (the photon) came to the atom. This is a laughable theory, but with straight faces they lie while not informing you of such fatal problems.
In the video below, you will see a little deception, in my opinion, where the presented apes the fools. They try to make it appear that they chose a kinetic theory of atoms based on what they observed, but I say they wanted the kinetic theory -- all atomic particles everywhere in constant motion even in the dark -- to compliment their big-bang theory, and therefore they went out looking for something that they could use as evidence for kineticism. Note the little thingies bobbing in still liquid:
There's something causing the non-organic material to move in the liquids, and there are two sources for forces in a liquid that they do not acknowledge, and therefore they can claim that this motion is from ever-vibrating atoms. You are told that wind in the air is caused by differing air pressures, but this is not the truest way to say it because there is a reason, in the first place, for different air pressures. The atmospheric electrons. They never talk about those little bitties because they are liars and happily-deceived fools. The sun shoots electrons out, and they enter the air and fill it with heat, but the fools do not want this sort of definition of heat. Instead, they want to define heat as the motion of atoms, because they are fools, there's no better word to describe them. They know that atoms cannot forever be moving purely under their own locomotive forces, but they feed you that lie anyway because they can then credit the big bang for giving the atoms their locomotive force in the first place. You need to be wise to this.
Think. Where did atoms get their ever-constant motion if not from the big bang? That's why they love the theory of ever-moving atomic particles. The big bang must have been a secret development of the loony scientists long before it was publicized and popularized. That's how snakes work, by incubating the devil's ideas, and bringing them to light deceptively.
We don't need a big-bang to explain the motion of electrons because they repel each other. They are the cause of their own motion. When they fill the sun-side of the earth's atmosphere, they represent the heat in the air, and as they spread out upon entering the highest parts of the air, they push atoms along i.e. wind. Voila, the true beginnings of air currents. Having said that, what do you suppose causes liquid currents in a liquid sitting still in a glass on your counter? Heat that liquid up gently, and liquid currents form. It's known, it's not a secret, liquid molecules move around in currents, when heated. They know warmer water rises, but they won't credit free electrons in the water as the cause of the rising.
I'm working to tell you why light thingies suspended in water move a little from side to side. But first: what would happen if electrons from the sun were unable to escape the air due to electrons being attracted by gravity? That question tells you why the fools never mention solar electrons filling the air, because the great need for their erroneous view of planetary and solar gravity forbids them to allow electrons from the sun to enter the air. Thus, they either create an excuse for why solar electrons don't enter their air, or they just don't mention it hoping it won't come to your mind.
If solar electrons enter the air with no way to escape back into space, they would become ever-more dense, and by now, after a few thousand years of solar radiation, the air would be highly saturated with electrons i.e. the earth would be extremely hot, uninhabitable. Therefore, the fools will claim that the earth's magnetic properties forbid solar electrons to enter the air. They lie because they badly need their definition of gravity, which is: gravity attracts everything, including electrons.
The adopted this view of gravity because they needed it to explain the formation of stars and galaxies from the big bang. They needed a way for atomic particles to come together to form stars, while the particles shot forever further apart from the big-bang explosion. Thus, they assigned each atom a small amount of gravity, and then claimed that the whole of a planet's or star's compliment of atoms amounts to a lot of gravity force.
But I submit to you that gravity is the negative force of free electrons in the earth's, and in the sun's, internal heat source. That's right, wherever there is heat, it's caused by free electrons. The fools do know that, wherever there are electrons coming out from electrical wires, there is heat. A filament-type light bulb produces electrons exiting the filament, producing heat.
Suddenly, with gravity being a negative force from free electrons, we can explain how solar electrons ever-entering the air get back into space, as gravity repels them into space on all sides of the earth but the sun-side. They enter on the sun-side, and exit mainly on the night-side. God arranged the gravity-force situation just-so that the planet doesn't over-heat. Gravity is able to remove sufficient electrons from the air to keep it from over-heating.
Now you know why everything hot rises. Now you know why heat from a torch, applied to the bottom of steel rod, encased in a foot of concrete all around, goes up the rod. The heat will not go downward through the rod, if heated from the top, nearly as fast as it goes upward. Electrons in the atomic spaces of the rod repel one another in all directions, yet they are also repelled upward by gravity so that the upward direction is heat's favorite.
All that's being said to inform the fools that there are electrons in a liquid, rising slowly through the liquid, even when the liquid is not being heated. As these electrons rise slowly, they can cause little bitties suspended in the water to move a little. Electrons rising in water or air give lift even to liquid and air atoms, explaining why the atmospheric ceiling is higher in summer than in winter.
The reason that electrons rise in water even when not being heated is that gravity is forcing electrons out the surface of the liquid. If no electrons came into the liquid to replace the ones lost as the surface, the liquid would constantly cool. But a glass of water on your table will not cool if the air outside of it doesn't cool. The solution to this problem is so obvious that the fools have egg on their faces.
The reason that electrons enter the liquid while electrons exit from its surface is that electrons repel each other. They always repel each other into areas where electrons are less dense. There is electron pressure, that is. The aether can have either a lower or higher pressure. When electrons exit the surface of a liquid, the electrons become more sparse in the water i.e. lower pressure, and thus electrons flow into the water from the glass. And when they exit the glass to enter the water, the glass has a reduction in electron pressure so that electrons from the air enter the glass seeking to bring the pressure back up to even-steven. Electrons always seek identical density, and they cause liquid / air currents when seeking it.
Aether pressure is identical in workings as air atoms repelling each other into less-pressurized air zones. That's right, gas atoms repel one another, which is a hideous reality to the evolutionist because his bang theory absolutely requires that all gas atoms attract one another. This attraction is the basis of his star formation. The end-time freaks must not merely grant each atom a gravity force, but they must avoid giving the atom an innate repulsion force that overcomes that gravity attraction. Now you know the real score: evolutionists are losers, freaks of the devil, keeping you from knowing the obvious realities in favor of their kill-God theory. That's all their "science" is.
And now you know another reason that they chose ever-moving atoms, not only to compliment the motion from the big bang, but to keep air atoms from deflating the tires of your car. If all that air atoms did was to attract one another, they could not be gases in the first place. Something is needed to keep atoms apart in order for them to maintain a gas state, but rather than choose the obvious, that gas atoms all repel, they turned into snakes of the devil, choosing to believe that atoms move so fast past one another that their mutual attraction force is mainly suspended (avoided) so that the atoms are unable to form a liquid.
Lucky for them, they were able to say that, when gas atoms slow down, it's defined as a lower gas temperature, and thus gas atoms that constantly race around can become liquid when they become slow enough to attract one another into droplets. The theory works in that regard, but falls apart at the atomic collisions expected in ever-racing gas atoms. Collisions always cause a slow-down, and the slow-down to motionless atoms would be very fast because atoms are colliding many times per second, in their view, because atoms are said to travel in the hundreds of miles per hour. Evolutionists are disturbing flakes of science, willing to deny the realities while pushing their manufactured trash into your mind.
By what coincidence do all gas atoms repel one another? Our first clue is that they are all immersed in the negatively-charged aether, predicting that the invasion of free electrons into atomic spheres makes all gas atoms go net-negative. And now you know another reason that the fools wish never to mention the solar electrons that fills the air, for they can make all gas atoms inter-repel.
