If you, as a teen, merely read about mental disorders, you can become fearfully sure that you have about a dozen of them, because those who describe them describe normal but adverse human traits, or typical problems, that everyone has from time to time. It's like the tricky horoscope fiend who convinces you that you're a true Scorpio just because he/she describes some human characteristics that you happen to have...because everyone has them from time to time, and so everyone suit a Scorpio, or a Leo, if you fall for these tricks. People infested with a demon(s) can have all sorts of "normal" but adverse thinking patterns, selfishness, divisiveness, and making enemies by all sorts of means. People need The Anchor to battle these things, not a shrink you doesn't believe in the words of Jesus, who's in business to take your money.
Relax, young people, and get to know your own mind, don't let it get away on you, then apply the Words of Jesus to it, and you will become healthy, guaranteed. Be kind to others, and you will feel GREAT. If those you try to assist are demonic, they may not show appreciation, but God will. If it's appreciation you need, be charitable even with your words, more valuable than gold. It's free to share good words, but you can't share them until you learn them. That's what Jesus meant by "let your light shine." You can't do it, therapists can't do it, unless you/they now the light.
When Jesus told the priests that they were not so high as they thought, they had tantrums, eventually to the point of murdering Him. The Light was attacking them, and they couldn't deal with it in the right way. Instead of heeding His words, they made excuses as to why Jesus was the demonic one instead.
It's the liberals who decided it best to praise school children undeservingly as a means to encourage them to do better. Liberals (self-liberated from Christianity) are dark destroyers. The best thing is to show kids where they are wrong, to correct them. Let them know where they need improvement, otherwise we are destroyers of our own children. Don't spare the cold-hard truths, the stuff that makes spines. Just don't pile it on too heavily thinking that more discipline is always better. Somebody needs to do the dirty work with the teens. Not overbearingly vociferous, but open-cut truthful. It'll heal, and that's the goal: let them heal themselves with truths in every way.
If someone is in dire need of being called, stupid, such as an evolutionist, don't spare the rod. An evolutionist is far worse than a moron; he's a God killer. And what do Creationists do when debating with them? They treat the morons with respect, like moms googoo-lofting their infants. Don't elevate a man who deserves to be sunk. Being Mr. Nice Guy Always is an end-time disaster. Don't live a lie. Don't tell your daughter she's as good as the boys in sports when you know she's not. This is an example of how liberals are spoiling this generation with illusions.
Don't let them become promiscuous as if there's no punishment in store. Tell them: God punishes bad behavior in order that you will heal yourself. Young adults shouldn't need a shrink to tell them what bad behavior is; they should know it because their parents told them. I say that all problematic thinking problems, when there's no physical mental defects, are the fruits of sinful behavior. When a disappointed God allows demons to infest minds, oh-boy, you had best hear His alarm system.
Face your earthly facts, the dogged futilities of this life, and lean on the Next Life with God, for your success story. He promises you glory of your own, glory you can never have while in a weak, flesh body. Face the facts, muscleman, you can impress us with your muscular feats for a few minutes only, afterwhich you're all tuckered out, as good as a dead man. Any old lady can beat a hockey player to the ground after his five-minute shift. For all of his daily weight lifting and jogging, after 25 years straight, the muscleman is still not a god. Instead, he's the fool who wasted his time seeking the praise of others for merely his bulging muscles. And if those muscles lured women to bed with him, he ends up a bigger fool yet when it comes time to tell God what he did with his time.
Does the Holy Spirit turn the Living-Water tap upon you when your thinking, actions, learning, or decisions are wrong? That would make God a lousy trainer. By praising people who do wrong, the anti-Christ generation is bring Narcissus to life. Faggots everywhere are loving self these days, proud of self. This generation is ready to legislate the praise of sinners, and/or to punish those who don't praise the wrong. If we don't worship the devil incarnate, we could face cruel punishment, says Revelation 13. The devil is a grandiose narcissist.
God cannot enjoy life, I think, unless He's able to lavish love upon us with His Living Waters. He cannot enjoy loving those who hate Him. This is why correction unto obedience is necessary, because, if God cannot love us, there will be no life on earth any longer.
It's a small miss to say that "God is love," for the reality is expressed better as, "God loves to love." There is only one God, and so we are to conform to Him, because He it is who is, and there's no changing it. CONFORM. Be wise like the youthful Solomon, not like the Solomon polluted with material things and an extravagant (to put it mildly) sexual appetite.
God is up to your challenge when you expect Him to be a good God. You haven't yet seen good. Even if God has touched you, even if you have felt the flow within you of His kingdom, His waters, you have not yet known good, but merely its surface. There's much more to come. The goodness of God is thick, filling.
When Jesus said that His "kingdom" is within you, a concept not stressed in the Old Testament, He meant that the King is within you. When you first sense Him in you, you surely get a little nervous. You can't come to terms with it fully. You might disregard the reality to some degree in order to deal with it slowly, and so you might let it become less fruitful within you than it could be, due to your fear of God. This fear is why the Living Waters feel reassuring, safe, loving, warming. God is being our momma. Look at me, says Momma, don't be afraid. Yet, we know from the Old Testament that there is cause to be afraid, when we disappoint Him. If I look into His eyes, my spirit vanishes into nothing. I shrink up, not wanting to be seen. I feel worse than naked and dirty before Momma, I feel inferior too, as deep as a bottomless hole. And what does God do now under the Second Covenant? He changes our diapers, wiping the filth and washing away the stink.
Accept God's googoo-pie today, and stop sinning. He'll do His best to make sure you don't become a narcissist, because the Christian calling is to think about others as a way of life. The Spirit within will show you where you need improvement, if you keep your inner eyes and ears open toward Him. Apply yourself to this task, or God will toss you away. Fear Him, said Jesus, who can toss you away to a harsh end. That's the way it has always been.
God is cherry-picking humans for a grand kingdom, and for their sake, nothing harmful can be allowed there, no rebels will enter. Become His cherry today. Say with your heart: "pick me, Father, please pick me, I want to be chosen, I want to be safe in You." How do you think God will react to such words, if they be sincere?
Christians carry a deposit of their salvation in the King within their hearts. By "Kingdom" is meant "family," not peasantry. By "King" is meant "our security," not slavery. By "deposit" is meant ownership, that the King is coming later to pick up His Purchase, his Wife, not His slave. Revelation and elsewhere tell of our crowns, our co-ruling the family of God, our sitting on the Throne together with Him. I don't feel worthy of that. Could you imagine? The only way for this to become the reality is when our minds are "magically" transformed to work like the Mind of Jesus. This gift can go only to the willing, the humble.
If people aren't willing to even thank Him for granting them life, how can they be willing to be like Him? They will be the scrap, unworthy even to be our slaves, unworthy even to be a scrap heap in our vicinity, but rather they will be laid below the horizon, where the top of the heap can't be seen. When people venture to the heap, to take a glimpse over it, they will feel thankfully good that the trash did not win the war against them, that they were not forever imprisoned in its stench, because Jesus came to unlock the prison door for us, that we could walk out of darkness to become owned by a New Master. Is this just a little thing, only a small victory?
People who don't honor God will be offended that I call them, scrap. To clarify, I mean that they are machinery that doesn't work for God, and thus it goes to the trash bin, and finally to the scrap yard. The trash bin is where God holds them for judgment in this life, reducing or even minimizing their destructiveness, and finally, at Judgment, they get tossed into a place of weeping, shame and pain, with fire of some sort not likely the fire we know.
I'm scrap in some senses, and so are you. That is, someone skilled in playing a piano can be precious in that regard, but I'm the scrap in that regard. But when the human instrument doesn't play God's music, then, even if it's the best piano player in the world, that instrument is trash in that regard. You can't avoid being God's trash by being the best mother, the best housewife, the best employee, the friendliest guy in town, if you're not playing God's music, as He plays it. We all submit our music to His music, otherwise the music stinks. It's the best employee of God that gets lifted up the highest, who enjoys the music the most, and who most enjoys making others enjoy the music. The latter point is called, "we love to love (others)." God loves to love you who love Him.
"In Greek mythology, Narcissus was a hunter from Thespiae in Boeotia..." Mythical Orion the hunter was also from Boeotia, and thus Narcissus was a play on Orion. Mythology surrounding Narcissus suggests that Boeotians on a Caiaphas-like Cephissus river (Boeotia) were also at Phocis and Delphi, what looks very traceable to a Daphne location in Cadmus' Phoenicia, at Mount HERMON. The Phocaeans were at the end of the HERMus river of Lydia, and Cadmus was assigned HARMONia for his wife (myth characters are code words for real entities).
Lydians under mythical Pelops (cannibal symbol) ended up at Pisa (in Peloponnesia), roughly where mythical Daphne was placed when in the Ladon river. Pisa is beside Elis, which I think derives in "Laish," a Phoenician city smack beside Daphne. Shechem of Israel, location of North-Israel's priests, was not very far from mount Hermon, and I claim that Shechemites named Boeotia's Schimatari, home of Orion's father. Laish was renamed, Dan, and I trace peoples there to the Danaans of Argos, explaining why mythical Cephissus was made the brother of Inachus, founder of Argos and husband of Boeotia's honey goddess, Melia.
Mythical Cepheus was husband to CassIOPEIA, part-code for Ioppa/Joppa of northern Israel. Their daughter, AndroMEDA (probably code for Mede peoples) married the Danaan, Perseus (probably code for a Persian people). His mother, Danae, gave him birth when the faggot, Zeus, appeared to her as a golden shower, what looks like a myth writer's play on Orion's urine symbol. Zeus was made the grandson of the urine (rain) god, URANus, and Zeus father (possibly code for Corinthians) was given a Cannibal symbol). Mythical Medea was made queen of Corinth, a city of Hermes opposite the Corinthian waters from Phocis and Delphi
Likewise on the Israeli coast with Joppa is ACRE, tending to explain why Danae's father was made, ACRisius. "Danae gained a reputation of being the most beautiful female mortal of the age." That beauty symbol can explain why Narcissus was extra beautiful, or vice versa. In contrast, the Mede-like Medusa, killed by Perseus, was especially ugly. Myth writers were comic-book writers of the day, entertainers. Narcissus was given a water-mirror symbol, and the Perseus-Medusa myth used a mirror to keep Perseus from death at the sight of Medusa. It was comic-strip fun.
As Miss Hicks played Sleeping Beauty, Narcissus and the Danaans could look like Hyksos, and in fact I do think the Hyksos became part of the Phoenicians. I trace the mythical founder of the Danaans, Danaus (bother of AEGYPTus), son of Belas/BELUS, to PELUSium's Tanis location in lower Egypt. Daphne's grandfather, Everes, was code (my personal discovery) for "Avaris," the Hyksos capital not far from Tanis. Daphne's father, TIRESias, came to own the Hermes caduceus (that also depicted CADmus) because Hermes was code for a cult at mount Hermon, where Panias, a city beside Dan, named Pan, the son of Hermes. One or both snakes of the caduceus could easily have created the Ladon dragon at the tip of a comic writer's pen, for Tiresias was not the only father of Daphne; Ladon was too.
There's a Panias-like Peneus river near the Ladon river, and the latter is where at least one myth writer placed mythical Daphne. Some gave Peneus as Daphne's father, wholly logical. Then, "In Greek mythology, a Daphnaie is a nymph of the laurel tree. They are named after Daphne ('Laurel'), one of the naiads who was plagued with unwanted sexual advances until she cried to Peneus (the river god) for help." Clearly, the Peneus river of Greece was related to Panias in Phoenicia, especially as Hermes / Pan was given a birth place in Arcadia, near both the Peneus and the Ladon. The Payen/Paion/Pan surname is first known in Dauphine province of France.
The Caucasian Avars suspect in "Avaris" were, probably, in Armenia at one time, and there's a question as to whether they named "Kabar." It sure looks like it, but not necessarily. Ugly Hephaestus was ruler of the Kabar-like Kabeiri cult, but I trace that cult's name to the (K)Habur tributary of the EUPHRATES because Hephaestus' wife was made, APHRODITE. She thus looks like a Hebrew (the Apiru/Abiru in ancient Babylon) people that named the Habur. As the Mitanni lived on the Habur, which may have been part of ARAM in those days, note the RAM head in the Mittan/Mutton Crest.
Aphrodite was paired with the Armeno-Lydian character, Ares, yet one can suggest her trace to proto-Venetians, the Heneti, because Romans called her, Venus. There is a question, therefore, whether Venetians were from Mus of Armenia's Lake Van, for Fane's/Vans share the gauntlet with Maceys/Mace's, and especially because Mussels/Muscels are first known in Lincolnshire with Antens/Antonys while mythical Antenor was code for the Heneti. Mussels/Muscels use "plates" while English Plate's, sharing the Anten/Antony leopard face, are in Ram colors and format. Keiths/Mascals at the Musselburgh theater were at HADDington while Hatti were on the Halys river. Mittans/Muttons are first known in Yorkshire with Keith-branch Caddys and Plate-like Blade's/Blate's. Fenns/Venns, sharing the Plate scallops, are first known in Devon with Flowers in the "flower" of Italian Antonys/Tonys.
The Heneti and/or their PAPHlagonian (possibly named in honor of the Hyksos king, Apophis) partners were on a Parthia-like Parthenius river, and Perta on lake Tatta looks Parthian too, begging whether the Perseus-branch Danaans / Laishians were at one or both of these locations. Tatta is at the upper Halys river, near the Parthenius, and the Halybes metal makers on that river can therefore identify the mythical metal maker, Hephaestus. Pelops ruled at Heneti-like Eneti before becoming the king of Pisa, suggesting that Heneti originated in Lydia. They look like they could have named, Anatolia.
While Cadmus' wife was Hermon-like Harmonia (Ares' daughter), he was given a settlement in Boeotian Thebes, where there was a Kabeiri cult. Hephaestus made weapons of war for Ares. One can spot the people-group alliances in these mythical situations, with all people groups on or off the coast of the Black sea. The ugly symbol of Hephaestus can indicate that Gorgons were on the Halys river. This is how one today plays mythology, by identifying the people roots of mythical symbols.
The Romans suggested that Hephaestus became Vulcan of Sicily, and the Arms of Sicily have a Gorgon head at the center of three human legs. Hephaestus' lame symbol suggests he had a leg symbol for some reason, likely the same leg/thigh symbol of Dionysus, a thigh symbol that was applied also to Athena.
In Greek, a leg is "skelos," suggesting mythical Scylla, code for the Sicel founders of Sicily. "Skelos" is a proto-English term, suggesting Scythians / Cimmerians in the people group depicted by Hephaestus. Note the city of Skala on Patmos, the island upon which Gog chose to give John the Revelation of the seven-headed dragon, and of the 666. I identify the Patmos cities of Chora and SKALa with aspects of mythical Coronis and her son, ASCLepius (from "ASCALAphus" = "owl"), and so as Apollo mated with Coronis to produce Asclepius, the Asclepius snake symbol looks connectable to Pythia, the dragon of Delphi...so obviously of the Ladon dragon i.e. connectable to a peoples at the Ladon river. AscLEPIUS, a LAPITH, had cults on Sicily, and Lapithos is a city on Cyprus, where the Greeks gave Aphrodite's birthplace, explaining why she had another name, Kypris. The seven-headed Lotan dragon was in the seas off Syria, and that's the location of Cyprus.
