IMPORTANT PHILOSOPHICAL DEBATE !!!

I  really  did  finally  find  a  very,  very  good,  very  powerful  inductive  proof  of  God's  existence  which  I  won't  relate  here  and  now.

But,  I  took  the  proof  over  to  my  friends  in  the  Ask  an  Atheist  discussion  forum  website,  and  their  response  was  always  the  same.  In  essence,  here  it  is  --  and  THAT  is  what  this  post  is  all  about ...

"Peter,  what  you  are  pointing  out  to  us  is  not  really  interesting  at  all.   There  is  no  such  thing  as  'a  miracle.'    Suppose  a  man  is  standing  in  Lincoln  Financial  Field  in  Philadelphia  in  front  of  an  audience  of  70,000  people,   flipping  a  silver  dollar ...

... and  he  flips  the  coin  three  hundred  billion  (300,000,000,000)  times  in  a  row,   and  IT  COMES  UP  HEADS  EVERY  SINGLE  TIME!!!  Do  you  realize  that  there  is  nothing  at  all  significant  about  that  --  that  nobody  in  the  70,000  person  crowd   should  be  even  a  little  bit  surprised,  because  300,000,000,000  heads  in  a  row  is  just  ONE  of  the  300,000,000,000  possible  outcomes  of  the  coin  tosses,  EACH  OF  WHICH  IS  EQUALLY  UNLIKELY.  In  other  words,    the  70,000  person  audience  should  be  equally  astonished  at  a  coin  toss  heads/tails  series  looking  something  like  this ...

H T H H T T T H T T H H H H T H T T H T ...

Each  outcome  is  equally  entitled  to  a  gasp  from  the  crowd."

Okay.  What  is  wrong  with  that  argument?

SAFE TO GET A BIG WET KISS ON THE MOUTH FROM A DOG ?

Dogs  lick  their  various  back-end  apertures  again  and  again  and  again.    It  is  part  of  being  a  dog.

And  --  let's  face  it  --  they  are  not  very  discriminating  about  what  they  are  licking  OFF.

And  yet,  despite  these  obvious  facts,  guess  what  is  a  very  common  practice  among  dog  owners ...

If  you  ask  the  dog  owners,  "Is  that  wise,"  a  common  answer,  nowadays,  is,  "Dog's  mouths  have  powerful  enzymes  which  immediately  annihilate   bad  microbes  and  other  horrible  things  in  their  mouths !    People's  mouths  are  MUCH  dirtier !"

Is  this  true ?    Is  it  safer  to  kiss  the  mouth  of  your  rear-end-licking  poochie  than  it  is  to  kiss  the  mouth  of  your  spouse ?

Well,  what's  on-line  is  pretty  unanimous:    Dog's  mouths  in  fact  are  horribly  germy.    When  you  are  kissing  your  dog,  you  are  kissing  the  flotsam  and  jetsam   from  his  rear  end  and  other  things  poochie  likes  to  sample  with  his  tongue  that  are  still  present  in  microscopic  form.

Whipworms ...

Hookworms ...

Roundworms ...

Our  old  friend,  the  tapeworm ...

Parvovirus ...

Cryptosporidia ...

And  a  vast,  vast  variety  of  other  microorganisms.

And  from  this  we  conclude  that  dogs  absolutely,  positively  DO  NOT  have  super-duper  germ-killing,  feces-cleaning  enzymes.

So,  if  you  see  your  significant  other  kissing  the  dog,   before  you  kiss  your  significant  other  you  might  want  them  to  clean  their  mouth  out  with  this ...

...  and  watch  carefully  if  he  or  she  likes  to  drag  their  hindquarters  around  on  the  rug  to  itch  them,  like  poochie  does  when  he  has  a  problem ...

THAT HAUNTING PIANO MUSIC IN "PEACEMAKER" WITH GEORGE CLOONEY AND NICOLE KIDMAN

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E3qHO9aOQYM

JOKE: CHURCH ON SUNDAY

It's  Sunday,  and  a  mother  looks  at  the  clock  and  is  shocked  that  her  son  is  still  in  bed.

She  rushes  upstairs  and  wakes  him  and  yells,  "GET  OUT  OF  BED  AND  INTO  THAT  SHOWER  AND  DRESS  FOR  CHURCH!    IT'S  SUNDAY!"

The  son  pleads,  "Mom!  Please!  I'll  give  you  two  good  reasons  why  I  shouldn't  go  to  church.  Number  One,  I  hate  them.   Number  Two,  they  hate  me."

"I'LL  GIVE  YOU  TWO  GOOD  REASONS  WHY  YOU'RE  GOING  TO  GO!"   the  mother  responds.  "NUMBER  ONE,  YOU'RE  59  YEARS  OLD!    NUMBER  TWO,  YOU  ARE  THE  PASTOR!"