Free electrons in the aether surround all atoms, and by their repulsive locomotion they press into an atom's electron atmosphere (i.e. their captured electrons) until the electron pressure in the atom's electron atmosphere equals the pressure of the free electrons outside the atom. We can't have the electrons in the atom pushing out stronger or weaker against the surrounding free electrons because electrons always seek even-steven pressures.
It should be hard to distinguish the atom's perimeter in this situation of captured-versus-free electrons, but there is a true but invisible perimeter at the point where the electrical charge is neutral. This neutrality must exist at the point where the protonic attraction charge goes out in all directions with a force equal to the negative charge going out in all directions from the totality of electrons above the protonic surface. That's easy to figure.
Therefore, when the temperature of the air around the atom increases, defined as a greater density of aether electrons, they press into the electron atmosphere with more force, thus increasing the density of electrons above the protonic surface so that the invisible atomic perimeter shrinks i.e. it moves closer to the proton. It's a no brainer because more inward force from the aether makes the density of the atom's captured electrons increase so that the negative charge going out increases too, thus meaning that the positive charge of the proton is matched with less height above the protonic surface as compared to when the temperature outside the atom is colder.
We learn two things, not only that atoms pick up additional negative force with increasing temperature, but that the force of aether electrons serves to keep the atoms away from one another with more force. Yes, for as aether electrons push into the atomic sphere in any one direction, there is a push in the opposite direction too, for electrons cannot push in one direction only. Thus, the electron push goes out from every atom in every direction toward all neighboring atoms. In short, a higher density of aether electrons pushes gas atoms apart with greater force than when the aether has a colder = less-dense condition, explaining why the air expands (gets lighter per unit volume of space) when hotter, and gets more compact when colder.
The aether has the power to make gas atoms go infinitely further apart if there is not some force containing that spread. In the atmosphere, the aether would send all air atoms hopelessly lost into space if gravity did not hold the air atoms to the ground. The expansion level of the atmosphere is a heat-versus-gravity situation, but on top of that, the rising electrons in the aether bump air atoms on their bottom sides, expanding the atmosphere a little more than would otherwise be the case.
Now you know why gas atoms repel one another, by essentially borrowing the repulsion forces of the aether electrons foisted upon them.
To understand why gravity attracts all atoms, it's simple as simple can be once you are prepared to view gravity as the negative force of earth-crust electrons. I discovered the true nature of gravitational attraction on atoms only because there is one way alone for it to occur: gravity must pull the proton of the atom in spite of the atom being surrounded by captured electrons which gravity repels (upward). If the repulsion level of gravity on an atom were equal to the attraction force, there would be no weight in any substance.
And so there is only one way to explain that all atoms get pulled by gravity more than they get repelled by gravity: gravity blew some captured electrons off of atoms in the beginning, a situation that persists to this day. It's completely logical. Gravity blew off of the atom's outer electron layers all electrons that the proton held with less attraction force than the force of gravity. It's a no brainer that any electron held to the outer atom with less force than gravity will be blown off by the gravity force, making the atom net-positive, and thus gravity can then pull the atom, all atoms. All matter, except electrons, are attracted by gravity, that is your fact of the matter.
Therefore, every gas atom not surrounded by heat is net-positive in charge, and thus all gas atoms without heat in their midst would repel one another by a net-positive charge. But, of course, if a gas was suddenly without heat, gas atoms could not exist (as a gas) because gravity pulls them down into a liquid and then turns them solid. It is gravity that causes liquid formation (did you know that?) in the absence of sufficient heat to keep gas atoms afloat in space. You are taught that liquids form when atoms slow down, but that is a falsification. Gravity makes liquids when gravity force overcomes heat-in-the-midst-of-gas-atoms force. This is a super piece of truth for the scientists, which they have squandered. The less heat in a gas, the closer the atoms come to one another until finally gravity (or some other force) causes them to merge. Gravity is not the only force that makes liquids. When aether electrons rush into a cold object, they push and accumulate atmospheric water against the cold surface to form visible water droplets there.
The addition of heat in the midst of a gas lends a negativity to all gas atoms so that they convert from net-positive, as gravity alone would create the situation, to net-negative. In other words, I view gas atoms repelling one another due to their mutual negative charges, not their mutual positive charges. Atoms do not race around in order to keep your tires inflated against the weight-force of your car seeking to flatten the tires. It teaches us that the repulsion force of a gas, even at room temperature, is mighty enough to hold the weight of a truck engine and more. The power of electrons is at the heart of the gas.
I'll say it again: air atoms cannot register their weight on the ground unless they are inter-repelling. Anything flying in the air does not register weight on the ground. Air atoms racing in space above the ground cannot register their weight on the ground if they all attract one another, and the fools had arrived to this realization long ago, yet they told you the lie of kinetic atoms in spite of this reality. They teach that a column of air one inch square weighs 14.2 pounds, and as we know that air applies 14.2 pounds of pressure on the ground, and upon your beautiful face too, it means that air weighs down on the ground. It means that the whole of the air pushes in all directions all of its force of weight, but this can only take place if atoms are in "contact" with one another through their repulsion forces.
Every air atom sits on top of a repulsion field that holds it up, and so as that repulsion field is holding up the atom's weight, the weight must transfer through the repulsion field to the atom beneath it, and so on all the way to the ground. For, the repulsion force is stemming from the atom beneath it.
If the repulsion force were not stemming from the atom, but purely from the aether electrons, than there is no reason that all air atoms should be equa-distant from one another. We could expect that a cubic foot of air over here has more air density than a cubic foot of air a few yards away, as the wind blows air atoms all over the place. But it's known that every cubic foot of air at the same temperature, and the same distance from the ground, has the same weight and pressure of air, and the only way to have exactly the same weight of air, per cubic foot of air, is to have the same density of atoms i.e. they always take up equa-distant positions for any general locality of space they occupy.
Thus, we just learned that atoms do repel one another even while aether electrons between them give them an additional reason not to come together. The aether electrons should not dictate, in my opinion, that all atoms take up equa-distance. There is no reason that two atoms over here shouldn't be two diameters apart while atoms over there should be ten diameters apart, while suspended in a sea of inter-repelling electrons, if atoms do not inter-repel. "Aether" and "sea" mean the same thing here.
A difficulty I've encountered is: if aether electrons (I call them heat particles too) cause atoms to become increasing net-negative with increased temperature, then how does gravity maintain attraction upon atoms? I say that an atom immersed in zero heat has some of its electrons blown away by gravity so that the atom's net-positive charge allows gravity to bite the atom in attraction. I then say that the addition of heat makes the atom go more toward the negative until the atoms in neutral in charge, at which point we would think that the atom has zero weight, if indeed weight is from the pull of a negatively-charged gravity source. This situation gets worse with added heat because it now makes the atom net-negative so that gravity should now repel all atoms away from the earth.