While Huckabee's use Asclepius RODs, Hucks use the owl, and Hick-branch Hooks are first known in Devon with Huckabee's, and with Rods from Rodez. Hucks were once said to be first known in Yorkshire with Hicks and Rhodes', though the latter were once said to be first known in Lincolnshire with Hucks.
One myth writer gave Arsinoe as mother of Asclepius, and that term, in this picture, looks like an Aras-Sinope code, suggesting Armeno-Cimmerian scythians at the base of the Halys river. Another mythical Arsinoe was given a cannibal symbol, symbol also of Pelops and Coronis-like Cronus. This same Arsinoe had a lunatic symbol often given to Dionysus' Maenads which I see as a Maeonian peoples on the Maeander river of Lydia. I don't think there was any way for Cimmerians at Sinope to avoid being on the nearby Parthenius river, and to this we can add that the Royal Scythians, originating in Ukraine to the west of Cimmerians there, had conquered into Media such that this can explain the naming of the Parthenius by Parthians.
Thus, there us a question on whether Gorgons in the Colchian land of the Lazi named Laish, and as such whether proto-Danaan of Laish were at the Parthenius river as mythical Perseus. The latter's daughter, AndroMEDA ("men of Meda"), jibes with mythical Medea (a witch), of the Lazi region. Medea's goddess, Hecate, was given a wolf-head symbol, same as mythical Scylla. The latter had her dog heads protruding at her THIGHs.
Lazi lived in CIRCasia, and mythical Circe turned the BEAUTIFUL Scylla into a monster i.e. ugly. Some made Hecate the mother of Scylla, explaining why mythical Glaucus loved Scylla, for the Lazi, and Medea, lived on the Glaucus river seen on this old map.
The Glaucus had a mouth at Phasis, also called POTI. While "podi" is another Greek word for "leg," Apollo's Oracle at Delphi had a triPOD symbol (tripods have legs) suspect by me as code for Trapani, which might later have named nearby Trappeti, both on Sicily. In any case, "Trapani" looks like "Trabzon," home of the Khaldi partners of the Halybes, and near Gorgon-like Georgia. The Arms/flag of Sicily is at times called a "tripod."
Apollo is in the book of Revelation as a demon in a Pythia-like pit, though Revelation calls it an "abyssos," which could be God's code for Abydos in Mysia (beside Dardania), explaining why Revelation gives Apollo the Hebrew name, "Abaddon." In myth, I say that Dardanus married the Bat Colchians when he married mythical Batia, daughter of Togarmah-like Teucer. A second Teucer was on Cyprus.
Houthi-Chinese Weapons
Two weeks ago, in the 3rd update of last month, I started some heraldic pointers to the Houthis of Yemen, just as they were making the news with missile attacks on Israel. On Thursday morning of the week, the video below told that the United States had caught China selling missile parts to the Houthis, and that the Chinese want Houthis to show appreciation by not hitting Chinese ships in the sea off the Yemeni coast.
Revelation's "kings of the east" were coming to mind, part of the Oriental invasion on Iraq, Syria and Israel at the brink of Armageddon. Revelation's 6th Trumpet and 6th Bowl has them parked on the Euphrates river prior to attacking the anti-Christ in Israel. Armageddon starts roughly at the 7th Trumpet. The upper Euphrates is now controlled by the Kurds, and I believe the Kurds ("Medes" in Isaiah 14) will be called (as per Isaiah 14) to destroy the anti-Christ's Iraqi ("Babylon") domains. The Kurds have already been at war with the present, Shi'ite rulers of Baghdad (20 miles from ancient Babylon).
The first thing coming to mind, heraldically, was my pointer to China of the SHINs/Chine's/Chings, a pointer that I've suggested for China's part in election fraud in at least the United States and canada. I was looking, this morning, for evidence on whether God would link the "SHIN bones" of Newtons to the Houth/Oddey surname, because the latter is first known in Sussex with English Bone's. But I didn't see much evidence of a pointer of the Newtons or Bone's to the Houthis, or a strong Houth/Oddey connection to Bone's.
You can load Shins now, which loads on another tab, in order to load other surnames, to better follow the heraldic links.
I then remembered that the Newton Crest has an "eastern prince"!!! WOW, I was floored. It was only after this realization that I wrote on the "kings of the east" above. Prior to writing that paragraph, the kings of the east had only come to mind. Then, when I got down to the Medes part, I remembered that Medes/Meads, once said to be first known in Somerset with Shins/Chine's/Chings, share the pelican with Houths/Oddeys!
Plus, as Newtons named STURminster Newton on the Stour river, their EASTERn prince can be gleaned as part-code for the Easters/Asters/ISTERs, a branch of Sturs. Not only do I trace ISHTAR of ancient Babylon to the harlot of Revelation 17, the one who is destroyed at Armageddon, but the Sturs (Hampshire, beside Shins/Chine's/Chings) share triple-red fesses with Shins/Chine's/Chings!
Ishtar was a goddess in Assyria, land of ancient Medes, land now of the Kurds, where also the anti-Christ springs out from, at Nineveh, according to Nahum 1:11. Nineveh is now Mosul. In many historical writings. Ishtar was the continuation of Inanna of Babylon. For example: "Inanna was among the most popular Sumerian goddesses and, as Ishtar, was worshipped by the Akkadians, Babylonians, Assyrians,..." She was called the "GREAT MOTHER of the heavenly dragon," you see, and in Revelation 17, she's "MYSTERY BABYLON THE GREAT, MOTHER OF ABOMINATIONS." She's riding on the back of the Revelation-12 dragon, and she partners with the Revelation-13 beast.
Her Sumerian past allows us to check the Sumers/Sommer(ton)s, possibly part of the Somersets, and while Somerset is where Shins/Chine's/Chings are first known, the Newton shin bones are in the colors of the Coats of Sumers/Sommers and Tume's/Tombs, the latter two both first known in Worcestershire with Lilys. I trace Tume's/Tombs to same-colored Susans (giant lily), and to Susa, the capital of the Cottians, which can explain why Bone's have a "COTISed" bend. English Cottons are first known in Huntingdonshire with the Kemmis'/Kenys' who in turn share the Shin/Chine/Ching Coat. Lille's are first known on Oxfordshire with the Bone-branch Bunns.
I trace VESTalis of the royal Cottians to Wests (Devon with Kenns) who in turn almost have the Sumer/Sommer Coat. Westerns/Westons are first known in Staffordshire with Hicksons and Cotes'/Coats while Hicks' pointed us to Hoods/Hoots/Hutts, and moreover Hicks' (same place as Bank Newton and Newton-beloved Prince's) probably have the Bone's in their motto, thus making a link between Sumerian-like Sumers, Shin-connectable Bone's, and Houth branches. Dutch Bone's even share the sun of Irish Sommers. Staffords list Staffs, and there is a "staff" in the Crest of KURDs/Kurts.
Plus, Medes-connectable Motleys likely have the lion of Odins (same place as Prince's) and Bona's, and while Bona's share the Greenwich Coat, Greenwich's and Greens are both first known in Kent with Star-loving Stairs/Stayers. Thus, we are still on the eastern-prince family-bunch of Newtons, still pointing to China while Houthi-like Houths/Oddeys are in central play.
Motleys likely have the quadrants of Otone's/Oltons wile Ottone VISconti ruled Milan, where Bona's are first known. VISE's are first known in Sussex with Houths/Oddeys and Bone's. Motley-like Motts (EIGHT-POINTED ESToile!) are first known in Essex with Easters/Asters/Isters and Este's.
Ishtar's ancient symbol was an eight-pointed star, and thus she looks like a proto-English goddess of ancient astrologists, i.e. named after "star." The interesting thing here is that Sturs are first known beside the Stars/Stairrs (ESToiles) while Stairs/Stayers are in Medes/Mead colors and format. Plus, StarLINGs/STARlincks and Lings are first known in Suffolk with Mosels and Golds, but also with Medes-branch Meadows. The Golds are probably in the "gold" term used twice to describe symbols of English Bone's.
I'll even add that Stairs/Stayers and Medes/Meads are in Trudeau and Spice colors and format while Spice's are first known in Devon with Houth-branch Hoods/Hoots, with Kenys-like Kenns', and with the Gates' who share the lion of Bone's...who are also Bohuns/Bohums, suspect along with Behms from Bohemians. Behms happen to be in Trudeau colors and format too, while Trude's/Trots, sharing the six pale bars of Bone-connectable Cotes'/Coats', are first known in Surrey with the Biss' suspect in the "Bis" motto term of English Beckers who in turn have a "buck's head" in colors reversed from the Trudeau "deer" and the Behr "stag." The Biss Crest (snakes) traces to Bissone (snakes), and the Visconti snake was a "biscione" likely for that picture. Behm-like "Bene" is even another Becker motto term while Becker-branch Beach's are first known in Hertfordshire with the Shovels in turn looking related to the Dutch Bone Coat.
I loaded Beckers in the first place because they share the blue-vaired Shield of Shins/Chine's/Chings and Kemmis'/Kenys'. The Gates' and Golds (both share the Bone lion) are in the "gold gate" in the Arms of Podebrady, that being a Bohemian city.
I decided to apply the Trudeau's to this discussion because it's known that justin trudeau has been in close cahoots with cheating China. BILL Gates may be a second goofball in league with Chinese global plots, and here it's interesting that English Bills (Somerset with early Medes'/Meads) share the pelican with Medes'/Meads and Houths/Oddeys. French Billets are first known in Maine with Pellicans, and the English Bone Coat looks related to the one of Pellican-loving Pullys/Pullens (Yorkshire with Oddie's/Hoddys and Palles'/Pauls) whose "pallescere" motto term could include the Pelles' who in turn share a gold-on-blue pelican with Houth's/Oddeys.
English Beckers are first known in Yorkshire with "bon"-using Hicks, with Houth-branch Odins and Oddie's/Hoddys (compare with Hoods/Hoots), with Bank Newton of the Shin-loving Newtons, and with the Prince's/Prinse's in the "eastern prince" of Newtons. Bank Newton is in Craven while Cravens can be traced with Ricks to Rika/Reka/Rijeka at the northern end of ISTRIA, thus explaining the EASTERn prince. Pullys/Pullens and their branches could be from Pola/Pula on Istria. Bona's (look connectable to Gates') share the giant lion of Pools/Pole's, the latter first known in Dorset with Sturminster Newton, and Gates' / Bone's share the lion of French Pole's.
I'll even take this to the HODnets who have the Houth/Oddey quadrants in colors reversed. Hodnets are first known in Shropshire with the MOTleys and MEDleys, and the latter surname was once said to be first known in Somerset, where Medes'/Meads were once said to be first known, and thus Medleys and Motleys (and Yorkshire's Methleys) were a Medes/Mead branch. Hodnets are said to have been in Drayton while Draytons (Shropshire) share the gold eagle leg with HOOTers/Hutters.
The TIGERs in the Medley Crest are first known in Suffolk with Babe's, and with the Meadows who in turn share the pelican with Medes'/Meads an Houths/Oddeys. Irish Teague's/TEEGERs are first known in Galway with Shin-connectable Kennys, but also with the Babe-related BRADYs, both traceable to PodeBRADY. German Teegers have a giant, eight-pointed star, symbol of Ishtar. The "diems" in the Teague/Teeger motto are listed with DITTmayers while Ditts (same place as German Teegers) use stripe-less tigers). German Teegers are first known beside DENmark, and the Ister river became the Danube, thus making Danes look like they were from a royal/noble family on that river. The Dane, Dan and Dean surnames are all first known in Sussex with Houths/Oddeys and Newton-beloved Bone's.
I've never said that Houth's are named after Houthis. I merely think that they are God's pointer to the Houthis, and perhaps we now know why God wants to point to them, due to their relationship with the "kings of the east." I've never said that Shins/Chings are from the Chinese, but merely think God uses them to point to end-time China.
For what it's worth, the Patria's in the Houth/Oddey motto share the Trump stag head and the Pully/Pullen scallops. Donald Trump is said to descend from Drumpf's, and while Trumps (near German Drummonds) are in the colors of German Drummonds, Scottish Drummonds, who named Drymen in Stirlingshire, share the triple fesses of Easter-branch Sturs while Stirlings are also STURlings.
The father of the first Scottish Drummond was prince George (Hungary), husband of a woman (Gate-like Agatha, I think) from Podebrady, and English George's (Dorset, beside Sturs), first known near Sturminster Newton, share the dove with the Houth/Oddey Crest. It could appear that God made these shin-bone pointers to Chinese orientals include Donald Trump, who hates China and strongly supports Israel.
Belgian George's/Gorgens share the Pully/Pullen bend, and may therefore have the scallops of English Jacks (Yorkshire with Pullys/Pullens and Bank Newton), especially as Scottish Jacks are first known in Renfrewshire with the Pollocks who in turn share the saltire of English Franks while both German Franks are first known in Bohemia with the first Drummond's mother. It just so happens that Scottish Franks have a saltire in the colors of the saltire-by-shin-bones of Newtons!!! Wikipedia's Clan Pollock article shows, or at least once showed, the Pollock saltire in colors reversed, which is then in the colors of the similar, fat cross that is the Arms of Pola/Pula i.e. city in Istria.
As one of the Bohemian Franks have a giant column, we first note that Columns/Malcolms are likely from king Malcolm III, for he was the son-in-law of Agatha, rightful queen of England as per her husband the Aetheling. This Agatha was the mother of queen Margaret (wife of Malcolm) who was brought to Scotland by the first Drummond. Thus, while nobody else seems to know that this Agatha was of Podebrady, I do, thanks to my heraldic learnings.
If the George's are from Gorgons, note that the latter lived to the south of the Caspian sea, beside Kurdistan. The staff of Kurds/Kurts is held by a "friar," and so it's interesting that Fryers/Frere's may have been of the Newton-colored Freys (Wiltshire with Newton-connectable Stars/Stairrs) and Freys'/Phreeze's (Essex with Easters/Asters/Isters). FRYdays are first known in Staffordshire. Then, Frasers/Freysers share the Coat of Kims/Shimmie's and McKinneys, both looking like they were named of/from the Shins/Chine's (same place as Friends/Freins) or their Kemmis/Kenys branch.
I now see the first-known location of Friends/Freins has been changed from Somerset (to Nottinghamshire), where Medes'/Meads were once said to be first known, and then the latter's Meadow branch is in Freind/Frein colors and format. In the meantime, the German Freys/Freie's share the giant lion of Golds, first known on Suffolk with Meadows. I've never said that Medes'/Meads trace to ancient Medes or Kurds, though they might, but they sure do look like God's pointers to anti-Christ prophecy.
Friends/Freins are in the colors of English Ferrands (AXE), the latter said to have been at Yorkshire's Skipton castle, in Craven, bingo! Craven is the location also of Bank Newton. We just saw Friends (early in Somerset with AXE river) looking related to Medes-branch Meadows.