PUT ON THE HEADPHONES -- FAURE'S PAVANE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpgyTl8yqbw

AN EVIL LAWYER REPRESENTING AN EVIL DIVORCING WOMAN

Years  ago,  when  I  did  divorces,  I  discovered  that  about  60%  of  them  involved  men  who  "became  crazy"   as  a  result  of  mid-life  crisis.  These  men,  as  they  realized  with  ever  greater  clarity  that  they  were  getting  older,  that  their  "equipment"  was  running  out  of  gas,    and  that  they  were  mortal,  would  "seek  life"   in  the  body  of  a  younger  woman,  and  torture  their  first  wife  with  great  mountains  of  abusive  behavior.

The  younger  "replacement  wives"    would  frequently   get  over-involved  in  proceedings,  and  come  to  court  with  the  husband  on  motion  day  or  for  trial,     and  the  attorneys  and  judges,  back  in  the  judges'  chambers  after  seeing  the  replacement  girls,   would  express  astonishment  at  the  ability  of   the  mid-life  crisis  guys  to  find  "photocopies"    of  their  wives  --  younger,  better-looking   women,  but  photocopies,  in  all  other  particulars.

I  usually  represented  the  women  in  the  divorce  cases,  not  because  I  understood  the  women  --  I  didn't  --  but  rather   because  I  understood  their  husbands,  and  the  evil  in  their  husbands'  souls,  and  so  I  got  pretty  good  at  anticipating  their  legal  nonsense,  so  that  I  could  "lay  boobytraps"    in  the  cases  (which  I  won't  go  into  now)   and  be  ready  for  their  lies  and  deceptions  in  court  before  they  even  thought  of  lying  and  deceiving.  

A  certain  percentage  of  the  time,  when  I  represented   men  in  divorce  actions,  they  would  come  to  me  in  a  state  of  shock   and  show  me  a  criminal  charge  for  sexual  abuse  of  their  own  children.   I  quickly  recognized  the  pattern  in  those  cases   --  

(1)  The  charge  would  come-up  only  AFTER  the  divorcing  wife   had  had  her  first  sit-down  with   her  divorce  lawyer;    

(2)  the  same   few  divorce  lawyers  were  representing   the   women  making  the  accusations;    

(3)  the  kids  who  allegedly   had  been  abused  were  always  infants  --   too  young  to  deny  the  accusations  against  their  dad.

The  effects  of   the  criminal  charge   always  gave  the  accusing  wife  sudden  total  control   over  the  divorce  case:

(a)  The  accused  husband  was  suddenly  in  for  the  fight  of  his  life;

(b)  he  frequently  had  to  spend  the  entire  divorce  case  in  jail,  leaving  the  wife  free  to   seize  total  control  over  savings;

(c)  the  divorce  court  judges  would  suddenly  become  unreservedly  hostile  toward  the  accused  husband.

In  the  cases  where  the  husbands  were  accused by  the  divorcing  wife  of  molesting  infant  children,  a  Mount  Holly,  New  Jersey  divorce  lawyer  seemed  to  be  talking  the  divorcing  wives  into  using  fraudulent  charges   of  incestuous  sexual  abuse  of  infants  as  a  "nuclear  weapon"   devastating  the  husbands   more  frequently  than  any  other  lawyer.    It  reached  the  point  where,  if  a  man  walked  into  my  office  with  a  divorce  complaint  drawn-up  by  that  lawyer,  AND  they  had  one  or  more  infant  children,   I  would  tell  them,  "Listen,   stay  calm  when  I  tell  you  the  following.  Promise?"  The  guy  would  say,  "Yes."    And  I  would  say,  "You  are  probably  about  to  be  accused  of  molesting  your  own  infant  daughter."

"My  wife  wouldn't  do  that!"  the  man  would  answer.

And  then,  within  a  few  weeks,  the  police  would  come  to  his  home  and  take  him  away  in  cuffs.

I  was  dead  certain  that  that  divorce  lawyer   was  talking  the  women  into  making  the  false  charge  in  every  single  case.  I  wanted  so  bad  to  destroy  that  lawyer.

One  day,   several  years  after  I  stopped  doing  divorces,  I  was  outside  my  home,  doing  gardening  work  in  the  garden  next  to  the  sidewalk  in  front  of  our  house.

One  of  the  neighborhood  girls  walked  up  the  sidewalk   toward  me  and  with  a  very  sad  look  said,  "Pete,  can  you  and  I  sit  down  in  the  shade  someplace  and  have  a  talk.    I  have  a  religious  problem,  not  a  legal  one."

I  pulled  out  a  couple  of  chairs   and  said,  "Wow!  It  sure  is  nice  to  talk  to  you.    I  haven't  seen  you  in  years!   I  heard  that  you  and  your  husband  are  divorced  now.    I  hope  everything  is  at  peace."

"Is  that  all  you  heard?"  she  asked.

"Yup,"  I  answered.  "I  don't  gossip  much.  I  guess  people  gossip  enough  about  me."

"Well,  I  want  to  talk  to  you  about  my  divorce.      I  did  something  very,  very,  very  evil  to  my  ex-husband,"    she  said.