My only solution to this dilemma is to think: gravity maintains its bite on atoms in spite of heat increase. One thought crossing my mind naturally is that the addition of heat NEVER causes the atom to go so far as neutral, but rather the atom is always net-positive with addition of heat particles. However, this idea was obliterated by what was explained above: gas atoms repel with greater force (i.e. higher gas pressure) with greater temperatures, meaning that greater numbers of heat particles in their midst makes atoms go more net-negative, not less net-positive. For if atoms go less net-positive with added heat, then they are expected to form less gas pressure, not more, with added heat. That's not the reality.
When that idea failed, it occurred to me that gravity would repel the electrons on the bottom of atoms to the top so that they a predominance would pile up on top, making the tops of atoms more negatively charged while keeping the bottoms positively charged. In this way, gravity could keep it's bite on atoms. This idea predicted that atoms should be oval, or with slightly-pointed tops, and this proved to be the case when I took a look at some atoms under the electron microscope. For example, the platinum atoms in the video above are oval, not round. I then supposed that heat particles increasing around atoms do not turn the bottom sides of atoms net-negative. It's feasibly true, and can suggest that, if someone turns a wheel positioned vertically, at the right speed, the wheel could lose weight as the bottom sides of atoms become the top sides. Turning the wheel while in the horizontal direction should not change the wheel's weight.
At 1:47 of the video below, there is a claim of showing gold atoms. The whites of these atoms are not in contact, meaning that this picture is deceiving. The atoms must be connected in the black regions between the white parts of the atoms, though the black regions look like the spaces between atoms. The white parts thus look like the peaks of atoms...because gravity forms the peaks by repelling electrons from an atom's underside to the top. The parts of the atoms in the dark region (valley between atomic peaks) were not photo-friendly, and so we just can't see the atoms in those valleys, but they have got to be there.
By the way, I'm not necessarily convinced that what we are seeing are individual atoms in the video above. Plus, we could just as possibly be viewing the underside or side of the gold atoms rather than their tops. It all depends on how the gold leaf was obtained, and/or which side of the leaf is facing the camera.
Also, we should expect faked photos that better reflect the orbital view of atoms, faked because many real photos don't reflect that view much at all. In faked cases, they would place some space between atoms to act as the space between protons and a few orbiting electrons. Where such spaces do not appear sufficient to express the orbital theory, the fools will just say that the electron microscope treats the inner orbit as a solid material.
Big Bang Mechanics
Below is a video that puts screws to your innocent mind, turning you into their Frankenstein. The thing of note is their "strong nuclear force" that bonds protons to construct atoms as they see atoms built. They absolutely need attraction forces from the big-bang model.
And by the way, there are no neutrons, but rather they were invented to correct a problem(s) with their atomic model. It's already ridiculous to suggest that protons repel each other unless they can be brought close enough to each other, but to then say that a neutral particle is also stuck to the core of the atom is ridiculous upon ridiculous, breaking the laws of physics. Trash the entire system, and go with the pudding model as I describe it, and you will do much better at explaining the realities we can see.
There is no logic in saying that inter-repelling protons will attract and stick together if only they can be brought close enough. Tell that to two magnets and they will laugh at you. The closer inter-repelling objects come, the stronger they repel, and there is nothing in the real world to suggest differently, wherefore their strong nuclear farce is a masked bandit seeking to steal your brains.
You heard the fool say that high temperatures are needed to get the protons close enough together to stick, and yet they define high temperature as faster-moving protons. Thus, these trashers tell you with straight face that the harder you fire cannon balls at one another, the greater the chance they will stick rather than bouncing away or cracking up. Tread on their trash heap at your own peril.
There is no such thing as a strong magnetic force that works only at close range. The stronger the magnet, the further away it acts. Stick to the tested realities, and reject the atomic trash from the big-bang fools. You cannot have a magnet that repels another magnet yet attract when only very close. BONKERS. The idea was invented only because the big bangers needed to give plausibility (in naive minds) to the formation of the cosmos by the big bunk.
When the fool tells you that there was more heat in the universe near the time of the big bang, it's a falsification according to their own theory of heat because they define heat not only as particle motion, but more intrinsically as particle collision. In their theory, there is no heat in motion alone; there is heat only at the collisions. Your finger can't get hot unless atoms collide with it. A piece of steel can't get hot unless atoms collide with it. That's what they teach. An explosion's aftermath has no (or few at best) collisions if the explosion occurs in space.
When particles explode from a central point, they move further away from one another the further they travel in space from the central point. NO PARTICLE COLLISIONS POSSIBLE. NO PLASMA CREATION POSSIBLE. Even though protons attract electrons, their force of speed through space would not allow their wee-wee attraction forces to bring them together, especially as the particles would be a mile apart in very little time. Why don't they share such fatal problems with you in the school books? You should know the answer.
How can protons moving ever further away from each other ever get close enough to bond??? Hello? It doesn't matter how fast they are going -- it doesn't matter how "hot" they are -- if they are not close enough together for the strong nuclear force to take over. Therefore, when the fool in the video above tells you on the one hand that protons needs great speed (heat) in order to bond, along with being very close together, the last place she should then go to is the formation of multi-proton atomic cores from an explosion. Sure, it can be argued that the speed of particles at that time was the fastest, the hottest, but it's that high speed that predicts the protons will never come near to one another.
How can protons collide if they all travel away from the central big-bang point? In that case, they travel near-parallel with each other, impossible to form collisions...unless the protons are moving at different speeds. In this picture, the fools would say that proton A can catch up to proton B with such force as to overcome their mutual repulsion until, and if traveling not too fast toward proton B so as to knock it forward at a faster speed, the two might stick together. But if they attempt that picture, they will need to admit that most of the protons would not collide, and even fewer would stick, and so where is the predominance of big-bang protons flying alongside the earth to this day that never bonded with anything, or that bonded with each other in different-sized clumps but didn't fly into any electrons along the way?
Indeed, if they argue that protons at different speeds bumped into each other while traveling in the same direction, we can say that electrons could have done the some to protons so that electrons began to infest the protonic surfaces without going into orbits. In that case, there should be protons with electrons stuck fast (non-removable) to their surfaces, which kills their atomic model. They can't have a compliment of electrons on protonic surfaces -- not even one extra one -- while also teaching their orbit / shell version of captured electrons.
It's not enough to say it was hot enough to bond protons near the big-bang spot; they need first to show, step-by-step, how star formation could have been possible from an explosion. They usually skip these necessary steps, and take leaps hoping you won't try to take the steps.
They cannot go rationally from the explosion's aftermath to a hot plasma that can assist their star formation. A localized hot gas or plasma requires a concentration of particles, which cannot take place in outer space, but requires a container to hold the heat inside. Heat spreads out, killing plasma formation. As soon as a gas even begins to get hot, it spreads out, which is the opposite of a plasma formation.
What they do is to say that the exploded materials were "close" together, immediately after the big-bang, such as to constitute a hot plasma with atom-forming potential. Whatever we want to call it, it's just particles in near-parallel flight away from a central point. It doesn't matter how hot the situation was, it doesn't matter how many electrons we envision at this explosion's birth, the inter-repulsion of closely-packed electrons will increase the volume of space of the exploded material, and the only direction for the expansion of the explosion is in the frontward direction, wherefore this frontward expansion force adds to the speed of the exploded materials i.e. they accelerate and move faster than the did when exploded forth. Increased speed makes it harder for protons and electrons to come near to one another in order to bond. Particles in repulsion become equa-distant because they seek to get as far apart as possible from one another, which is not conducive to atom formation.