If I knew now that justin trudeau was going to be elevated to a global position in WEF, I'd go deeper into the Justins/Justus' (Perthshire with Drummonds and Aetheling-like Athels) in the Ferrand motto, but this elevation is not likely, even though trudeau continues to play the hard-headed, hard core WEFer while sinking in canadian politics. He could be banking for a WEF position, for the sunk WEFer, Mark Rutte, got the job as NATO chief recently.
The "causa" motto term of Justins/Justus' could be for a branch of Chase's who share the patonce cross with Justus-loving Ferrands. Italian Ferrands, first known in Ferrand-line Firenze, share the checkered Coat of Checkers, the latter first known in Hampshire with Chase's, Change's, and Drummond-connectable Sturs. Chase's share the patonce of Chance's, the latter first known in Essex with Easters/Asters/Isters/Sturs. This paragraph is all connectable to the Newton shin bones, pointable to the Houthi-China relationship, begging whether trudeau is assisting the Houthis due to his despising Israel.
For their English-version motto, Houth's/Oddeys have "Truth and faith" while Truth's are listed with Trude's/TROTs. The Trudeau-beloved Deers have a "A galloping horse," which also TROTs. The Faith's in the same motto are first known in Norfolk with the Hollys who in turn share the dog of Scottish Allisons who in turn have another "Truth" motto term. Faith-like Fate's/Feets are first known in Yorkshire with Oddie's/Hoddys and Odins, and also with Hulls sharing the Allison / Holly dog, as do Halls, the latter first known in Lincolnshire with Alice-beloved Mussels, and with Cross'/Croce's linkable to the Odin crozier. Mussels with Mosels can be a pointer to Mosul (Alice's have a "muzzled" bear).
While Dogs/Doags/Docks (Perthshire) share the Lanark cinquefoil, Scottish Allisons (dogs) are first known in Lanarkshire with SINE's/Sions who in turn share the demi-dog in Crest with Irish SHINs. Thus, it's likely that Sion-of-Switzerland elements are in the Newton shin bones. "SIONnach" is a motto term of Irish Fox's/Shinnocks who in turn share the Coat of Shinnocks/Shiners. China-toting WEF is in Switzerland too, at Davos, and while Daves'/Davers use a "jay," the Jays are first known in Herefordshire with WEFers, their Wafer branch, and with Yemens.
Wefers (probably a Way branch) share the eagles of Italian Este's while English Este's are first known in Essex with Newton-beloved Easters/Asters/Isters. See that? Did God arrange this heraldry? Houthis control western Yemen.
The Yemen Coat is almost the one of English Gains, and the latter are first known in Huntingdonshire with Shin-branch and Stur-connectable Kemmis'/Kenys'. See that? I didn't make the Yemen Coat? The thing is, French Gains are first known in Ile-de-France with Trudeau's and French Levi's, and the Aide's in the latter's motto are probably of Ada of Warenne, who married Henry, earl of Huntingdon, son of king David I, son in turn of Malcolm III seen above.
Thus, both Gain surnames look definitely to be branches, and while the Huntingdon Gains almost have the Coat of English Gore's, the latter are first known in Kent with English Trips while German Trips are first known in Hamburg with Drummonds i.e. who married Agatha, king David's grandmother. English Gore's were once said to be first known in Essex with Easters/Sturs and Este's, and Drummonds almost have the Sturling Coat.
The GENoud variation of French Gains, and variations of German Gains'/Geans look very much like the Yeam/Yeme variations of Yemens, especially as English Jeans share the lion of Yeans (Somerset) in colors reversed. It's then pretty trudeau-suspicious that Trude's/Trots are first known in Surrey with Jean-connectable James' while Trade/s/Trotte's share the fleur-de-lys of German Gains'/Geans. It's making me think that the China-loving destroyers at WEF are supporting the Houthis. The Trade/Trotte fleur is also of the Norths, first known in the same place as Houths/Oddeys. Norths were a Denardo/Nordi branch while Nerets share the French Gain Coat while Nero's/Neretti's are first known in Florence/Firenze with Italian Ferrands.
And I haven't even delved into Justin/Justus symbolism yet (which I wanted to pass on, for now). While this surname's "pair of balances" were likely SCALES prior to their merger with Balance's (Warwickshire with Medes'/Meads), English Trips (share Gaine / Gore / Yemen crosslets) have a "SCALing ladder" while Schole's/Scayle's (Yorkshire with Justus-loving Ferrands) share the vaired Shield of Patents/Pattens (Essex with Chase-branch Chance's and Pair-beloved Peacocks) while a "pair of scales" are in the Crest of Chase-like Cass'/Cash's. The latter are first known in Cambridgeshire with the Wrench's sharing the Trip and HAMburg crosslets, and Chase's are first known in the same place as Hones' while Hamburgs love the Hones' in their motto, I assume.
Hams and same-colored Hammers, in the colors of the Newton shin bones, are first known in Sussex with Bone's/Bohums and Houth's/Oddeys while Hamburgs are first known in Oxfordshire with Bunns (almost the Bone/Bohum Coat). Compare the Coats of Bone's/Bohuns and Bunns to Scale-like Skulls, the latter first known in Herefordshire with Yemens.
Ham-beloved Salmons, first known partially in Surrey with Hammer-connectable and Jean-branch James' (share Warwick lions), are said to be first known also in Cumberland with Pattons (not "Patten"), the line likely responsible for naming the Chase and Ferrand patonce cross. Cumberland is also where Fare's and Browns/Bruns are first known while Italian Ferrands are first known in Florence with Bruno's. Bunnys are first known in Nottinghamshire with Friends/Friens, and Bunns share the eagle of Ferte's while Ferrands (same place as Fare-branch Fermans and Firmans) are also Ferrents. Ferrats/Fers share the Italian Ferrand Coat. Fiers/Fears are first known in Middlesex with Bruns.
Let's go to the write-up of Patton-connectable Ferrands: "The surname Ferrand was first known in Yorkshire where they were granted lands by William the Conqueror and appointed to the Wardenship of SKIPTON Castle, for the CLIFFords, the chief tenants shown in the Domesday Book." Houths/Oddeys are first known in Sussex with Cliffton-connectable Saddocks while Clifftons (Lancashire with RatCLIFFs) almost share a motto term of Ferrands (Yorkshire with Cleaver-beloved Keys). Cliffords, sharing the Coat of Warrens (highly suspect from Ada of Warenne of Huntingdon), are first known in Herefordshire with Yemens and Wefers. Skiptons are suspect as a branch of Ships/Shiptons ("bellow" fans) while Houthis are sinking ships off the Yemen coast.
The Coat of Cliffs (Cheshire with the Ship-beloved and Billet-branch Bellows/Ballots) looks related to the Hoo/WHOO Coat of while the dastardly WHO (World Health Organization) has headquarters in Switzerland with WEF (World Economic Forum).
One can also take the Hoo/Whoo Coat to both Wests (Devon with Billets and Hoods/Hoots) and Dove's/Dows (Berwickshire with Aide's/Ade's), for there's a dove in the Crest of Houths/Oddeys. The blue George doves are shared by West-branch Waistells, first known in Cumberland with Pattons, though the latter were previously said to be first known in Shropshire with Cliffs/Cleave's. Skippers are first known in Essex with Patents/Pattens, and with Chance's sharing the white-on-red patonce cross of Ferrands. The latter's motto, along with the motto of Clifftons, can have the Tennis' who in turn share the leopard faces of Parsons, the latter first known in Norfolk with Cleavers, Diss', and Chance- / Chase-connectable Case's. The latter love the Diss' in their motto whose eagles are those of Bunns (same place as Tennis' and Tiens/Thames') in colors reversed.
Biden happens to be pro-WEF, and so the Houthis may have attacked ships with the wink of whoever oversees the Biden administration. To hide its complicity, that trashy organization may have put some slim military efforts against Houthis merely to make a "good show" of things, though now that Trump is almost on the Chair, we see the American military increasing its efforts in Yemen.
Good morning December 31. Sometimes, I like writing about an accomplishment on my part that almost nobody is talking about, if anybody. I discovered the true nature of heat, gravity, light and all physical energy. I'm not the first to discover them, but it was a discovery nonetheless. The most amazing thing about this is that nobody I've ever read has thought to base all heat, all gravity, all light and most physical energy in the one-little, wee-wee electron. It's God's supreme particle, the basis of all life and sustenance of living creatures.
I went on to form an atomic model that is at least rudimentarily correct, smashing the accepted atomic model to a junk heap. I can begin to convince Christians that wee-wee me is correct about this, while all the biggie scientists are wrong, by pointing out what Christians should know: evolutionary science is all wrong, yet "all" the scientists think it's fact.
Here's the fact: the fields of evolutionary science combined are MUCH BIGGER that the science of atomic physics alone, or of chemistry alone, or of macro-physics alone, or of electrical science alone. That's because evolutionary science includes all of those sciences. Once you begin to receive what I've just said, it can begin to dawn on you that all of those other sciences are infested with incorrections because evolutionists formed their theories to harmonize with, and facilitate, cosmic evolution from the big bang.
Therefore, if you don't think the big bang is correct science, or if you don't think that stars were formed from the big bang, neither should you trust their atomic physics that is a basis for their chemistry and electrical theories. The latter includes the electrical interactions of atoms, light-wave propagation, and simple electrical flow in metals and other electrical conductors. Just think of how many corrections have yet to be made that were not made, exactly due to evolutionists "owning" science departments everywhere.
This story begins at the big bang. It's their story that I'm going to crash. If you are a person of logic, you will tend to agree that I'm correct, but as you are a product of this world, you will find it hard to believe me, because I'm going to go against all that you've been taught. Often, once you believe what you've been taught, for decades, it becomes an indisputable fact in your mind. If all your life you were taught that moving trees cause the wind, it will sound ridiculous for me to say,"no, the air causes the trees to move."
The big bang has a big problem that evolutionists don't tell you, because they are liars. They don't tell you how far apart protons would have been one year after the big bang. Can you figure out how far apart they would have been, at the speeds the liars claim for them, after one year of travel into space? Go ahead, venture a guess. The sphere is the big-bang explosion point.
Imagine all protons back-to-back on the periphery of the big-bang sphere. They can't be closer than back-to-back, in contact with each other. The smaller the sphere, the further apart they will become for each mile of travel away from the sphere. It's known that particles travelling away from a sphere are eight times further apart for each doubling of outward distance.
Okay, use your imagination. The sphere explodes, sending the protons away from the sphere's center. How far apart will they be after a year of travel at just one mph? Go ahead venture a guess. The protons begin exactly one protonic diameter apart, for that is the center-to-center distance of protons in contact with one another. How many atomic diameters apart will they be after one mile of travel if the sphere is two inches in diameter? This is child's play, and evolutionists know it, but they will not paint this picture for you, because they have been, and are still, liars.
With a big-bang sphere two inches in diameter, which is far larger than they say it was, every core of every proton at the sphere's periphery is one inch from the sphere's core. After the protons explode such that the protons are two inches from the sphere's core, they have become eight times further away from one another, now eight protonic diameters apart, because they started on protonic diameter apart.
We now have an easy-to-do and reliable math method. When the atoms are one mile from the big-bang explosion point, that's 63,360 inches away. If you care to do the math (I don't), just finish this following pattern until you hit in the neighborhood of 63,000 inches away from the big-bang core:
2 inches from the core, protons 8 times further apart
4 inches, protons 64 times further apart
8 inches, 512 times
16 inches, 4,096 times
32 inches, 32,768 times
64 inches, 262,144 times
128 inches, 2.97 million,
256 inches from big-bang core, 16.77 million times further apart.
As you can see, after just 21.3 feet (256 inches) of outward travel into the virgin cosmos, all of the evolutionist's protons are already almost 17 million times further apart than the one proton-diameter they started out at. If they were travelling at one mile per hour, they would do the 256 inches in: 256 / 63,360 = .0004 of one hour, = .24 of a minute, = 14.5 seconds. You can easily calculate how far apart they would be when travelling at one million miles per hour, which is a snail's pace as compared to how fast the buffoons think the big-bang sent them out at.
Only an idiot would try to do this math because it's painfully obvious that the atoms would be so far apart after a minute of travel that there's no way they could attract each other in to a gravity pool, even if true that protons attract each other, which is exactly what the buffoons want you to believe, which is why they don't show you the step-by-step formation of stars beginning at the explosion.
Only a buffoon, a sick-headed liar, would want you to believe that, after millions or billions of years of outward travel, the protons and electrons managed to form gravity pools, as opposed to travelling ever further apart into ever-larger space. What possibly could form the gravity pools, do you think? A gravity pool, in their minds, is a gathering of hydrogen atoms into one area.
They want you to imagine, first of all, trillions of gravity pools formed in the cosmos, each of which formed one star. Each gravity pool attracted protons and electrons, but not before they themselves attracted each other to form hydrogen atoms...and powie, thus formed the stars. Ya, powie, in their dreams.
The first step they need to convince us about is: how did the protons and electrons attract each other to form atoms, when the original bitties were screeching through space further from each other, with each passing second, and when they were already MANY-MANY-MANY miles apart after just a year of travel? Who in their right mind would present this scenario to students? Nobody. And that's why it's not to be found. Instead, they begin by showing the gravity pools already formed, in their fantasial diagrams, and now with their computer simulations. Quackpots they truly are, worthy of life in prison, which God will give them to their utter shame.
Okay, the next revelation for anyone with a true head on their shoulders is that modern atomic physics got it wrong when claiming: 1) all atoms have gravity force; 2) all gas atoms attract each other. Why did they choose those errors? Because, they're needed for star formation. How possibly can protons and electrons screeching through space form a gravity pool when a gravity pool is defined as a concentrated region of atoms? How can the atoms come collected into a pool unless they attract each other? See? This is not science, this is bogus. They choose their atomic physics as needed to make the big-bang viable, but even then it's still not viable. They trick you. JAIL TIME will be their reward. I'm looking forward to it because evolution was the ship that created all sorts of wakes, now collectively called "woke." UNGODLINESS was placed above respect for Christians; the anti-Christ generation is here and growing, believing the lie.
So, could it be true that gas atoms repel each other? It is true, and one can prove it with the fact of gas pressure in combination with air pressure. By "the fact of gas pressure," I'm referring to the forces that all gases form no matter how thin or thick the gas. All gas atoms push on container walls if confined in a container. How does that push form? By gas atoms repelling each other.
However, evolutionists would kill their own big-bang if they admitted that gas atoms repel, and so they chose to believe that gas pressure is formed by the motion of atoms that never stop moving. Yer typical air pressure has atoms racing at many hundreds of miles per hour (hahaha), and they collectively lose no velocity (ahaha), a fantasy that you think is fact because you've been taught it by those you trust. FOOLISH ONE, why do you believe evolution-based atomic physics? Get with the facts, man: things that crash lose speed.
FACT: when one crashing item transfers its energy into another item involved in the crash from opposing directions, the items slow each the other down. It's a no-brainer; you can work this out with a little logic all on your lonesome.
Put it this way: transferred motion energy results in loss of speed because all speed originates in motion energy to begin with. If you, with your baseball pitch, create the motion of one atom at 1,000 miles per hour directly toward another atom thrown by your buddy at 1,200 miles per hour, your atom, at the crash site, will stop dead in its tracks, and be sent backward toward you at 200 miles per hour, because the other atom's 1,200 mph cancels 1,000 mph of your atom. Your buddy's atom, instead of bouncing backward toward him, after the collision, will continue to move toward you, but only at 200 mph because that's all the motion energy it has left after spending 1,000 mph against your atom. Both atoms end up slower, but the evolutionary goofballs cannot take this fact, to practice and teach it for their atomic physics, because it destroys their big bang.
It destroys their big bang because they are left without a mechanism to explain gas pressure, aside from inter-repelling atoms. The latter, which is the fact, doesn't allow these goons to teach that their big-bang atoms collected into gravity pools, the proto-stars.
The only problem I need to solve, with inter-repelling gas atoms, is how gases form liquids when gases are cool enough to do so. I can explain it in a logical, easy-to-understand way. In spite of gas atoms repelling each other with expounding force with nearness to each other, there are forces stronger than their own repulsion forces that bring atoms together into contact. Once in contact, the same force(s) that brings them close also cause them to merge, and once merged, the proton of one atom attracts the electrons of the other atom, and thus a bond can be formed that we call a liquid droplet. The droplet will be maintained until the temperature increases, which is a process that causes the atoms to unmerge, and, after that, they repel each other away as far as they can get. This final result is called, gas pressure.
On the other hand, the atomic physicists (boneheads) tell us that gas atoms slow down with decreasing temperature, and when two of them come close to one another while moving in roughly the same direction, they can possibly attract one another into a liquid droplet. That's logical, which is why you could be duped into believing it. Therefore, whether they explain the attraction force as the electrical charges atoms have between each other,or by an innate gravy force that each possess, they do in fact teach that all gas atoms attract each other with sufficient force to bond in certain situations, especially when moving nearly parallel with each other. Otherwise, gas atoms are said to bounce off of each other without losing any total velocity.
But this is boneheaded, a testament to how utterly stupid, careless and reckless modern physicists are. For if they argue that atoms can bond when moving nearly parallel with each other, because they bounce off each other while crashing in opposing directions, then gas atoms should always form droplets no matter how hot the gas because there will always be atoms moving parallel, and at roughly the same speed, so that they should grab each other by their supposed attraction forces. Yet, there are exactly zero liquid air molecules in the air at this time. How can that be?
It doesn't matter how they try to answer that question, they trash their big-bang theory in the process, for if they say that the air atoms are moving too fast to bond when they nearly brush shoulders at two or three atomic diameters apart, at 2,000 mph, for example, how will they convince you that they attracted each other into cosmic gravity pools when moving zillions of mph at zillions of miles apart? Achem, who is the fool? YOU. You believed them, even after you became a Christian, after you should have known better than to trust evolutionists. But take heart, I'm saving you from the big-bad gumba. Get unstuck from him, today.
You can go online to be fooled by foolish science worshipers showing an experiment wherein two large metal balls are hung on a string each, and placed ever-so-close to each other in an effort to detect their gravity forces. Hahaha, nope, they never prove to you that any gravity forces exist in the balls, even though both balls have zillions of atoms. Clearly, atoms don't have gravity force, and, so, oops, there goes their big-bang theory into the trash again. How will lone atoms, zillions of miles apart, and screeching forward so fast so as to counter any attraction forces they may have, form those gravity pools that the gumbas claim as forming proto-stars? What a bunch of losers ALL OF THEM.
By countering each others' attraction forces, I mean that the particles, be they lone protons, lone electrons, or full atoms, will be moving apart from one another by distances far greater than their imaginary attraction forces could bring them closer. DEATH OF BIG BANG. The goons can't even get past the first requirement of big-bang creation, let alone to gravity pools. But in trying to fool you, they invented the bang-bang theory of atoms to facilitate the big bang, which they call "the kinetic theory of atoms." Look it up if you are not familiar with it, and see how gigantic is this "science" that is nothing but fantasy, asking: how did these fools ever get so far from the facts? Answer: their lust for killing God via the big bang. LUST FOR SIN.
Therefore, evolutionists breed sinners, and carry them on their shoulders like champions urged to attack you, Christian, to make you look like the fool instead. If you have no weaponry against them, because you don't realize how wrong they are in so many science theories, you can't fight them very well. And if you support their errors in atomic physics, you also support their big bang too without realizing it.
I was on this topic not many weeks ago, when showing absolute evidence for the inter-repulsion of all gas atoms. This is so simple to realize, for anyone who has some physics expertise, if only someone should point it out to him/her. And so here it is: the air could not weigh down on the earth's ground if air atoms either attract each other, or are neutral toward each other, for air atoms do not make physical contact. There you go, undeniable proof that air atoms repel each other, and are in literally (though not physically) in contact through their repulsion forces.
You cannot say that air atoms do not weigh on the ground at 14.7 pounds per square inch, but only apply 14.7 psi of pressure against the ground. Nope, for if you say that, you don't have the expertise I'm referring to. It is an undeniable fact that air LITERALLY weighs on the ground, or on the bottom of any sealed container filled with a gas.
The weight is always equal to the gas pressure because inter-repelling gas atoms push equally in all directions, but the fact remains: gas pressure is due to the weight of the gas atoms alone. As atoms weigh down on each other, they transfer the combined weight in all directions. Gas weight causes gas pressure, never forget it because it demolishes the big bang.
Well, then, what lunatic scientist would argue that gas pressure is not from the weight of the gas, but from atomic bombardments against objects (part of their bang-bang theory)? The evolutionist quacks, that's who. Cracked not only in their brains, but in their hearts, devoid of reason, like brute beasts, they believe blindly and proudly all of the errors they are taught. And what's your excuse, Christians? Why won't you join me in this fight against them? Are you too proud of them? Are you too afraid? I don't know. You know. If you have a youtube channel, tell the world what I've just told you. Gas weight = gas pressure because gas atoms repel each other. If air atoms attract each other, they could not transfer their weights from atmospheric ceiling to the ground. Nor could they if they are electromagnetically neutral toward each other. THEY MUST REPEL.
How Gas Atoms Repel?
Inter-repelling gas atoms can not only cause gas pressure apart from atomic motion, but the very fact that they inter-repel teaches us that, in a sealed jar, they become STATIONARY. Figure it out. Use your imagination. Imagine all those bitties repelling each other as far apart as possible, and thus, trapped in a jar, they get locked into positions with every atom at the same distance from the other (if there is only one gas in the container). How can it be otherwise? You just learned something new, for a reason.
If we add more gas into the jar, the gas pressure goes up simply because we are forcing the atoms closer to each other, and we should all know by now that, the closer two magnetic items are to each other, the harder they attract or repel.
Now, let's bring the jar to a flame, and heat the gas within it. What happens? The gas pressure goes up, even though we haven't added more gas into the jar. Why should that be? The great thing about proving that all gas atoms repel is that we simultaneously prove that they are not moving in a sealed jar. The inter-repulsion of the atoms causes each one to find its stationary spot. LOCKED IN PLACE. As the finks, the bastards without a Father in Heaven, decided that heat is the motion of atoms, we must now find the true definition of heat, because the atoms do not move in the jar, yet we increase the gas temperature by simply applying a flame to the outside if the jar.
The next great thing is: there are only two definitions of heat: 1) their erroneous bang-bang theory, and; 2) heat is a material that passes through every atomic material. This means that you can now know that heat is a material given off by the flame. What could it be? Something mysterious? Something yet to be discovered? No, neither. It was discovered at about the time evolutionists were hi-jacking science departments on behalf of evolution. THE ELECTRON.
It wasn't long after the discovery of the electron that science discovered this: wherever there was a heat source, there were free electrons too. But, zikers, if they defined heat as the material of free electrons, it would help kill their big-bang theory, because they needed the bang-bang theory of heat as "evidence" that all gas atoms are crashing forever into each other. That latter theory is necessary to avoid the fact that all gas atoms inter-repel. And this is how science history went, more than a century ago, with no corrections yet because science fields are ruled by liars who care more to kill God than to feed students truths. Is this a little sin only?
How can electrons go through a jar? Easy, because they inter-repel each other. Nobody disputes that they inter-repel, but when was the last time you heard an honest-to-goodness scientist say that electrons go through jars or bricks or wood or the big-fat noses under their willfully-blinded eyes? The little bastards, they deliberately neglected to inform you that electrons easily pass through all materials. They didn't want you to realize that electrons define heat. BASTARDS. Traitors to their Creator.
It takes a little time only for the heat of hot water, poured into a glass jar, to penetrate the glass. As soon as you feel the heat entering your hand, them's electrons entering your hand. What else could it be? The electrons are small enough to worm their way through the atomic spaces of the jar's atoms. The hotter the water, the closer the electrons are in the water's atomic spaces such that they push one another faster through the glass. That's right, the hotter a thing, the more free electrons it has, the closer its free electrons, the harder they inter-repel. If the water in a jar is only lukewarm, it takes longer for you to feel the heat coming through the glass. Last I heard. electrons are classified as a material. If you get enough of them such that they are forced very close, they form "plasma." They don't get close on their own; they need to be forced close by adding them continuously to a surface or space.
Back to the heated gas in the jar. The electrons from the flame penetrate the jar, and enter the gas. Why should this increase the gas pressure? Duh, because the electrons inter-repel. It's not arrogance when you say, "duh," when it's warranted due to the STUPIDITY of modern scientists. If you're one of them, I'm not apologizing. If you claim to be a physicist yet have never pondered the transfer of electrons through materials, you've been stupid, proud one. You're proud because you know so much of what you've been taught by the wizards, yet are too dull to realize all the fake facts.
There's resistance when electrons pass through materials. Some materials allow easier cut-through ability, but all materials offer some resistance to heat transfer. Therefore, the more electrons one "pumps" into a jar by heating it, the higher the pressure from the electrons, as they repel each other. If they slipped though the jar with zero resistance, one could then not increase the gas pressure because they would flow out through the jar as easily as they flow in, and thus they could not accumulate in the jar. The accumulation forces them closer to one another, and the closeness causes harder inter-repulsion = higher gas pressure.
So, this theory works not only to explain gas pressure, but the expansion of all liquid and solid materials when heated. The electrons are forced into the interior of the liquids/solids, and their inter-repulsion causes atoms to unmerge a little from one another, making the liquid/solid body grow a little larger. This theory works because it's the fact, for there is no other explanation, because the bang-bang theory of atoms is false.
The only available theory remaining is HEAT IS A MATERIAL, and there is no other material known that can penetrate all materials, and expand them, aside from free electrons. It's even known that the sun emits free electrons constantly such that the goofballs ought to be teaching that solar electrons are what heats the earth. But we are dealing with demons in human bodies who absolutely will not shipwreck their big-bang theory on behalf of any truth. So afraid are they that someone could get the impression that solar electrons are the definition of solar heat that they invented the "fact" that the earth's magnetic field re-directs solar electrons from the earth.
Ya-but, even in their own bang-bang theory, heat is unable to get from the sun to the earth due to there being no atoms between those two bodies. Their bang-bang model is the banging together of atoms, but without atoms, heat cannot transfer. So what they may try to do is convince you that radiant heat can pass through vacuums, and indeed it can. Yes, there are two forms of heat from the sun, radiant, but also from the entry of solar electrons into our atmosphere.
If they claim that solar heat arrives purely as radiant heat, too bad, they lose, because heat yet escapes the earth, by roughly as much as solar heat is entering, yet the earth's surface is not radiating heat away anywhere nearly as much as heat is flowing up into space on the dark side of the planet. Where does this other solar heat come from if now from solar electrons?
Think about it. The ground on the dark side of the planet is radiating almost zero heat, yet, all night long, heat rises into outer space, yet the bang-bang theory doesn't allow it to rise into the vacuum of outer space. How possibly could heat rise all night long such that the free electrons in the air get more sparse, which defines a decreased temperature? How do the electrons in the air get there if not from the sun on the daytime side of the planet?
Every bit of heat entering the sun side of the planet must be released into space on the dark side. Otherwise, each day would get either progressively warmer or cooler, if the dark side allows significantly more or less heat to escape than the sun supplies. Therefore, God set the distance of the earth, from the sun, just perfect to create this equilibrium in heat gain versus heat loss.
If you've been wondering how the sun's free electrons can escape into space, you're possibly wise-up enough, by reading this far, to know the answer: they repel one another into space. Good one, bloke, you're catching on. They have no problem entering a vacuum of space, and thus vacuums in a jar have as much temperature as the surrounding air simply because heat is defined as free electrons. Don't let the gumbas muddy your brain.
But there's more, for this is your lucky day, unless you read it (from me) on an earlier day. Praise God if you heard it from someone else. Can you arrange an experiment, if you need one, to prove that heat rises more than it goes downward or sideways? Yes you can. Just get a metal rod about three feet long, and protect the upper 18 inches with non-combustible insulation (concrete would work), to prevent the air from contacting it.
Position the rod vertical, and put a flame at it's middle about 18 inches from the bottom end. After a couple of minutes or less, you will be able to feel a lot more heat at the top of the rod than at its bottom. As the top half is covered such that heated air can't add heat to the rod, you just felt the electrons flowing through the metal and entering your finger/hand. Why do you think the top end got most of the heat flow? What in tarnation could be sending the electrons upward more than downward?
I'll give you this as a consolation prize: humans are really pretty stupid when they first set out to solve a problem. We usually need to go over and over the problem until finally a solution springs out at us like a jack-in-the-box. Lucky for you, I spent the time to figure this out. The solution is anti-climactic, but the basis of this solution is staggering. The solution: free electrons repel electrons in the metal rod upward. What else could we expect to propel electrons through the rod if not other electrons? Okay, that's anti-climactic, not a big deal.
But where's the free electrons that are repelling the rod's free electrons more upward than downward? What's underneath the rod that could push them up? Or, what's above the rod that could pull them up? It doesn't matter where you put the rod, ten feet in the air, or ten feet below ground level, or completely buried in the soil, the rod's heat always rises...because the earth is filled with heat that repels all free electrons upward. STAGGERING.
Why is this staggering? Because, as heat is defined as electrons, heat has a negative charge, and thus one can now reveal that heat is the gravity force. No small discovery, blokes, are you impressed? Wouldn't you love to be the bringer of this good news to the world. Have at it. Enjoy.
If someone begs to differ with you, saying that it's impossible for gravity to be a negative charge because it would then attract some atoms but repel others, you tell them, nope. A negatively-charged gravity force will attract all atoms because all atoms are covered in captured electrons. Tell them, God's a genius.
Gravity is a BIG negative charge acting from a far distance. It blows some outer electrons clear away from all atoms, making all atoms positively charged. What happens when a negative force comes against a positively-charged atom? The atom is attracted. Now you know the real scoop on gravity.