Plasma is defined as a hot substance, and their "hot" is defined as particles striking each other. Even in their definition of heat, particles spread out when striking each other so as to kill the plasma, not create it. As even the fools imagine particles in a high-density state striking one another in a locality, they claim that the particles spread out and take on a larger volume of space precisely due to their striking one another. It doesn't go the other way around to a plasma. That's why the fools jump over a whack of steps and go straight to the plasma / hot-thick-gas formation, deceiving you.
Since heat spreads out, no star formation can happen from a quasi-plasma in the birth canal that itself cannot survive in a big-bang situation in the first place. This theory is dead on arrival. A relatively few protons that might collide and stick, even if it were possible to stick, would never form a plasma or gaseous system sufficient to build a star because all the vast material needed to come together in one, relatively small region of space doesn't happen from an explosion?
The explosion is what kills their cosmic evolution to begin with. The irony is that they need the big bang to explain the creation of the universe, and yet the mechanics of the big bang kills the formation of the universe. The irony looks very good dangling from these imposters.
The plasma, or the gaseous system, whichever they choose to advance, is absolutely necessary for their star formation because they define gravity as a collection of atoms. There is no central gravity force if the big-bang explosion sends materials forever more distant in straight lines. They need to have atoms accumulating at a locality so that they can envision gravity formation that itself forms the star...which is like, what comes first, the egg or the chicken? How can gravity form without the accumulation of material, and how can accumulation form without the gravity? They just don't mention this problem, but do a long-jump from the explosion to the gravity situation.
The fool in the video says (2nd minute) that "light nuclei [hydrogen] collected" by the pull of gravity is what formed the first stars. There you go, a grand leap to a grand heap of trash without explaining how the collection might have taken place. Once she gets to the formation of a stellar gravity source, she goes directly to atom formation via fusion of protons in the star. She's not yet at the three-minute mark. She went from the big bang to atom formation in the star in less than three minutes, and your job is to believe what she says, which she heard from someone who heard from someone who heard from a stack of wackos in the cult of pioneer evolutionists who had no idea what they were talking about concerning atom formation.
The title of the video below is bang-on correct, more or less, and the first scene has Einstein admitting that his science, adopted or spun by the establishment, was wrong all along. The second scene has a wicked "manipulation" that's part-and-parcel with deception of the deep state, which is a cult of evolutionists and atheists who are not only unafraid to harm humanity, but desire it. These kinds of people have existed beside those who have human hearts, but the wicked always kept their cat in the bag because it was necessary to manipulate their victims without their knowing it. Suddenly, in the past few years, the deep state, starting with U.S. Intelligence under Obama, has served as a traitor to those who worked for decades to keep the cat in the bag. They have let the cat get out thinking that the people will not be able to do anything about the cat's attack. To some degree this is true, but it has also caused many people to reconsider the true state of things, to see that there is a devil, and it's my job and yours to help people figure out that this wickedness is the prophecy-backed proof of Jesus Christ the Son of God.
This video has no human voice, and I suggest you mute its entirety if you don't like doom / fatalistic / irritating music:
The video proposes a black hole, which cannot exist. It's a fairy tale to suggest that gravity can pull light. Einstein pushed this stupidity and more stupidity as if a worm were eating out his brain from the core. He became a fool because he kept company with the fools. He refused to acknowledge light as a wave, turned it into a photon bullet that, like everything else, he thought, was attracted by gravity, and proposed that stellar gravity attracted and curved light, thus distorting the look of the sky as telescopes see it. Light is a wave through an aether, and gravity repels the aether particles so that gravity cannot attract light to itself to form a "black hole" (defined as a star pulling in its light).
Then, more recently, there has been talk that gravity is not an attraction at all, but no such theory can survive long unless the establishment has many fools willing to manipulate the masses into their joke, for they love to deceive and get away with it. This is how the wicked enjoy life, stroking their egos everytime they trick people, both in their personal lives or massively through science papers.
As glass has oxygen, I'm going to suggest that transparency requires a atoms on the large side, or atoms having loosely captured on the perimeters so that they act much like an aether. When the electrons are attracted too strongly deeper down from the periphery, they stunt the wave passing through the electron atmosphere. You've been taught that oxygen is amongst the smallest atoms, but I've discovered that the fools have the atomic weights backward, totally expected of fools. What proof do you think they have that hydrogen has the smallest atom? What fools. They have no proof, they have only a foolish guess. And upon this guess they have envisioned all atoms wrongly in combination with their other foolish theory: protons can bond with each other by a force they invented in their heads. This is science?
Here's what the fools did. They guessed that all gases at the same temperature and pressure (STP) had the same number of atoms. There is no logic for this claim. Go ahead, try to explain why a hydrogen gas should have the same number of atoms where all the conditions are identical, including the volume being measured. And this goes for all types of gases. One gallon of carbon dioxide has as many molecules as a gallon of oxygen gas has atoms, they claim, what absolute idiots. If this is incorrect, and it is, then a water molecule is not an H2O molecule.
Here's how they invented an H2O. They learned that two gallons of hydrogen gas mixes with one gallon of oxygen to produce two gallons of water gas. Therefore, as all gallons have the same number of atoms, every two hydrogen atoms bonds with one to form water, hence H2O. But this is based on a guess that all gases have the same number of atoms. It's wrong, and Galileo showed them how they were wrong when he discovered that all materials fall to gravity at the same speed/acceleration.
For some reason I don't know or remember, they had to claim that a hydrogen atom is really two hydrogen atoms fused, and also they claim that an oxygen atom is really two O atoms fused. The reason they did this, I assume, is that experimental observations didn't conform with their view of atomic weights if those atoms were lone atoms.
True Atomic Weights
There is no way to explain what Galileo discovered except to obliterate the atomic weights of the fools. He didn't know atoms at the time, I assume, but if he did, he would have realized that all atoms weigh the same. There is no other way to explain how all materials can fall to gravity at the same speed.
I can explain what seems like a grand coincidence in all atoms weighing the same, because gravity creates that situation in the first place by giving every atom the same level of positive charge by blowing away all their captured electrons held to the proton with the force of gravity or less. It makes perfect sense. If gravity is likened to a wind at 40 miles per hour at the earth's surface, then all outer electrons held to the proton that cannot withstand a 40-mph wind will be blown off. Instead of using 40 mph, we use the force of G. Nobody is going to argue that gravity doesn't have a force of G, and therefore I can claim as an indisputable fact that all electrons held to an atom with less than the force of G will be repelled and freed from the atom. It's that simple, and Galileo therefore proved (without knowing it) that gravity is a negative force.
That's right, for if gravity repels electrons, it's a negative force. And if it's a negative force, it becomes suspect as a pool of free electrons in the earth's interior.
When gravity pulls a cannon ball toward it, it pulls each atom individually. Ditto for when it pulls a larger bowling ball. Both balls will hit the ground at the same time, even though they are not the same size and are made of different materials, when dropped from the tower of Pisa. Why? Because gravity is pulling each atom individually, and also because they are all pulled by the same force, because they all have the same level of positive charge at their peripheries. Hello?