If we say that the force of gravity at sea level is, g, then all captured electrons upon atoms, attracted by the protons with less than g force, will be blown away by gravity. What this means is staggering yet more: all atoms weigh the same at sea level. All atoms twenty miles in the sky all weight the same, less than all atoms at sea level.
Yes, for when gravity repels all captured electrons held to protons by g force or less, every atom develops g-force attraction to gravity, and because gravity attraction is the definition of weight, all atoms at the same distance from gravity must weigh the same...which explains why a metal ball twenty feet round falls to gravity at the same speed as a plastic ball two inches round. BECAUSE, gravity attracts, not the ball as a whole, but its individual atoms. All atoms, no matter how many in any given object, come racing to gravity at the same speed, only if gravity attracts them all with the same force.
Sorry, evolutionists, you got skunked by God. He fooled you. He made fools of you before you saw it coming. Your entire atomic model, with all different atoms weighing in differently, is your snot all over your faces. Despised you shall all be for being deliberately blind to the obvious realities, on behalf of your desires to outlaw God in the schools, and in science departments, and for portraying God's people as Wonderland fools.
You can cry foul until the cows come home to roost, but you cannot deny that, if all substances fall at the same speed, they must all be pulled by gravity by the same force. Sorry, the facts deny you your atomic model. It's all wrong. It needs more than an overhaul, more than mere reform. It needs the trash can.
A bowling ball gets pulled with more gravity force than a marble, but only because a bowling ball has more atoms. The atoms of both balls get pulled with the same force. If it were otherwise -- if some atoms were heavier than others -- the heavier ones would fall faster. It's so easy to figure. The magnet with the greater force gets pulled to a steel wall faster. Same should apply with gravity: it would pull atoms faster if it pulled them with more force. SO EASY TO FIGURE, but the goofs goofed and made fools of each other, praising each other for their superior knowledge anyway. False knowledge is worse than wrong; it's a trap for more wrongs upon wrongs, a heap of trash.
What Really is a Wave?
What is a light-wave medium? It's atomic material. But, it needs to be capable of transferring motion energy from the moving thing that starts the wave. A rock moving into water starts the water wave. It's nothing more than the motion energy of the rock spreading out, water molecule to water molecule, as one molecule pushes the one in front of it. No wave can form unless the particles of the wave medium are pushed forward to strike more wave-medium particles. This is too simple, anyone can comprehend it, and the point is: why should light-wave mechanics be any different than a push-push scenario?
Sound travels through an air medium, impossible if air atoms did not repel. Did anyone ever tell you this? No, because the fools don't want you to think about it, because they have committed you to the error of: all gas atoms either attract each other, or, depending on who you ask, all gas atoms are basically neutral toward each other (and bond only when undergoing slow collisions).
By the time a sound wave reaches your ear, it will be spastic, or untrue to its original sound, if correct that it carries through atoms that are ever colliding randomly in all directions. For example, a sound wave from the vibration of a guitar string. The moving string strikes the air and pushes air atoms between the string and your ears. If this wave goes to the left of the string when striking the first atom, then to the right of the string when the first atom strikes a second atom, then toward you when the second atom strikes the third atom, then toward the guitar when the fourth is struck, then many sound waves from the same string, as well as from other strings, would strike each other from random directions zillions of times by the time they reached your ear, and the original "information" would be polluted, all mixed up, as one wave merges with another and becomes something else. The reality is much better.
There can be no light-wave medium if light-wave particles do not inter-repel. Has anyone ever taught you this? No, and that's because evolutionists don't want the idea into you mind. Yet, even though gas atoms inter-repel, light will not move across air atoms. Why not? Because, atoms are too heavy for light-wave electrons to move in bump-bump fashion sufficient to create anything nearing visible light. Instead, light-wave electrons crash into atoms but barely move them.
Air atoms seek to repel each other into outer space, but gravity keeps them down. Gravity squeezes them nearer to each other in spite of their wanting to repel each other further away. Air atoms are therefore under tension from the squeeze. They are "heavy" from this downward pull, and to some degree they get locked into position, so far as the weak light wave is concerned, as it strikes air atoms.
Air atoms are in contact with each other through their repulsion forces. When an atom of the guitar string strikes the first air atom toward your ear, the wave moves always toward your ear. It doesn't get all mixed up into all directions, zillions of times, before reaching your ear.
You can easily understand that, if the first atom gets pushed toward your ear, the second atom that the first one strikes will likewise be pushed toward your ear. However, the first atom will also push atoms to the right and left (i.e. right, left, up, down, or in all directions) of the straight-line path to your ear, though these other waves get weaker the further they go to the right and left of the straight-line path. You can easily understand why the straight-line path has the strongest wave because a forward atom-to-atom push is stronger than the push at an angle upon an atom to the side.
Let me make you understand this; imagine three magnets on a slippery table all repelling each other when brought close. You bring one magnet directly toward a second, and it gets pushed forward, as you can easily imagine. When the magnet you are pushing slides past a third magnet that is directly to the left of the slid magnet, it doesn't get pushed as far as the second one that you attack dead-on. The faster you slide the magnet past the third one to the left, the less the latter moves. If you slide it fast enough, the third one won't budge at all, because the motion energy received from repelling objects depends partially on the duration in time that the repulsion acts. If the time is so slight that the third magnet can't break the resistance to motion that its under, it won't budge.
This is why a sound wave get weaker the more to the side it goes from it's straight line path. A person sitting beside you gets weaker sound waves than the ones going in a straight-line path to your ears, and you get weaker sound waves from the straight-line waves into his ears. But, in every case, the waves don't go erratically in all directions as atoms collide in all directions, because that's as nutty as the evolutionists.
In a real sound-wave scenario, the waves go generally in straight lines. The person beside you gets your straight-line waves straightish into his ear even though they deviated from the straight line to your ear. That is, at the moment of deviation from the straight line, at any part of the guitar string, the deviating waves go in straight or straightish lines. Any wave that does not begin in a straight-forward direction tends to go in its own straight line elsewhere, but even if the non-straight-ahead wave happens to curve a little toward an ear, it'll be a straight-line curve, not zig-zag confusion...because air atoms are generally stationary, not zig-zagging about.
The accumulation of waves toward your ear will tend to keep all waves as straight as possible, because one wave to the right of the straight-line wave will push the latter leftward, but a third wave to the left of the straight-line wave will push it to the right, in counteraction. These waves tend to train each other into straight lines, therefore. Counteraction tends to keep waves straight. That's how I see it.
A sound wave is nothing but a bump-bump-bump of air atoms. The air is the wave medium. But the nutbars who invented the particle-wave duality of light don't have a material light-wave medium, even though these utter buffoons know that the sun continuously spews electrons. Why can't these solar electrons be the light-wave medium? Are the buffoons too daft to realize this easy thing? No. They are indeed smart enough, but they will not even bring this idea to your mind -- if only as a possibility, a theory -- because it'll become obvious to you that solar electrons are indeed the light-wave medium. CURSED FOOLS. They lie to you to keep their big bang viable in your mind.
They even have a name for the solar electrons: the solar wind. It's a literal wind of electrons. Nobody can deny that these bitties repel each other toward the earth. Nobody can deny that the giant negative charge inside the sun, from free electrons there, repel the solar-wind electrons even faster toward earth than they repel one another. This is such a no-brainer, so undeniable, yet the quacks never tell you this as they explain their quacky photon-wave duality.
If they did mention it, you might get the impression that solar gravity is the negative charge of in-sun electrons (that are already part of the solar wind). Once you learn that solar gravity is a negative charge, you will also learn that electrons are anti-gravity particles. Shudders go up and down the spines of the evolutionists, in case the whole world realizes what liars they have been.
A photon can never be a light wave, what's wrong with you that you would allow their diagrams and computer simulations to deceive you? A photon was invented as a bullet. A real bullet, from a gun, is not a wave. What don't we understand about this? When the nutbars saw from a slit experiment that light seemed to move as a wave, instead of dropping the photon bullet, they turned into a wave. NUTBARS, LUNATICS, RED-LIGHT WARNING.
An electron either gets released and emitted from an atom completely, or it jostles upon an atom without becoming free from it. In either case, it strikes one or more free electrons that encompass all materials EVERYWHERE. There is no place, no space, where solar and stellar electrons have not filled. If you can find such a place, with zero electrons, that would be absolute-zero temperature. It doesn't exist, because electrons spread out into every nook and cranny. Therefore, wherever there is a captured electron that's emitted or jostled, there also is one light wave formed.
One quanta of light is the emission or jolting of one captured electron. One quanta of light is one light wave. This is the true "quantum" physics, just a "stone" tossed into the sea of electrons, a thing you can easily grasp, so simple, yet so miraculous from the God of everything.
The goofers have no light-wave medium, in their light-wave model, but do claim a light wave completely spastic. One is a fool to claim understanding of their quantum wave. Seriously, as compared to simple, motion energy passing across an electron medium, their view of the light wave is absolutely lunatic.
They do know of electronic waves cutting across electrons in wires, yet they are fools not to know the same for light waves when they obviously should. What "important" thing(s) is holding them back? They know that moving electrons form waves in wires. They know space is filled with electrons. Waves go through electrons in wires, wherefore, duh, waves must go through the electrons in space too. What kind of waves are they if not light waves. DECEPTIVE EVOLUTIONISTS, the time is long arrived to cut them down to the trash heap of history.
Remember the magnet scenario above, where, if you slide a magnet past a stationary magnet fast enough, the latter won't budge at all. We are now able to see why light waves don't curve, as sound waves do. The emission of electrons from the sun must be so fast that they don't push solar-wind electrons to the left or right, nor up or down, but push only straight ahead.
An electron emitting from the sun can only emit once, when leaving an atom, after which it becomes a solar-wind electron. The one emitting causes the bump-bump-bump into the solar wind, but afterward, it receives bumps from behind. Waves go in all directions because emissions go in all directions, but every wave goes straight ahead, not deviating/curving to the sides enough to be visible to us. That is, sunlight passing the corner of a house does not curve to splash light on the wall of the house that's beyond the corner. The light goes straight past the corner, because, I claim, the electrons in the wave medium are moving too fast to cause sideways motions for their neighboring electrons in the shade (behind the house corner). How fast do you think solar electrons, weighing zero, emit from solar atoms? Or from the bright filament of a light bulb? Fast.
This light-wave medium was known several decades before "solar wind" was discovered and coined. In those days, prior to the discovery of the electron, it was called the "aether." However, nobody seemed to guess correctly, so far as I know, that this aether originated in the sun. They thought it was a piece of cosmic furniture that filled all the cosmos, and maybe moving in one direction only past the earth. They didn't realize that the aether was going out in all directions from the sun.
I'm bringing this to the evolutionist's table. What will they do with it? Same as they did when someone else brought it to their table long ago: they swept it under the rug. They don't even mention it in modern articles dealing with the aether, where they proudly boast that they "proved" the aether to be a fantasy. The solar wind is the aether, STUPIDS. Slap-slap-slap to the faces of the stooges, but they refuse to be righteous and confess that they were wrong. It would be understandable if this aether were hiding from them, but it's in plain view, and has been for over 50 years.
We could say that, relatively speaking, the aether always passes by the earth from the same direction, from the sunlit side toward the dark side. The aether splashes electrons into the atmosphere, and this is heat. The earth's gravity pushes some solar wind upward as they near the atmosphere, causing the wind to become concentrated at regions above the atmosphere...to explain why it suddenly gets hotter up there, with increasing distance from the earth, instead of colder.
How does earth gravity push solar electrons away from earth? By the same negative force that pushes them toward the earth. That is, the negative charge of solar electrons pushes the solar wind toward earth, but the negative charge of earth's electrons (in the rocks) pushes them away from the earth, and so there's going to be a maximum clash point of negative forces at some point between the earth and sun, at the noon point, that is.
It would be interesting to know where the solar wind stops moving toward the noontime part of the earth due to the counteracting, upward, negative charge in the earth. That clash point cannot be above the atmosphere, because it's obvious that some solar electrons are getting through to us. A whole new science is needed here, but we can't trust evolutionists to steer it correctly.
On the morning and afternoon sides of the planet, the earth's negative force curves the incoming solar wind such that it forms "belts" of concentrated electrons. I use that term because I suspect that the Van-Allen belts are just those concentrated electrons. When part of the the solar wind is curved slightly away from earth, that flow is forced into the paths of other electron flows, causing traffic build up i.e. more dense electrons, which is defined as more heat. In other words, the quacks get it wrong to claim that the earth's magnet curves the electrons away from earth.
It's not the earth magnet, stupids, because a magnet BOTH attracts and repels. If you want to argue out one side of your mouth that the earth's pole repels solar-wind electrons, you need to be honest and claim that the other pole attracts them. But you don't argue thus, because you are dishonest pieces of human trash bent on fooling humanity on behalf of your cosmic-evolution fantasy. You can't be trusted with science. It will be taken away from you, when shame is Heaped upon your faces.
I've never seen the evidence that the earth is a two-pole magnet. It's probably not true. It's probably an invention to explain why solar-wind electrons don't enter the air. But they do enter, and the pieces of trash want to keep that key piece of cosmic knowledge from you...because it makes heat look like free electrons. They would then need to confess that heat is not the kinetic, bang-bang energy of atoms.
The solar wind enters the air, and as such the air is filled with aether. This allows two forms of heat to enter, radiant heat, and electron-flow heat. The latter is ordinary heat flow that they call, "convection heat." They just don't define it properly. In reality, it always flows from a region having denser electrons (hotter region) into regions have less-dense electrons (colder). Free electrons behave as a gas does in this respect, moving from high-pressure to low-pressure regions. Hey gumbas, the aether is a gas of free electrons. Time to wake up from your delirium. Move over, get lost, let Christian caloricists rule science departments and school textbooks.
Radiant heat is from light waves, nothing more complicated than that. As the wave passes through the aether, it comes to the end of the road once it strikes an atom. What do you suppose will happen to the last aether electron on the light-wave road? The one right next to the atom? What happens to it when it gets struck from behind by the bump-bump-bump of the light wave? DUH, it gets knocked into the atom's atmosphere of captured electrons. What do we call that? DUHHHHH, it's called increasing the temperature of the atom.
But the going textbooks won't even acknowledge that there are free electrons sitting next to objects. When did you ever hear of such a thing? Why isn't it common knowledge? Because, you would then ask such things as: where did they come from?; how many are there?; don't they enter all objects? what do they do all day and night, besides turding all over the faces of evolutionists?
Bump after bump, sunlight knocks aether electrons into your skin, and it feels good...until there are too many going in and too few getting out into the air again, when you get too hot. That's right, they get knocked into surface atoms of anything made of atoms, but as the atoms are fully loaded with captured electrons before the sun shines on them, the atoms can't retain the ones knocked into them. What happens when the sun causes a concentration of free electrons in objects? They push each other out into the air again, which is why the wall of your house gets cool again as clouds pass by. Heat and cold, it's just the entry or exit of the free electrons that evolutionists don't want you to know about.