For, if gravity blows away all electrons held with G force or less, it consequently means that all protons radiate G force of positive charge at their peripheries. It's an indisputable fact that if the proton is able to hold its outer-layer electrons against the G force of gravity, then the positive force at the periphery must be G force, and more than G force deeper down toward the protonic surface. It was less than G force higher up from the protonic surface, and that why gravity will blow any electrons captured higher from the protonic surface that the height where there is G positive force.
To put it another way, an atom cannot load captured electrons above the height where the positive force is less than G force, and consequently all atoms have G force of positive force at their peripheries. That's why gravity attracts all atoms with the same force. What does it mean when gravity attracts all atoms with the same force? It means all materials fall to gravity at the same speed. It means all atoms weigh the same because weight is defined as nothing more complicated than the specific force of gravity. If atoms didn't weigh the same, the heavier ones would be drawn faster, even as a magnet will pull a stronger magnet toward itself as compared to speed of pulling a weaker magnet.
The fools ignored what Galileo showed them about the weight of atoms because they needed their multiple-proton view of the atom, because it was more explicable, they thought, by big-bang mechanics than the idea that all atoms are made of different kinds of protons. They needed to make all atoms built by the same proton particle, the only difference being that different types of atoms had a different number of protons glued to each other at atomic cores. And that's how the determine their erroneous atomic weights: an atom having 16 protons at its core weighs 16 times more than a hydrogen atom, they claimed like fools.
They found that a gallon of hydrogen gas weighs 16 times less than a gallon of oxygen, but rather than all gases having the same number of atoms, the reality is that all atoms weigh the same, which tells us instantly, like a bird whispering in our ear: the evolutionists are nutjobs happily willing to deceive you with the atomic model because they happily deceive you about the big-bang theory of Creation. If they're going to lie to you about the latter, they will also lie to you about the realities of atoms if you don't know how to prove them wrong.
The known reality is that a gallon of oxygen gas has 16 times the atoms as compared to a gallon of hydrogen gas. The variations of weights of all gases are proportional to the number of atoms in the gas. That is, where a gas weighs 32 times as much as hydrogen gas, there are 32 times as many atoms in the gas than H atoms in a hydrogen gas, because all atoms weigh the same. In that factual case, a water molecule is an HO8 molecule because two gallons of H gas mixes with one gallon of O gas to make water.
We can easily gather that, with eight O atoms merged into one H atom, the periphery of the water molecule is mainly oxygen. Both hydrogen and oxygen gases are transparent because both have large atoms; I'll show you how this exposes itself. Water is transparent because light waves find it easy enough to circle around the electrons at the peripheries of O atoms. That's because large atoms have more weakly-held outer electrons than small atoms. This is one proof that oxygen atoms are amongst the largest of all, and it can explain why glass is transparent, because it's made of silica i.e. made of oxygen.
Okay, so what we have is goofballs who envision hydrogen gas as a single proton with a single orbiting electron, one of the stupidest things you ever did hear from the field of physics. Consequently, the goof balls claim that hydrogen atoms are the smallest and lightest of all, and to "prove" it they will tell you that hydrogen has the greatest upward lift amongst all the gases. To "prove" that the H atom is the lightest, they will tell you that hydrogen gas takes the highest region in a sealed container filled with different gases. They deceived each other because they refused to see heat as a material repelled by gravity. If they had understood that heat gives lift to atoms, when gravity causes heat particles to flow upward, they would have realized that H atoms were the largest, not the smallest, and that oxygen atoms are not far behind in size.
It's true that propane leaking in your house will take the position on the floor because it's a heavier gas than oxygen. It's true that it's a heavier gas, and it's true that the lightest gases rise toward the ceiling when mixed with heavier gases, but the reason for this has nothing to do with atomic sizes or differing atomic weights.
The fact of this matter is afforded by Galileo. It's amazing as to how many realities he was in the throes of discovering if only he had understood atoms. His discovery was: all atoms weigh the same. Therefore a hydrogen atom cannot rise to the ceiling based on its lighter weight, and a heavy gas atom cannot fall to the floor based on its heavier weight. Something else if going on.
I can tell you as a fact that if we put a plastic ball weighing one pound under an upward flow of pressurized air from an air hose, it will be lifted to a greater height than a one-pound plastic ball having a smaller size. The reason is easy to spot: the greater the area of ball surface that the upward air can strike, the greater the upward lift on the ball. THEREFORE, rejoice, because you have just learned that the hydrogen atom is the biggest ball of all. In an upward stream of free electrons that give all gas atoms lift, the H ball gets the most lift, and the smallest atoms get the least lift.
Plus, the fools are more foolish yet because they themselves claim that all gas atoms race around at such speeds that they defy gravity. Well, goofballs, if they defy gravity, why should the smallest flying atom rise, and why should the largest of them sink, as they collide with one another? If the heavier gas atoms bang the lighter atoms upward as much as they bang them downward, why should any of them rise or sink immediately?
A hydrogen gas goes immediately upward in air, to a ceiling, which would not be the case if H atoms had to collide their way to the ceiling. Instead of traveling a few feet to the ceiling in a straight line, as is the case in the real world of atomic lift, ever-colliding atoms would need to travel miles and miles before getting to the ceiling. Are the physicists this stupid that they can't realize this problem? If they are not stupid, then they are afraid to publicly differ with the establishment.
The fools tell us that there is a 50-percent chance for at kinetic atom to be knocked upward when enduring collisions, and a 50-percent chance for being bumped downward. In this case, stupid, the prediction is that they will go neither up nor down, in a sealed container or room. And if there is a 50-percent chance that they will bump eastward versus westward, then the dizzy atoms will not move sideways either. Or not much anyway. In that case, why does an H gas shoot straight up to the ceiling as if taking a straight path to it? Because, it's caught in the electron wind. It's exactly the same as the solar wind, only weaker on earth. At some point on the sun-side of the earth, these two winds collide, spreading electrons sideways in all four directions.
Eat bitter pie fools, I have no pity on you. In your dark graves, you can ponder your stupidity both for a non-sensical atomic model, and for seeking to kill God in our minds.
Here's from the Redacted show on this Friday speaking on the giddy fusion experiment: "@glenn5216 1 hour ago Hi Natali and Clayton, I was the creator of the first Cold Fusion Reactor in 2017. I created a material that can stand up to 23 000 degree Celsius. I just use Deuterium [water] and release the extra proton and create plasma."
The plasma is the energy created, a soup thick in heat, but he's not telling the whole story because those temperatures cannot be maintained but for a very short time, and so what good is his achievement? No material can withstand such temperatures prolonged, and so how will they remove that heat for any practical use?
Secondly, there is no logic is claiming that splitting apart bonded protons in a deuterium molecule should create plasma energy, nor is there logic in saying that fusing two protons should net energy. They say: "In a fusion reaction, two light nuclei merge to form a single heavier nucleus. The process releases energy because the total mass of the resulting single nucleus is less than the mass of the two original nuclei. The leftover mass becomes energy." It's a bogus claim that mass is necessarily energy. The truth is, motionless mass = zero energy. They view all atomic particles in constant motion i.e. with kinetic energy at their disposal. But as ever-kinetic atoms are an impossibility, their definition of fusion energy is bogus. Seek another explanation.
They think that by pulling a proton from another proton far enough will cause the protons to repel, and thus this creates push energy. But how can this produce a plasma when the latter is defined as dense free electrons? Isn't it obvious to them that rather than unbonding protons, their "fusion" experiment squeezes and/or jolts electrons out from the water molecule?
They are shooting the deuterium with many laser beams at once, which will obviously excite captured electrons so such a drastic point that they come off the deuterium atoms. The electrons will be recaptured once the lasers are turned off, and so there will be no net-energy produced, meaning that the men need to find a way to use the ejected electrons before they are recaptured. It seems like a futile method of heat production because the heat achieved melts electrical wires, in case they want to direct the plasmic electrons into them.
Nuclear fission is by far a better choice because it cripples protons in order to get them to give up their electrons. When done slowly under the controls of a nuclear reactor, the protons are crippled slowly. By crippled, I mean that their positive charge is being reduced. I have no idea what their shapes look like under fission bombardments, but the fact can be concluded that the protons are giving up their electron and not taking them back.
On fission, the fools say: "When Uranium-238 is bombarded with neutrons, Plutonium-239 is created". There are no neutrons to use as the bullets, and so they must be using something else. The plutonium-239 is just uranium-239, but as they think they have caused an extra proton to merge with the protonic cores of the original material, they think they have created a new material. These are ignorant idiots playing with nuclear fire. One day, thinking they are about to do make a safe and beneficial alteration in the fission process, they could accidentally blow up an entire city.
The most we can say, if in fact the bombarded material is heavier, is that the bombardment makes the original product more attracted to gravity. My claim above is that the heaviest materials, per unit volume, have the smallest atoms. Metals have the smallest atoms, explaining why a cubic inch of metal weighs more than a cubic inch of plastic, because the cubic inch of metal has more atoms while all atoms weigh the same. They have it backward, thinking metal atoms are the largest and heaviest. No, they are the smallest but weigh the same as all other atoms. Uranium has the smallest atom of all the metals, and any metal made from altering uranium is altered uranium.
If one bombards a uranium atom so as to cripple the proton, the periphery of the atom decreases in diameter because outer electrons are freed without being reclaimed. The periphery of the uranium atom maintains a positive force of G, still matching the negative force of G (gravity), after the proton is crippled. The perimeter of all atoms will always match the G force (this is a law of physics) because gravity-versus-proton always provides that situation.
If the atmospheric wind on earth were always blowing at the same speed, and if we call this wind force, W, then all trees with leaves bonded to tree branches with less than W force will be blown off. The only leaves remaining on ALL trees are those held to branches with more than W force. This is a no-brainer, once it comes to mind, and it came to my mind with gravity-versus-electrons because I deviated from their atomic model, because it's a sick joke on humanity.
There had to be another atomic model, and we have sufficient clues at this period in history to prove that my model works in every regard. The correct atomic model will withstand any experimental challenge where there's nothing amiss in the experiment, and unless there's something taking place with the atom that we can't yet know or explain. This is what makes Galileo so crucial, because it's necessary to peg the true relative sizes of atoms, and their true weights, in order that experimental results don't deceive our understanding of the look of atoms, or certain workings / properties of materials.
If I recall correctly from school, a cubic centimeter of water absorbs a whopping 80 calories of heat in going from water at 32F to ice at 32F, which can only mean that the water molecules are unmerging a little during the freezing process, for unmerging atoms always absorb heat as the atoms reload with electrons released during melting. This predicts that water will expand near the freezing temperature, and indeed it continues to expand even after it's turned to ice. Water is almost alone in expanding with reduced heat, but only under 35F degrees.
Water looses most of its transparency in the frozen condition, which for me means, tentatively anyway, that the electrons on the peripheries of water molecules are held tighter, making light waves travel through them with more difficulty. If I knew why water molecules unmerge with decreasing heat, it might possibly explain why ice is less transparent.
One way to explain the mystery of expanding cold water with decreasing heat is to first realize the fact that atoms, if we could begin to merge them outside of any heat at all, would merge only as far as a certain depth, and no more. Then, when heat is added to them, it compresses the atoms all around, tending to make a material smaller with added heat, and yet the heat particles push atoms apart from their atomic spaces to expand material. Usually, the net-effect of this battle causes a net-expansion of materials.
But with ice, I've got to assume that an increase in heat causes the water molecules to move apart from one another, BUT the increasing heat causes the 8 oxygen atoms of the water molecule (i.e. the HO8) to slip deeper into merger into the central H atom so that the net-effect is a net-decrease in water volume...all the way up to 35F degrees. Above that temperature, the water expands with increased heat because the O atoms do not unmerge from within the H atom at the same rate they did under 35F.
With most molecules, increased heat causes the atoms of the molecule to unmerge more, but for some reason, the opposite takes place with cold water, and so I reason that increased heat upon water molecules causes the O atoms to go deeper than they would naturally go when there is no heat in their midst. The reverse would be true for most other substances: the atoms would naturally merge deeper if there was no heat at all, but heat gets between the atoms of the molecule and begins to put the squeeze upon them such that they pop out progressively more from mergers with increasing heat.
This tends to suggest that O atoms around the water molecule are so deeply merged naturally that no unmerging occurs with increased heat, but rather heat applies a "downward" push on the atoms so that they go deeper into the H atom, and only when the downward pressure of heat particles has finally (at 35F) pressed a deep enough groove into the periphery of the H atom can the heat particles get "behind" the O atoms to begin popping them outward from the H atom. If you imagine this '8' as two atoms merged, you can see that heat particles pushing in sideways can get between the two atoms to pop them further out from merger, in spite of the heat particles simultaneously pushing vertically upon the atoms to force them closer together i.e. into deeper merger. The deeper the two atoms are merged to begin with, the more difficulty the heat particles have in unmerging them.
The H atom is so giant in comparison to O atoms that an O atom may be as far as halfway sunk into the H atom, in which picture heat particles can't easily get into the H atom in order to bet "behind" the O atoms to push them out of merger. Instead, the heat particles press the O atoms deeper into merger. Even as the heat particles are pressing in on the O atoms, they are pressing in on the H atom where there are no O atoms present, for the eight O atoms don't likely cover the H atom entirely (I assume a ninth cannot fit). And so my theory is that, when the heat has pushed a groove deep enough into the H atom to get behind the O atoms, they begin to unmerge with increasing heat.
I reason that the H atom has got to be huge in comparison with O atoms in order for 8 O atoms to be spread over its surface. Plus, it takes 16 times as many O atoms in a gallon of gas to equal the overall repulsion forces (= gas pressure) of H atoms in a gallon of gas, which by the way allows me to calculate that H atoms are 2.67 times further apart, center-to-center, than O atoms (at STP). This calculation is based on what I think is my correct calculation that particles are twice as distant in all directions when 8 times less dense, and vice-versa.