The heat entering the outer surface of the house wall can worm through to the inner side of the wall because the electrons knocked into the outer-surface get distributed into the atomic spaces, and from there they are pushed, by the repulsion forces of electrons, deeper into the wall. But many escape back into the air, OF COURSE. You don't need an experiment to prove that they escape back into the air as well as through the wall. It's a no brainer. Where did they come from? How can the air be filled with them?
How can such microscopic bitties make such gigantic fools of evolutionists? These treasonous snakes are always seeking ways to hide the realities from you. The seething heat of Armageddon is for them, for they wish to unseat the Creator from His throne, and to sit in it themselves.
Instant Light Speed
If we put you behind a guitarist in an open field without trees or anything else to deflect sound into your ears, the waves from the guitar strings will start to reach your ears in straight lines once they pass his body. If this is due to sound waves moving too slow to create straight-ahead waves alone, why should it be? What's the difference between waves through air versus waves through electrons? Both air atoms and electrons are in contact only by their repulsion forces; neither are in physical contact. But air atoms are squeezed toward the ground by gravity, while electrons are repelled upward into pure space, with no wall available to squeeze them closer together.
Therefore, I do declare, that the vast speed of light waves is due to non-squeezed aether electrons. There's zero restriction when bumping an aether electron because they are all moving slightly away from each other rather than being squeezed together into a grid. It takes WORK to move air atoms; ask the flapping wings of a bird. Zero restriction means the bird can't fly. That's why a fly can't fly even in a partial vacuum. Friction in air atoms is needed for flight. But while the vacuum is filled with free electrons, they offer zero help for flight, zero friction. They have no weight, and the repulsion forces between them are the best lubricant possible. It's genius. God is a genius, and nobody can even begin to explain what repulsion force is at the mechanical level.
Zero restriction means that, as soon as an electron is emitted from an atom, the first aether electron of the wave moves as soon as the emitted electron moves toward it. They both move at the same time by the same distance, and the same is true of the third electron in the straight-path light wave, and the fourth, all the way from the sun to the earth. It's like poking a stick from the sun into the earth such that, as soon as the stick is poked from the sun, the other end sticks it to the earth.
However, it's not likely true that solar light reaches the earth instantly, meaning that there is some restriction in the light-wave motion. But how can that be, if all solar electrons are accelerating from the sun? I can fathom restriction to motion only if the electrons are locked into place by even an iota of force, or if they are moving toward the electron that caused the light wave, but if the solar-wind electrons are spreading out, further apart from each other as they travel toward earth, I cannot fathom restriction to the light wave passing through them...until they close to the earth, where the earth acts as a block wall to their flow, causing them to become concentrated such that they may no longer move further apart from each other.
It's known that gravity accelerates atoms toward itself simply because gravity power is constant. Therefore, it is also true that the negatives charges from the sun -- call it gravity or call it what you will, it exists -- accelerate solar-wind electrons constantly. This is why I say that solar-wind electrons put a little extra distance between each other with every passing second.
Not only does the sun accelerate them toward earth, but their own repulsion forces, because they act constantly too, add to that acceleration. UNDENIABLE FACT, you don't need an experiment to prove it.
Okay, I ask you: if solar electrons are moving away from one another, as they flow through outer space, how can there be restriction in pushing them forward? There's nothing to restrict the motion of any one electron. It should mean that an electron emitted from the sun sticks it to the moon instantly, with zero time passed between the two events. It's different on earth because the aether here is mixed up with the air, and the air offers some resistance to light flow. Yes, every time light needs to pass across atoms, it slows down a little, ask a window pane about that.
In other words, I have just explained why the light of a star can reach the earth almost instantly. If not for a wee-bit of slow down as starlight cuts across the earth atmosphere, starlight would reach earth instantly. We have just mowed down a key argument of the evolutionists against Creationism, where they say that it takes billions of light years for stellar light to reach earth. This could be yet another reason that evolutionist skunks don't want light to be taught as a wave through electron aethers: it allows light to act nearly instantly from start of wave to planetary contact.
I challenge you: what could slow the electron bump-bump-bump in pure space where zero atoms exist? I challenge you: if there's zero cause to slow the bump-bump process, will not an entire row of aether electrons poke at an INSTANT SPEED, from start to finish of one light wave? Of EVERY light wave? You need to grasp this. The aether doesn't move at light speed, but rather the striking, from start to finish of the wave, acts at light speed.
Gone, here, is the super-fast photon, an impossibility because there's nothing to make it fly at 186,000 miles per second, for if there was something, then there would be something else that flies that fast. But there is not. And it's too fast to be possible. Only an idiot thinks a photon can be propelled to such speeds without smashing it destructively. Are you that proud idiot? Are you mesmerized by the super-fast photon, like a proud idiot who can't think straight?
It doesn't matter how fast aether electrons fly, their speed is irrelevant to the speed of the wave. A water wave moves at a certain speed even though the water molecules may not move at all. See that? Grasp it. Aether electrons do not move at 186,000 mps in earth's air. The wave may be slowed from instant to 186,000 mps, due to air-atom congestion, but no particle moves at that speed, slap yourself if you allowed the idiots to deceive you.
The air in your room can be motionless, yet the sound wave moves at over 700 mps anyway. When the air is still, so is the aether, yet light moves at 186,000 mps second anyway. In all practicality, that's instant. As soon as the bulb is turned on, the electron emitted at the filament sticks it to your face, INSTANTLY, by pushing the electron next to your body, into your face. It's the miracle of the weightless electron. It could not work unless there was an electron sea between the light bulb and your body. And there is, ask any honest scientist who knows about free electrons.
If you rub an object such that it takes on a net-positive charge, it will re-load with electrons. The goofs admit this. Yes, they admit it. They don't tell you where the electrons came from that go back into the rubbed object. You take them off the atoms when rubbing it, and they go free into the room, but there are plenty others everywhere in the room, ready to load back onto the atoms, because the protons pull them back. How did your room get filled with free electrons? From the big-bang fairy? Or from the sun? It's your choice: be an idiot, or be smart.
Electron Push, the Cause of Most Energy
When air moves, it pushes aether particles. When aether particles move, they push air atoms. That is, aether wind causes air wind, and air wind causes aether wind. Aether wind flows naturally from hot air to cold. The air on the sunlit side of the planet has a higher ceiling (than on the dark side) because the higher concentration of aether heat expands the air, forcing air atoms to higher elevations. As free electrons travel forcefully toward outer space, they bump air atoms upward, giving them lift.
The higher the concentration of electron bumping, the higher air / gas atoms and water molecules go into the sky, but only to a limit. What do you suppose causes that limit? What do you suppose matches the force of the upward bumping with a downward pull? What is it in the earth that pulls atoms down? Why should gravity come to match the upward bumping on the underside of atoms? Because, air gets colder with height, and thus the bumping force decreases with height due to fewer electrons per volume of air. Why do electrons get sparser with height? Because, there is eight times more volume of space with every doubling of distance from the surface of a sphere. Increased volume of space allows (causes, forces) aether electrons to spread out, to have less upward-bump force.
The larger the atom, the higher it goes, because all atoms weigh the same. The larger the atom, the more upward bumps it receives from available rising electrons. This taught me that hydrogen is the largest atom while metals are amongst the smallest atoms, but the goofs have it backward, because they did not always follow truth nor facts.
Why did you never question them? Why did you believe that, if the entire school of science agrees with claims, they must be correct claims? There is something in politics called, "control," and evolutionary science got married to politics. It's fascism.
Evaporation of a liquid is due to the upward flows of electrons through the liquid. As they escape the liquid at the surface, they help to dislodge the liquid atoms/molecules there, and thus they send them into the air when they are able. The more rising electrons in the liquid, the more they are able. The larger the atom they seek to dislodge from the liquid surface, the more the electrons are able. This is child-play logic, folks, but the liars will complicate almost everything because their atomic model needs band-aids, patches, gunk, puppeteers to amuse you, magicians to deceive you, and inventions in fake science such as the orbiting electrons.
Hydrogen atoms rise faster than other gas atoms because they get more electron lift. They rise faster and higher than any other material. Hydrogen atoms rise faster and higher than water molecules in spite of the latter being larger, because water molecules are nine times heavier. So, it's not size alone that determines the upward-lift force from atmospheric heat, but also the weight of the lifted molecules. I can't think of anything else; those two things must be the only factors.
The reason that high heat is needed to evaporate most liquid metals is due to the much-smaller size of most metal atoms. A uranium atom is as heavy as a hydrogen atom, but the latter gets many times the lift force due to its greater size. See that? What did you just learn? You just learned that H atoms are not the smallest by far.
Gravity assures that all single atoms weigh them same, and so due to water molecules being nine times heavier than hydrogen atoms, you just learned that a water molecule is made of nine atoms. Its an O8H molecule, not an H20. The goofs are nutbars, you should never have allowed them to teach you. A water molecule is eight O atoms merged into one H atom. That's how you can get a feel for how much smaller O atoms are than H atoms. You can't get eight H atoms merged partially into one O atom. They won't fit.
If you look into it, you will learn that they invented the H2O molecule based on the STUPID theory that all equal-sized gases at STP have the same number of atoms. Not even an idiot would propose such a theory, meaning that they invented it due to needing it for their big-bang model. This same theory is how they arrived to their erroneous atomic weights. They argued that, since two equal volumes of oxygen and hydrogen have the same number of atoms, that H atoms must weigh 16 times less than O atoms since the H gas weighs 16 times less than the O gas. But what they should have done is to face the fact that all atoms weigh the same, for Galileo at Pisa proved this to them centuries ago, so that the O gas ends up having 16 times as many atoms. Hence, the water molecule becomes an O8H (or HO8) molecule (because two H volumes mixes with one identical O volume to produce two equal volumes of water).
The combustion of hydrogen gas produces the most heat of any combusted gas because the H atom is the largest atom, having the most captured electrons. How can anyone be so daft as to assign the H atom with the least number of electrons in the face of this known fact? How long has it been known? Probably before the discovery of the electron, from before the goofs assigned one electron per one H atom.
Once released by the combustion process, these electrons, released from both the O and H atoms (as they merge to form water), are the heat. The gas that produces the most combusted heat cannot have the least number of captured electrons, duh. And so you now get a glimpse of why they did not define heat as electrons freed from atoms. They needed another definition to save their tiny and rudimentary H atom. But their definition requires the kinetic theory of atoms, yet the weight-itself of gases forbids that theory. That is, not the specific weights of any gas, but the fact that all gases REGISTER weight forbids the kinetic theory.
Again, as air atoms weigh down on the earth, air atoms cannot be inter-attracting or neutral, but must be inter-repelling, and this picture dismisses the need for ever-colliding or "kinetic" atoms. Furthermore, the law of known physics forbids the keeping of total velocity for objects undergoing constant collisions...to the tune that all atoms would come to a standstill in less than a second due to the enormous number of collisions claimed, by the goofs themselves, per second. To this, we add the fact that stationary gas atoms under inter-repulsion logically explain gas pressure (i.e. no need for kineticism to explain gas pressure).
The reason the wackos assigned each hydrogen atom with only one captured electron is that stars are made up mainly of hydrogen gas. They thought it was easier for the gullible to believe that proto-stars could begin as H atoms if one proton has captured just one electron, as opposed to capturing many, for they themselves, in their secret rooms, realized the great difficulty of protons attracting electrons after millions or billions of years of big-bang expansion. How could screeching protons attract screeching electrons across vast distances of space? They couldn't, but that didn't stop the despicable loons from saying it happened.
As there are many more electrons than air atoms, and as they are smaller than air atoms, it follows that we should view the aether as a sea into which air atoms are immersed. As rising electrons give atoms lift, so electrons moving sideways push atoms and airborne water molecules sideways. What do you suppose happens when the aether electrons flow into a cold piece of steel on an above-freezing morning, after two days of bitter cold? The steel gets wet...because the aether electrons are pushing the water molecules onto the steel faster than they can evaporate off of the steel.
The aether sea pushes air atoms and water molecules too; they flow together and constitute the one sea we call, the atmosphere. It's Genius, and could not exist without repulsion force. Can all the goofballs in science the world over invent repulsion force? If not, how did blind evolution do it which had no brain? How many miracles are we to expect from brainless evolution before the snake charmers admit that it's the work of an Intelligent God?
Aside from the push from electrons, there is another form of energy, very small and rare by comparison, when atoms are made temporarily net-positive. In this case, the atoms do some pushing too. But by-and-large, energy is from the negative charge of electrons. Energy is not mc2; only a science zombie believes that. What's a zombie? Someone who doesn't think properly for himself, but allows propped-up "geniuses" -- the snake charmers -- to mesmerize them into a sort of worshipful trance. They take the credit due to God, and transfer it to their Godless big bang, and in the meantime they lay snake eggs for the earth's people.
When electrons are released from atoms, they push. ENERGY. Release all the atoms from a solid piece of metal one inch square: MASSIVE ENERGY. Protons are energy-storing units. It's not energy until the electrons are released. Protons quickly reload with lost electrons, unless protons are damaged.
Shoot things at protons, damage them, and they will release their electrons. But as most atoms have sufficient captured electrons acting as shields, mankind doesn't know how to bang through them, to damage their protons in a controlled way. Only in uranium atoms can this be done, to the present time, because uranium atoms are the smallest of all atoms, having the least number of captured electrons i.e. the thinnest shield. Nuclear energy is proof that metal atoms are amongst the smallest.
It's probably true that nuclear bombs can damage the protons of dirt and rock atoms. The explosive force of such bombs may, therefore, be due to more than the disintegration of the uranium atoms, but also due to the complete or partial disintegration of rock atoms. It's logical that, when the latter are partially damaged, they don't release all of their electrons, but can be expected to release them slowly, and this could define the poisonous fall-out from such bombs, or the ongoing dangers of radioactive turf all around the explosion.
In other words, radioactivity is, probably, in all likeliness, the release of very-fast electrons from the inner layers of atoms. The deeper into the atoms the electrons are held, the tighter they are held, and the harsher they emit when released. It just makes sense that tighter-captured electrons, in being closer together, are held under stronger repulsion forces. The emission of electrons is what causes light, and so very-fast electrons cause dangerous light waves. It's as simple as that. The moral of this story: don't damage protons with nuclear explosions.
There's no such thing as neutrons; they were invented to fill the pot holes in the erroneous atomic model invented by big-bangers.
Transparency
Why do you think the air is made up of products all transparent? Sheer coincidence, evolutionists? Nay, stupids, but God designed it that way, or life would be harsh if even a small fraction of the air were not transparent.
And how do the stupids explain that photons can pass through a few feet of liquid water, or a half inch of solid glass? They explain it with stupidity, what else? Don't be deceived, for bullets cannot pass through glass without breaking it. And photons cannot pass through an inch of water without striking atomic material and being bounced out again. As light travels in a straight line through glass, only an idiot would classify light as a photon bullet. Photon bullets will ricochet off of many atomic particles and thus become mud (a solid blur) by the time the bullets exit the glass.