To put it another way, atoms become .67 times more distance each time a gas volume is doubled. Doubling a gas 4 times = 16 the original volume, hence atoms are expected to be .67 x 4 = 2.67 times further apart. I hope I'm not feeding you error with that calculation. My reasoning is that, as there are only three dimensions, we need to get atoms twice as distant in all three dimensions to get them twice as far apart in all directions, wherefore we need to double the gas volume once per each dimension, and when we therefore double it three times, it's eight times the original volume.
In the video below, I was surprised to find that I might agree with the astronomers on why lunar "meeting places" are always at the same place for certain moons in the solar system. The mystery seems correctly solved in the 11th minute, but there's one thing left out of the discussion that could make the explanation too simplistic. I'll comment on it after you come to the 12th minute:
The speaker says that the gravitational pull of the inner moon can pull on the outer moon to speed it up in its orbit, which consequently enlarges its orbital diameter so as to give it a longer orbital period that consequently slows it down, not in speed, but in the sense that it takes longer for it to achieve a full orbit. This argument sounds as though an astronomer can pick and choose whether a moon completes the orbital period faster or slower by adding in, or leaving out, the possibility that one moon gives the other a larger orbital diameter. The purpose is to explain why meeting places are always at the same place for some moons, though the argument breaks down where some moons have every-changing meeting places, or no meeting places at all.
What the speaker failed to say is that while the inner moon increases the momentum of the outer moon, the reverse must also be true: the outer moon slows the inner moon, because they are both attracting one another. The entire argument, as stated, thus falls apart, and so I would appeal to a new entry: one of the moons likely has a greater gravity force than the other so that it pulls the other moon to itself more than vice-versa, and thus there can be said to be a change in speed of the moon having less gravity, or no gravity at all.
I'm presenting the video above because it serves some proof that some moons have gravity. However, I fully expect some moons to have no gravity because I expect some moons to have no core heat. Without core heat, a planetary body has no gravity. Proof of core heat is where a moon has volcanic craters. A moon does not need to have gravity in order to orbit, because the planet can yet attract it, and this is all that's necessary to form an orbit along with some orbital velocity, though God must produce the orbit because the likelihood of an orbit, apart from an intelligent Being, is impossible for dozens of moons all in the same solar system.
The fact that moons, per planet, have different orbital speeds and periods kills the evolutionist's theory that moons were formed by a gas circling a planet. It kills it because there's no way to explain why the inner side of the gas orbits faster than all regions/layers of the same gas further out from the planet even while every region/layer has a speed perfectly conducive to setting up perfect (long-lasting) orbits of the solid materials (i.e. planets) formed by the cooling gases. If such a perfectly-timed situation was from a stroke of wild luck, then we wouldn't expect it with SEVERAL, neighboring planets in one solar system. And so God mocks the evolutionists with planetary moons.
Jupiter's Red Storm is Crock
I have shown in recent months that eclipse data places the sun about 18 million miles from earth, though this number depends on whether NASA is correctly giving us the correct size of the umbra in a lunar eclipse. I spent weeks on the calculations, using NASA data only, and found a way to use two lines, one from a lunar eclipse, to find the distance to the sun. It was full-proof method of finding the solar distance because both lines start at the earth and meet at the edge of the sun. I made no mistake, I checked and re-checked the math and the formula; there was no mistake.
Here's the proof that I'm correct in saying that the sun is not 93-million miles away: NASA has never shown the public how to find the solar distance using eclipse lines even though it's easy and reliable to do so. The only explanation as to why we never come across such a method is that it betrays the 93-million number.
NASA claims to have all the data necessary to know the exact angle of a line starting from the edge of the umbra where the moon passes through it during a lunar eclipse. This lines marks the outer edge of the umbra and therefore crosses along the earth's surface. Therefore, the angle is easily obtained for this line that continues to the edge of the sun.
The angle is easily obtained by knowing the diameter of the umbra where the eclipse occurs, and the lunar distance (from the earth) at that moment. NASA gives both pieces of data on its eclipse pages, but not forthrightly. One needs to know a little astronomy to figure those things out. In my opinion, NASA doesn't give those two pieces of information forthrightly because it doesn't want to make it easy for an outsider to use it in figuring out the true solar distance. I'm saying that the astronomy establishment knows it's lying to us with the 93-million figure, and wants to keep this lie covered.
Each NASA-eclipse page gives the apparent size (angular diameters) of the umbra and the moon during the eclipse. One can use those sizes to figure out both the diameter in miles, and the lunar distance. Having done that, one can easily find the angle of the line using a right-angle triangle calculator online.
Then, once a person has the angle of a lunar-eclipse line, a second line to the edge of the sun is made. This line goes from the core of the earth, then across the edge of the moon, but in order for this line to meet the lunar-eclipse line, it must touch the moon's edge when the moon is exactly the apparent size of the sun during the same lunar eclipse. If that second line touches the edge of the moon that is exactly the size of the sun during the eclipse, then it is a certainty that the line goes to the edge of the sun during the eclipse.
As the apparent size of the moon is known in that situation, one can calculate its distance (from the earth) at that size, which coughs up the angle of the second line. Once the angles for both lines are known which go to exactly the same place -- the sun during the eclipse -- one can figure out how far from earth the lines will meet. That math product is of course the true solar distance.
The reason for repeating this method of finding the solar distance is that it can explain Jupiter's red spot much better than the claim that it's a centuries-old hurricane circling the planet. The chances for the latter view are ridiculously unlikely. Why should a storm follow the planet's spin direction exactly? Even the clouds within the red spot swirl in all directions, as we would expect, and do not form in a straight, lateral line as do the rest of Jupiter's gases.
Is there another way to explain why the gases form horizontal lines that the going claim from astronomy? Yes. Is there another way to explain the red spot? Yes.
The outer planets travel round the sun more slowly the further they are from the sun. You may have known this well-known fact. You may think it's fully expected for satellites further from a central body to need slower orbital velocities than satellites nearer to the body. But wait. That's not necessarily true. It might depends on the weight of the satellite. I'm not sure whether science thinks that, the heavier a planet, the faster it must go to maintain an orbit at a certain distance from the sun. This can explain why astronomers claim that Jupiter and Saturn consist of gases, for they might think that their great size would otherwise suggest very heavy planets that should be orbiting faster than Mars and Earth, though they do not orbit faster.
And so we read that Jupiter is made fully of gases, no rock core at all. And from that falsification they lie to you also about the red spot being a giant gas storm. The alternative is that there is a mountain, or some other volcanic system, spewing red gas that forms the red spot. As the mountain moves in a circle during the planet's spin, that's why the red spot circles round with the planet's spin. DUH. And the white gases we see on Jupiter, that form rings around the planet, are predicted to be from other volcanic systems spewing white gases. This is so easy to figure, but the fools cannot inform us of this view because they need to assign Jupiter a certain very-light weight to explain its slow speed around the sun.
But if the earth is only 18 million miles (or less) from the sun, then all the planets are likewise about five times closer to the sun. In that case, we might be able to explain why Jupiter is mainly a rock, for where all planets are five times closer to the sun than the liars claim, then the sun's diameter must be five times smaller than they claim, and consequently the gravity force of the sun goes down drastically because gravity force is from the sun's internal heat.
In fact, with the evidence above that the gases of Jupiter are from volcanic systems upon a rock planet, it again proves that the sun is not 93 million miles away, for there is no other way to explain that a rock planet the size of Jupiter should orbit round the sun slower than pee-wee Earth and pee-wee Mars unless the sun's size were much smaller than they claim.
I can see no other reason for assigning Jupiter as an all-gas planet but due to it's slow orbital speed. I don't know for sure, but I think astronomy predicts planetray orbital speeds based on: 1) solar size; 2) solar distance; 3) planetary orbital period / speed. I think they believe that these three ingredients require a very light planet, but as Jupiter is obviously made of rock, one or more of the three ingredients must be changed, and as 3) cannot be changed, it becomes obvious that 1) and/or 2) are erroneous.
FACT: the lower the gravity force of the body being orbited, the heavier the satellite can be per any given orbital period. FACT: when the diameter of a sphere is reduced by five times, from the size that the sun is claimed to be to its true size, the volume of the sun is reduced by many more than five times, and consequently the sun's internal heat is reduced by many more than five times.
The formula for finding the volume of a sphere: 4/3 pi r≥. The volume of a sphere 5 units in radius: 4/3 x 3.14 x 5 x 5 x 5 = 523.3 cubic units. The volume of a sphere five times larger than the one above: 4/3 x 3.14 x 25 x 25 x25 = 65,417 cubic units...which is 125 times more volume than the first sphere. Therefore, the fools have given the sun at least 125 times more internal heat than it truly has, and consequently the solar gravity is far less than they think it is. Besides, they are not correctly computing the sun's gravity force because they don't interpret gravity properly. FOOLS FOOLS FOOLS.
It must be very cold on Jupiter's rock surface because any significant level of heat would create random-directional winds to destroy the striped look of Jupiter's gases. The gases probably don't allow light to the rock surface, but, my point is, there must be very little heat due to volcanic systems spewing the gases.
We might ask how the gases do not mix, over centuries of time, in order to destroy the striped look. I suggest that these gas precipitate to the rock surface while new gases spew forth. The speed of precipitation plus the speed of spewing forms the striped look that we see. If there was no precipitation of gases, then the gases would long ago have spread perpendicular to the stripes, i.e. ruining the stripes. Therefore, Jupiter looks like a "rainy" planet likely of something akin to what we call, sleet.
The more the fools follow their erroneous science, the more erroneous they trudge. "The temperature in the clouds of Jupiter is about minus 145 degrees Celsius (minus 234 degrees Fahrenheit). The temperature near the planet's center is much, much hotter. The core temperature may be about 24,000 degrees Celsius (43,000 degrees Fahrenheit). That's hotter than the surface of the sun!" How possibly can it be correct that such a wild temperature difference occurs on a planet that's all gas above a light-liquid core? Heat moves through gas FAST. Heat as hot as the sun moves FAST-FAST-FAST. Hello? Are they bonkers? Where did they go wrong on this blunder? High heat causes high disturbances in liquids and gases, but Jupiter's atmosphere needs to be stable enough to produce the stripes, and cold enough to let the gases fall to the ground and stay there.
The fools need Jupiter to be so light the claim is that it has a liquid- or solid-hydrogen core. They picked the lightest material...because they have a sun way too big.
Britannica: "Saturnís low mean density is direct evidence that its bulk composition is mostly hydrogen." They speak of the low density as a fact, and then get an erroneous scientific product. Science is as good only as having all ingredients in the method correct. The article continues: "...Saturnís mean density of 0.69 gram per cubic cm requires..." an idiot to compute. That's lighter than water. The goofs have Saturn lighter than water, then claim that Saturn's rings are made of rocks. IDIOTS making you their idiots.
"Saturn's rings are made up of billions of particles ranging from grains of sand to mountain-size chunks. Composed predominantly of water-ice..." There you go, they need such a light planet that, although they need to admit rock in the rings, their minds gravitate to a light product -- water -- as the main ring ingredient. Saturn too has stripes, and so it must have volcanic activity under the clouds. Ignore these fools, and start to view the solar system as much smaller than they claim.
But John, you may argue, they know how long it takes to get a spaceship to Mars, and so they can also know how far it is. But I say, there's no speedometer on the rocket to prove that it's going as fast as they claim it is. Therefore, they calculate the speed of the rocket by entering the erroneous distance they assign to Mars, divided by the time it takes to get there. They lie.
I'm not saying that solar gravity should be exactly 125 times less where the solar volume is 125 times less. I suggest that the gravity will be considerably less than 125 times lower because the level of heat formation of a star is expected not to be proportional with the decrease in its size/mass. I think that heat formation would be increased on a compounding basis with increased size of the solar furnace, and vice-versa.
One can assume logically that Jupiter and Saturn are much heavier than liquid hydrogen. I assume that the .69 g/cc weight assigned (by the establishment) to Saturn is calculated as per its distance from the sun in combination with its orbital period, and so I think it's correct to say that the true weight of this planet is less than 125 times the weight of .69 g/cc. How much less I don't know, but one can venture a good guess apart from having the tools and time to do an intricate study.
The .69 figure is obtained in accordance with the size they think Saturn is. But where it's five times smaller because the whole solar system is five times smaller, it changes everything. This is not to say that we should work out Saturn's average density as .69 x 125, because the sun's gravity is much lower than it is when they erroneously derive the .69 figure. In other words, we've got to scrap the .69 figure altogether and start afresh with the true orbital velocity of Saturn when it's about five times nearer to the sun than they think it is. This velocity can be obtained accurately when the true distance to Saturn is known.
However, the true gravity force of the sun is not known. I don't think anyone can know the gravity force of the sun unless they first know the weight of Earth, and frankly I don't think they have a clue as to the latter, but are merely guessing at 5.5 g/cc. Without the specific gravity force of the sun, they can't know the accurate density of any planet even if they have the planet's orbital velocity. They wrongly have Venus at 5.2 g/cc, and Mercury at 13.6.
As they haven't measured the true distance to Venus, obviously, by some telescopic method, how can they know the distance to any planet? Unless they have the planetary distances known, they can't have orbital velocity either. If they really could measure the distance to Venus, why are they reporting it wrongly as at least five times further than it really is? Our basis for measuring the solar system has to be on the eclipse lines I mentioned above. Those lines do not lie. That method is simple and true. They don't use it because they don't want you to know about it, and if they used it, every astronomer would know about it as basic astronomy, so that the cat would have long ago been out of the bag to you. Instead, they opted for the 93-million-mile lie.
Just to give you some numbers to ponder, liquid hydrogen weighs .07 gram per cubic centimeter, 111 times less weight as compared to a cubic centimeter of iron weighing in at 7.9 g/cc. Pure granite weighs only 2.7 g/cc. So, if we assume that Saturn is mainly made of metal and granite, we can go for an average weight of 4.5 g/cc. Or we can go with purely a heavy metal in the ballpark of 13 g/cc.
The first rule of science: they are liars when they need to be. The second rule of science: discover which half or more of their science is false. Proceed only after those two rules are in your belt.
Here's all four Gospels wrapped into one story.
For Some Prophetic Proof for Jesus as the Predicted Son of God.
Also, you might like this related video:
Pre-Tribulation Preparation for a Post-Tribulation Rapture