The reality is that God formed the outer layers of air atoms, and water molecules too (surrounded by O atoms), such that the light exits the aether, into the atom, then circles the atom, then exits the atom into the aether again to continue its journey, then strikes another atom, then circles and exits it too, over and over again many times until the sunlight reaches our eyes in a straight line through the entire atmosphere. IT'S MIRACULOUS. No ricochets allowed, because that distorts the light into mud.
How do I know that light circles the atoms of transparent materials? Easy, because electrons are the light-wave medium, and all atoms are covered in electron atmospheres. That's right, even atom-captured electrons are an aether of their own. In fact, transparent materials PROVE that lights waves are through the medium of electrons. Full stop, case closed, I win, the goofers lose.
This is very easy to understand. One draws a straight line from the light source anywhere on the sun, to the center-top of one air atom. In this picture, we cease to speak of a single light wave; we now view all of the waves striking together upon the entire top (sunside) of the atom. These waves exit at the center-bottom of the atom after circling the entire outer layers of the atom's loosely-held electrons.
That's why waves continue in a straight line after exiting the atom, because they all converge (collide) at the perfect-opposite side, and thus they bounce each other out of the atom there. It can't be otherwise, and that's how I know it's correct. If waves enter all atoms at 12 o'clock but exit at 3 o'clock, or 4 o'clock, or all over the atoms at random locations, the waves cease to go in straight lines from the sun, and we would then not see a perfect solar disc. As we know that light waves come through air in straight lines, it's a no-brainer that they ALL must exit at 6 o'clock when entering at 12 o'clock.
Follow logic, stop being an evolutionist's fool. There's no such thing as a photon, for this creature would bounce from air atom to air atom and not produce a straight-down path for sunlight. It's impossible for photons, or particles even smaller, to penetrate the entire atmosphere without striking atomic parts many times over.
Air atoms allow lunar light to flow around them simultaneous with the sunlight doing so, and both sets of waves carry on straight across the atoms even though the two paths are not the same. Fat-chance evolution didn't create this situation, similar to / identical with waves in communication lines travelling across atomic electrons, in both directions simultaneously down the same wire, with many waves going up and down the wire over the same atoms.
The moving thing that starts a light wave is an electron. Always. Every light wave is exactly one electron wide because a light wave is a bump-bump through electrons. Is "bump" not scientific enough? Would you rather have a 13-letter word from the Greek that you can't remember? Do we really need to be professional here? It's just bump-bump, or push-push, and you should not think that just because the liars use professional terms that they have the correct theories. That's called their smokescreen.
The earth is always given some slight lift from the constant bombardment of the solar wind. It seeks to knock the earth up and out of perfect orbit. We might therefore assume that the Earth's orbit has been growing gradually larger with each passing century, meaning that the length of the year may have been going up, and the earth's climate may have gone toward the colder.
The Cause of the Earth Spin
What happens when the front face of the planet collides with the solar wind? By "front face," it's meant the half-side of the planet facing the orbital path, half sunlit, half dark. Only the sunlit half of this front face (this is the western half) is crashing against the solar wind. The opposite sunlit half (eastern half) never crashes into the solar wind.
To paint the picture fully: the solar wind crashes into the entire sunlit half of the planet, but only one quarter of the planet -- the western half of the sunlit half -- crashes into the solar wind. Confused? Draw it on paper if you want to know what I'm saying, because I'm thinking I'm in the very process of discovering what it is that causes the earth to spin on its axis.
To set this up, let me first say that the solar wind striking the eastern half of the sunlit side receives as much force to turn the earth counterclockwise as the western half of the sunlit side receives to turn the earth clockwise. In that case, there's no net spin formed. In other words, we must ignore the solar wind's colliding with the planet, and focus only on the earth colliding with the solar wind. It's a little tricky, but I can paint this picture in a way to convince you that the solar wind is what causes the earth's spin!
THIS IS A NEW DISCOVERY, or better yet, others have discovered it, but the goons did not allow it to be propagated round the planet to science magazines.
You must understand that the front face of the earth collides with the SIDE of the solar wind, not dead-on into it. That is, the electrons are flowing past the front face as the latter strikes them. Draw it.
Back to what was said above, that we can ignore the striking of the solar wind into the earth. In that case, we may as well imagine this wind as stationary, because it removes confusion as to what's going on with the only thing that remains: the earth crashing into the side of the solar wind. Which way will the earth spin if its front face (half planet) crashes into stationary solar electrons?
I am absolutely sure that the earth will spin from west to east so that the sun rises in the east. Why am I sure? Because I made a realization some time ago, that the dark half (quarter planet) of the front face of the planet never strikes one solar electron. Only the sunlit half (quarter planet) of the front face strikes electrons. In that case, as the sunlit side striking the electrons is the western half of the sunlit side, the planet will turn west to east, the direction in which it is indeed turning.
To prove this to yourself if you are unsure after some significant thought and study, view the earth as stationary in its orbit, with the side of the solar wind coming against its front face at the speed of earth orbit. It's a scenario identical with the solar wind stationary and the earth moving in orbit against the side of the solar wind.
I therefore ask you: which way will the earth spin if the side of the solar wind collides against the western half of the sunlit side of a non-orbiting earth, where the dark half of the front face receives no electron collisions? The answer is as clear as day. The earth will have its western sunlit half spin toward its eastern sunlit half.
I'm pleasantly amazed. I think I now understand why the earth spins constantly, not because God gave it a twirl with His hand, a few thousand years ago, but because the solar wind ever keeps it spinning.
To put this another way, the solar wind applies friction on the planet, and the result is both spin on its axis, and a slow-down in orbital speed. In the past, I grappled with whether or not weightless electrons can cause friction in the orbital path, and I may have concluded that, no, they cannot. If that was my conclusion, it was hasty, because I am very sure now that, in spite of having zero weight, the electrons,because they are moving, can hinder anything that comes into contact with them, for they yet have mass.
For things not attracted by gravity, weight and mass are not identical. Electrons have zero weight, but some mass. If they're flying, they've got mass energy, or velocity x mass. Anything striking moving electrons on their sides will find hindrance to its motion, even if electrons are not being pulled by solar or earth gravity.
I've got to conclude that, where the sun was more powerful in the past, such that the solar wind was faster and thicker in density, the earth spin would have been faster i.e. a day was less than 24 hours. In that case, if this is all we consider, there would have been more than 365 days annually (per earth orbit). However, the solar wind could have increased the size of the earth orbit so that, in the past, there was less time per orbit due to a smaller orbit.
Arguing For a Russian Gog
Note the two Gog-like locations here: "Manichean texts in several languages of neighbouring regions used the expression 'the land of the Four Toghar' (Togar~ Toxar, written Twyr) to designate the area 'from KUCHa and Karashar to QOCHo and Beshbalik'" (Wikipedia "Tocharians"). Clearly, these were earlier the Biblical Togarmites.
In Ezekiel 39/39, not only Gog of Magog, but "Togarmah," are placed in the "far north." Tocharians lived between the Khazars and India in time for the Khazar empire. The latter was in Ukraine between the northern Caspian and Black seas, and one Khazar king, Joseph, claimed that Khazars were Togarmites. That looks correct, though I and many others believe that Joseph was Jewish or Hebrew in some way, as were other king-priests of the Khazars.
Therefore, "far north" refers to what is now Russia, and most, I think, historians/geographers place Magog in Russia, not Turkey, Armenia, or Georgia. Although Gogarene/Gugar was off of Armenia's Lake Sevan (not the far north), Ezekiel gives indication that a branch(es) of the namers of Gogarene were up in "the far north."
When the Varangian Rus conquered the Khazarian empire, I see the Varangians as the descendants of Ezekiel's Rosh, and it's known that these same Varangians of Ukraine co-founded Moscow, and thus named Russia. It makes sense, therefore, that Ezekiel's Rosh and Meshech ("Mushki" to Assyrians), when translated to the end times, are Moscow of Russia. This is partly why I'm not biting when guys like Joel Richardson insist that the Gog alliance refers mainly to Turks. Nor am I convinced that "Turk" was named after "TOGARmah," as some prophecy buffs claim. Turks descended from GOKturks, and so that looks like partial Gog.
The Khazar empire was taken near the time of the Templarite conquering of Jerusalem, and these Crusaders had an alliance with Georgia, for the flag of Georgia today is a near-match with the Crusader flag of Jerusalem (large potent cross surrounded by four potent crosses), similar also to the Arms of ROSicrucians (large saltire surrounded by four roses). It begs whether Crusader Zionism was partly from Khazar king-priests.
To help reveal that proto-Tocharians were in proto-Georgia, myth made Togar-like Teucer, the father of BATia, mother of Trojans. Wikipedia has an article on a Bat people living in what is now Georgia, especially at Batumi near the MOSCHi mountains. What don't we understand about this?
Teucer's father can be connected to Lydia, which is beside Mysia, location of Troy. Lydians and Lasonii can be traced, probably correctly, to the Lazi of Georgia, on the north side of Batumi. Lazi lived at Lazona, and Latona was the Roman/Latin version of mythical Leto, mother of both Apollo and the Amazon goddess, Artemis. Amazons named Mazaca near the Moschi mountains, and thus the namers of Mazaca becomes suspect from a branch of Meshech. From Mazaca, Amazons (comicalized in myth as all-female) moved to Mysia, and probably named it. This has got to reveal why the myth writer made Apollo the leader of the all-female "Muses."
Apollo and Artemis were worshiped by "Hyperboreans," a term meaning "far northerners," how about that. Therefore, one can trace some aspects of the Gog alliance -- Togarmites especially -- to Latins at Rome, especially as Roman myth traces Romans to Trojans. The latter look like they could have named "Turk," as might "Thrace/Thrako." Yet "Troy" traces better to such terms as "Tyre / Tarsus," and the Tyrians could therefore have named TYRRhenians on the north side of Lazio, which can explain what we could call a family feud, when Rome and Carthage (founded by Tyrians) had mortal combat. Rome won, and went on to become Daniel 7's fourth beast.
After the Rus conquered Khazaria, Khazars and their Kabar branches spread out mainly into Germany and Hungary, where some became the "Ashkenazi Jews." In Genesis, Ashkenaz was brother to Togarmah, and both descended from Jupiter-like Japheth. It can explain why Romans turned the Zeus Taurus (Tyrians) into Jupiter. These were such stupid, pig-headed and brute pagans, not great but in being callous and sinful, seeking like parasites to absorb the whole world by military might. Such stupids are still with us today, and Rothschild stupids are thought to descend from Khazar Hebrews, which can explain why the Rothschild founders of modern Israel lavished (or infested) Israel with Russian "Jews" (that God may not want there). The Rus have always been seeking to conquer the world, and Rosicrucians (fake Christians) have an "emperor" position even, which might just be filled one day by the anti-Christ or False Prophet.
I see "Magog" becoming "Magogar," a term I created, suspect as a term I define as "man of Magog." I created the term because I imagined it to modify to "Magyar," for the latter were a real people in Ukraine, to the west of Khazaria, and allied to Khazars too. The Magyars become the Hungarians, yet the latter, at their founding, were about one-third Kabar-branch Khazars who named Kabardino (northern Caucasus, in Ukraine).
Roman myth that had Romans descend from the early Trojans, and thus partly from Teucer-branch Togarmites, gave mythical Romulus as their namesake ancestor. As the Jupiter-like Japodes lived at a Romula location (now Croatia), we can take this picture to Cronus- and Ukraine-like Ceraunii Illyrians of proto-Croatia, for Cronus had been made Zeus' father. Apollo mated with mythical Coronis, and Corinth was home to king Aeetes of Colchis i.e. proto-Georgia i.e. home of proto-Latins, and home also of mythical Batia, daughter of Teucer. We are talking ancient human-sacrifice cults here, whose end-time descendants are likely doing the same.
Ares, son of Zeus, given a war symbol, was a pedophilia cult that named Eros and Erotes. Ares' special mate was the official wife of ugly Hephaestus of Mysia. Ugly was the symbol of the Gorgon Medusa, and Gorgons at the southern Caspian sea likely named Georgia. The latter is near the upper Aras river (in Armenia) that I say named "Ares." The Aras was also the Arax, and ARCadia was made the birthplace of Armenia-depicting Hermes. The latter, a friend of Aeetes of Corinth, was paired with Aphrodite in a transvestite symbol (see "Hermaphroditus"), and Aphrodite was the official wife of Hephaestus.
When you get to know how to interpret mythology, it's a people-group tracker of the worst of humanity, the perfect justification for Armageddon and the Lake of Fire. The reason Hermes is involved in a chariot-related myth of Pelops' Amazonian father-in-law is that Pelops was made the king of Lydia at the Hermus river. To interpret this, it means that myth writers traced Amazons in the Peloponnese to Lydians, and the latter were mythically made the sons of Aeetes-like Attis of neighboring Phrygia.
Gomer likely named the Cimmerians, who came down from the Ukraine to conquer king Rusa at Lake Van. This picture, along with the Varangian Rus of Moscow, argues strongly for the inclusion of "Rosh," as a nation, in Ezekiel 38/39, though some Bible translations omit "Rosh" and use the term as part of "chief prince," for "rosh" is the Hebrew word for "first / chief." Would God confuse us when the text well describes a Rusa > Rus > Russia line?
Note that the bear constellation was mythical Arca, symbol of Arcadia (in the Peloponnese), birthplace of Hermes. King Rusa was of Armenia, and therefore the Russian bear could tend to reveal itself, in this way, as depicting Russian ancestry in Rusa-line Armenians at the Aras river. Compare "Ursa" to "Hros," for the latter were a real peoples I suspect as part of the Ares-cult Rosh > Rus.
Google now acts like it doesn't know what I'm looking for when asking for "Hros tribe." It once did know, but AI is going to make regular google as dumb as possible, to urge people to purchase AI. BOTTOMLESS GREED.
As Ezekiel names Persia as part of the Gog alliance, it doesn't tend to equate Gog with modern Turkey, at this time, anyway, for the latter opposes modern Iran. Ezekiel's Put, thought to be Libya, can indicate why Russia, while pulling out of Syria in late 2024, was looking to store / station its Syrian weapons in Libya.
In earlier Ezekiel chapters, satan is made the king of Tyre while satan incarnate looks like Gog in chapter 38. The 'g' looks like a 'y' because the letters were inter-changeable in some languages. Or, one evolved into the other. Therefore, "Togar" could have become Toyar > Tyre. Mythical TYRRhenus was a Lydian, and about 700 AD, not long before Ezekiel wrote 38, Gugu was a Lydian king.
Cimmerians had conquered Lake Van (not far south from Gugar) in or about 720 BC, and I had read that these same Cimmerians, stationed at Sinope of the Hatti realm of mythical Attis, had also conquered west into Lydia. Thus, where Steve Quayle spoke of "Gug-Cimmerians," they apparently were part of Gugar, and thus Gogi-branch Cimmerians came to rule Lydia at roughly the time that Romans were forming in Latin Lazio, and roughly the time that Tyrrhenians were forming in Tuscany.
The interesting thing now is that mythical Cybele, Attis' wife and mother of the Lydians, was the Phrygian "great mother" goddess that I trace to the seven hills of Rome as per the harlot of Revelation 17 sitting upon them. Therefore, it appears that Cybele could have been the Gug-Cimmerian people in Lydia. I suspect her name either from or to the Cabelees people group, a fellow tribe of the Lasonii, and then Thrace has a Cabyle location to boot.
I have "Cabelees" in over 20 online articles, but when I ask google for "cabelees," it does NOT bring up either my articles, nor any on the ancient Cabelees. GOOGle has become a piece of trash so far as serious research is concerned. google caters to big business instead of researchers, which in my opinion is a violation of its chief purpose. GREEDY-GOOGLE TRASH.
google refuses to have one spider for research and another for businesses because it wants to increase the chances that business webpages get visits when people do research. That's an exploitive violation of researchers and general-information gatherers. It buries all of my webpages, ALL OF THEM, bringing up only a token few in precious-few instances.
Arca-like Archibalds (said to be Bernicians) are first known in Roxburghshire, a place named by the Roxolani once living in Ukraine. The "AUDax" motto term of the Roxburgh surname is code indication for proto-Rockefeller, Roquefeuil elements in France's Aude province. The white horse head of Roxburghs reminds that Hros-like "hross" is the Nordic name for "horse," and that Ares was the Thracian Horseman. Roxburgh is near bear-depicted Berwickshire. Khazars had horsemen called by an Arca / Ursa term: "To supplement their native warriors, the Khazars retained many thousands of cavalry known as Arsiyah (or Ursiyya) whose origins are unknown...". Those horsemen would be a good place to tentatively trace the Russian bear symbol.
https://khurasanminiatures.tripod.com/khazar.html
I link the pale bar of Roxburghs to the same of English Tate's, and then lake Tatta was up the Halys river of the Cimmerians at Sinope. The Halys surname shares the GOOGE boar heads, and while Googe's are first known in Roxburghshire too, the Halys boar heads form a single pale bar in colors reversed from the single Roxburgh pale bar.
The Halys Crest shares the BROWN lion with Browns/Bruns, and the one of Halys', in gold, is the lion of Brunswicks while proto-Berwick was Brunswick-like "Bryneich/Byrneich." Cimmerians / Gomerians likely named Cumbria / Cumberland, where Browns/Bruns, Burns and Bernice's/Burness' are all first known. The Brunswick Coat is shared by Hatch's/Hacch's while Halys' are first known in Sligo with Hickensons and Higgins/Hickens, and while Hicks'-branch Hooks almost the Brown/Brun Coat. Hooks are first known in Devon with Sea-connectable Tokers who share the seaHORSE of Seamans, the latter first known in Suffolk with English Tate's. Scottish Tate's are first known in Berwickshire with Archibalds (Roxburgh colors).
Thus, the Berwick bear looks to be linking to the Ursa bear, known to Greeks as, Arca. The ARCHibure variation of Arthurs (Berwickshire) now comes into play because I trace Arthurs to the Ardiaei Illyrians who married a Tatta-trackable, Dardanian princess while Batia, Teucer's mythical daughter, married Dardanus, code for ancient Dardania in Mysia. This Dardanus was made the father of Trojans.
One can link the Seaman and Toker Coats to German Drummonds and Sea's, the latter first known in Kent with English Trips while German Trips, from Ukraine's Trypillians, are first known in Hamburg with German Drummonds. German Hamburgs share the ArchiBALD bend, and English Hamburgs (white horse) share the crosslets of English Trips. Scottish Balds were a branch Scottish Bauds, the latter first known in Stirlingshire with the Drymen location of Drummonds. The latter began as royal Hungarians and thus possibly descend from a Magog > Magyar line.
Drummonds came to Scotland with the first Scottish Leslie's, and the latter are first known in Kabardino-like Aberdeen with Schims/Schiens sharing the Googe boar. Hungarians had been partially Kabars. Lesks, looking related to Leslie-connectable Bards, are first known in Berkshire with ARCH's/Arks, and Bards, suspect from BARTHolomew, the Scottish-Leslie progenitor, are first known in Lanarkshire with SINope-like Sine's/Sions/Swans. Compare with the Schien variation of Schims and their Skene/Skin branch, and then Skinners look related to Ticks/Tucks/Toke's while Tokers are also Tuckers. Ticks/Tucks/Toke's were once said to be first known in Kent with Toker-connectable Sea's. The Lesk boar head is shared by Rusa-like Scottish Rose's.
Tokers are first known in Devon with Fauns and Fenns/Venns (Archibald / Roxburgh colors), suspect from Lake Van, and Fenns/Venns share the GREEN griffin head of Bards and Leslie's. Fawns are first known in Berwickshire, and share the black hunting horn with Burns and Bernice's/Burness' (Cumberland with PARTons). Greens are first known in Kent with PERTs/Petts having "bulRUSHes" while Perta was on the shore of lake Tatta. Rush's were once said to be first known in Suffolk with Tate's. Perts/Petts share the stork of Pitts in turn first known in Dorset with Ross-branch Russells.
Kent is also where early Ticks/Tucks/Toke's were who in turn have more griffin heads. In colors reversed, the Tick/Tuck/Toke Coat is the one of Stomps/Stumps while Stamps almost have the Rush Coat, both using white horses, as does the Arms of Kent.
The House of Griffin was in Pomerania, and therefore possibly of SCANDinavia. Note the Shand variation of Googe-connectable Schims/Schiens, and the Scan of Skene's/Skins. Skinners then share the Tick/Tuck/Toke griffin heads.
The bear symbol of the Swiss city of Bern is suspect from the city's founder, the ZAHRingers, who look named after "Khazar" when pronounced, "Hazar." Zahringers had triple-blue antlers for their symbol while their Veringer kin -- obviously from Varangian Rus and traceable to them via the red Casimir antler -- uses triple-red antlers. The Casimir antler in a form of the Arms of Baden because Zahringers and Veringers were in Baden. The Arms of Baden is in colors reversed within the Bern Coat.
The Casimir antler is the Keep bend because Keeps trace to "Kiev," the capital of Varangian Rus. It's also the Lorraine bend because Richeza of Lorraine was the mother of Casimir of Poland, husband of princess Maria of the Kiev Varangians. This is how I know that the Lorraine eagle, found also in the Arms of Lorraine province, belonged to the Polish Piasts, one of whom was Casimir's father.
The Richeza-like Rich's/Richess' are said to have named a location in Lorraine, wherefore it's interesting that they are first known in Hampshire with CASimir-like Chase's. Khazarians names? Hampshire, near the first-known Badens/Battins, is where Budini-like Buttons/Bidens/BOTTONs/Budins are first known, and Budini lived south of Kiev, according to Wikipedia. Rich's/Richess' show a so-called "crosses BOTTONee." Hall of Names shows descriptions of the Coats of Arms.
Though not in the same color, Rich's/Richess' and Drake's share the "wyvern" dragon with the Tile's (Dorset, beside Hampshire) who in turn share the axe with the neighboring Badens/Battins. Tile's can thus be from Khazars of their Atil capital. Atil was probably named by the family of Atilla the Hun. The latter's father, MUNDzuk, can be to the Mound / Mount surname because Turks/Torks and Rich's/Richess' use the "mound / mount." Rich's/Richess' have a "green mound" while Greens (Kent with Munds and Rich-beloved Gards) essentially have the HONor/Honan Coat. Lake Garda is near Bled while Atilla's brother was, Bleda.
NEWS
Trump wants to cut out income taxes by replacing them with tariffs, claiming that this creates more work for Americans, but when Elon Musk wants cheaper, foreign workers, Trump's changes his tune to support Musk, as expected by me because I admit he's a lying, hypocritical, upper-crust fist portraying himself as a soft-spoken nice guy to his voters solely to snag their political support:
https://www.bitchute.com/video/kS0dLE3YlB1b
The video above reminded me that Trump's grandfather (Mr. Trump) was from KALLstadt, Germany, and that trumpets are the only symbols showing for Calls/Calles' (Wiltshire, beside George's). German Kalls/Kallers use a giant griffin while the House of Griffin has their griffin in the Arms of Pomerania while Trumps are first known partially in Pomerania. The first Drummond, of the George's and likely the Trump ancestor, married the sister of king Malcolm III while Malcolms/Columns are first known in Argyllshire with Scottish Kalls/MacCalls/MacCole's who in turn share the pheon of Celts/Cults (Perthshire with Drummonds and Kelts) who in turn share the stag heads of Malcolms/Columns likely because Malcolm III was of the DunKELD dynasty. Kelds/Kells are first known in Hampshire (beside Calls/Calles') with Drummond-connectable Sturs, and with Hangers who in turn almost having the Kall/Kaller Coat.
The problem for Trump voters: they already voted him in. The should have chosen another Republican candidate. Musk's iron fist is showing at X just as Trump is about to take power, as if Musk's Jewish shadow is demanding from him that he cripple the speech of part of Trump's base. Something to the tune of 10 million X accounts have been crippled or banished over a period of about one year.
Now that immigrants in canada are not voting for the Liberals, as the Liberals hoped they would when they were shipped in massively over the past few years, the Liberal government is preparing to ship them all home, hoping that Poilievre will get less votes by election time, slated for the fall of 2025. Obviously, the Liberal government will seek to ship Poilievre voters home to their nations of origin, but keep all Liberal voters here...who will go on to wreck this country just by their standing for the Liberals. If they be that sick stupid and sinful, they will wreck this country in other ways too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Up-KZVZdd6M
The video above could have the partial motive of making voters believe that immigrants are being shipped out when the reality, in many cases, is that they are scramming on their own choices due to the hell that Liberals caused with swift-massive immigration. This video explains:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5blrmVorcVI
Life in multi-cultural cities of canada is cold, uncaring, robotic, dim, helpless, worrisome...which is all worse if immigrants come from warm climates. Immigrants, go home, you don't belong here, be content amongst your own people, and let canadians build a culture of their own without you making it muddy for them. How can you enjoy life here when they don't like you here??? THINK. Liberal canadians were stupid for allowing you in, and the Liberal government deceived you when promising rosy conditions here. The multi-cultural experiment has been an utter failure. It was the stuff of fairyland tales. I most-definitely don't want to see my community stacking up with red-dotted Indians and Muslim turbans. You look out of place because you are. You are not the glue to bond the community, because you don't like being unwanted here. You are better off where you don't despise your own citizens. GO HOME.
The video below has a title telling that trudeau loves multi-culturalism. The only thing I can think of for liking heaping immigration is when heaps of Hindus and Muslims insult the Jewish minority such that the deep-state / bankster / corporate Jews, who want liberal-foreign voters, suffer backfires into their own faces. Same applies in the United States:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJp6oG-BXw8
Here's Trump's fist at work on robbing Europeans in desperate straights:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCkMlO_v9DM
Did you ever wonder why Germany didn't sue the Brits and/or Americans for blowing up the Russian pipeline to Germany? Germany didn't even make a stink, probably because it was in globalist hands at the time. Not so much anymore.
Everyone hates Bill Gates because he's murderously hateful. Some say he should be jailed; I say he should be executed, in Africa, just as trudeau should be executed by order of a just, canadian court:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GeaK2a2jIvE
Did you catch Bayer's name in the video above. The controllers of that company are so incredibly stupid and reckless that they bought Monsanto shortly after it was fined by a court on a cancer case brought against it. Nothing like giving all your Bayer products a bad name by doing such a purchase. I suggest you stop buying Bayer products. I use Round-Up on my property, but I'm not spraying it on my wheat, barley, corn, rye, and other foods. Monsanto sold much Round-Up to worldwide farmers, and we have eaten some Round-Up and Round-Up residues, therefore, without a doubt. What's it doing to our nerves / organs / brains? How can we avoid it? How will Bayer increase or decrease the sale of Round-Up? Is Robert Kennedy going to address this, or is he going to weaken at the knees?
On Syria, I've heard that Julani is wearing a so-called "Windsor knot" on his tie, as proof that the current Syrian government is in cahoots with Britain and therefore accepting of Israel's current doings in Syria. But things are not so clear-cut because Julani has inside forces who want enmity with Israel. As Israel and the West now have the upper hand in Syria, who together are much stronger than Julani's faction, it is to be expected that Julani might decide to feign a partnership with the West until his government has dug in sufficient to resist the West to greater degrees.
Where ISIS was in an alliance with the Obama administration, it wasn't due to love for the West. Therefore, nobody should think that any deal made between the new Syria and the West is based on strong ties. The West can hold that deal only tyrannically, with spoken or unspoken (understood) threats against Julani. With the revelation that China is supporting Houthis, it's a revelation that China could side with Russia and Iran against Israel, at least until circumstances change such that it Middle-Eastern conditions bode bad for Chinese interests. No partnerships in this theater are until death do we part.
In Canada, Poilievre accused Mark Carney to his face of purchasing Brazilian pipelines, and selling those pipes to end-users who hire oil/gas workers, but forsaking Albertans with their pipelines and related jobs. At the heat of Poilievre's accusation, he labeled Carney of doing the bidding of "Davos" i.e. the WEF. That's a good sign on Poilievre's part. If any country gets the WEF monkey off of its back, it's en route to healing, not guaranteed healing, but hopeful for the foreseeable future.
News people are saying that Carney has accepted the challenge of replacing trudeau, though I don't know whether it's official on Carney's part. trudeau is thought, by leading Liberals, to be quitting this coming week, not willingly, but due to too much Liberal-party pressure, which wants a new figurehead (i.e. Carney) for a fall election. One of two ways to extend the election until the fall is for the NDP to go back on its word of not many days ago, or for the Quebec party to go back on its word of a couple of months ago, to force an immediate election, within a month of a Parliamentary non-confidence vote later this month.
The second means is for trudeau to cancel Parliament until the election season later in the year so that he can avoid the confidence vote. Good riddance to this snake, yet the corruption machine that is most of his party goes forward seeking a come-back, criminally unscathed thanks to the federal police force doing NOTHING to curb the corruption, meaning that it's embarrassingly complicit with it, and apt to receive God's judgment in due time, just when the guilty think they have gotten away with their parts in the crimes. This present situation is not a healed condition by any means for this dim and ailing country.
It turns out this demonoid, all feeling sorry for himself instead of being ashamed of himself, announced, at about 11 am Monday, that he "indends" to quit once his party has chosen a replacement for him. His own party turned out to swing the final wrecking ball to his head. I, and literally ten million or more others, will be so very glad when his mere face disappears from the news. The only thing more unbearable than his face, or the thing that makes his face unbearable, has been his slippery verbiage. Instead of responding to the accusations made against him as per the country's concerns, he used the air time, both in Parliamentary sessions and in news conferences, to campaign for himself, trying to reinforce in the minds of any would-be supporters that he's the best person to do the best job for "all Canadians." He's a dillusional delinquent who moreover wants to see a sinful canada by his own workings. But even the sinners have rejected him. There is hardly a canadian in the comments, of any video on this resignation, who has the guts or desire to praise this destructive moron for the things he's praising himself for. NARCISSIST.
I can hear the truckers celebrating from sea to sea; their convoy was not in vain. They helped to save this country from four more years of this sickening facade.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HWtH3ejP0Qg