"Who  was  your  attorney  in  the  divorce?"   I  asked.

"Mr.  So-and-so,  in  Mount  Holly,'  she  answered.

It  was  THAT  attorney.  I  knew  what  she  was  about  to  say.

"What  happened?"  I  ask.

"Well,"  she  answered,  "My  attorney  told  me  to  falsely  accuse  my  husband  of  sexually  molesting  our  infant  daughter,  to  give  me  complete  power  over  him  in  the  divorce  case.  He  had  me  falsely  accuse  my  ex-husband  twice.  So,  my  ex-husband  went  to  jail  twice,    each  time  for  6  months.

"I  think  some  pretty  horrible  things  happened  to  my  ex-husband  in  jail.    Our  daughter,  now  that  she  is  on  her  way  to  growing  up,  is  deeply  confused  about  him,  and  I  can't  tell  her  the  truth.  I  believe  that  unless  I  do  something  to  fix  things,  God  has  a  very,  very  terrible  place  in  Hell  reserved  for  me."

I  fell  quiet,  and  finally  I  said,  "I  am  glad  that  you  told  me  this.  Do  you  know  that  that  same  attorney  has  done  the  same  thing  to  several  divorcing  men,  over  the  years.  He  should  be  disbarred,    stripped  off  all  of  his  assets,    and  sent  to  jail  for  the  rest  of  his  life.  This  makes  me  think  of  a  way  you  can  pay  back  your  ex-husband,  and  get  God  to  forgive  you."

"What?,"  she  asked.  "I'll  do  anything."

"Let  me  represent  you  as  your  attorney,    and  I   will  set  up  an  agreement   giving  you  complete  immunity  from  prosecution  for  anything  related  to   your  false  accusations  in  exchange  for  your  testimony  in  support  of  criminal  charges  against  the  lawyer.     You  would  also  have  to  be  your  ex-husband's  witness  in  a  lawsuit  against  the  lawyer,  to  enable  your  ex-husband  to  strip  him  of  everything  he  owns,  including  his  license  to  practice  law.  Although  I  am  sure  that,  under  such  circumstances,  you  ex-husband  will  forgive  you,   I  can't  do  anything  to  keep  the  lawyer  from  counter-suing  you.    Any  judge  on  the  planet  would  protect  you  under  these  circumstances, however,  so  that  wouldn't  have  that  much  to  worry  about.

"Lastly,"  I  said,  "I  know  a  gentle  and  a  good  priest  who  would  be  happy  to  hear  your  confession,  and  give  you  absolution.  That  will  save  you  from  Hell."

The  lady  looked  at  me  with  profound  shock,  and  said,  "Pete,  I  just  can't  do  those  things."

And  she  walked  away,  and  died.

True  story.

WATCH OUT ! THE NEW CHIP-EQUIPPED CREDIT CARDS HAVE A PROBLEM !

There's  something  they  didn't  tell  you  about  your  new  chip-equipped  credit  cards.

They  can  be  "pinged"   in  your  wallet,  and  made  to  broadcast  your  credit  card  number  from  as  much  as  25  feet  away,  by  someone  walking  past  you  in  the  mall  or  on  the  sidewalk  with  a  device  available  online  costing  less  than  $50.

Apparently,    the  rotating  PIN  system  that  is  supposed  to  make  them  fraud  proof  only  kicks  in  at  a  particular  amount.   So,    small  transactions  CAN  be  done  on  YOUR  credit  card  by  a  stranger  walking  past  you.

Additionally,    your  credit  card  information  which  your  chip-equipped  card  itself  broadcasts  like  a  radio   can  also  be  used  at  any  on-line  site  not  requiring  the  old  3  digit  security  code.

And  now  for  the  big  one:    There  is  no  PIN,   and  no  limit  except  for  a  one  million  ($1,000,000.00)   transaction  limit,  on  foreign  currency  transactions.   So,  a  passerby  scanning  your  card  inside  your  wallet  inside  your  pocket   with  his  little  $50  pinger  bought  on-line  can  purchase  thousands  of  dollars   in  British  pounds  sterling  or   French  francs  with  your  credit  card  --  and  then  you  get  the  bill.

What  is  the  protection?    Your  card  in  a  paper  envelope  in  an  aluminum  foil  wrapper  --  a  "Faraday  cage."  The  paper  between  the  card  and  the  aluminum  foil   protects  the  still  ubiquitous  magnetic   strip  on  one  side  and  the  chip  on  the  other  side  from  damage.

Not  such  a  wondrous  piece  of  technology.

And,  note  well,  this  isn't  MasterCard's  fault.

ALL  chip  cards  with  ALL  credit  card  providers

have  the  problem.   Blame  it  on  your  elected  officials.

It HAS to Be the Case: The End Times ARE Here !

Yeah,  yeah,  yeah,  Christ  said  that  we  "can't  know  the  day  or  the  hour."    Catholics  who  view  themselves  as  "well-grounded"  and  "common-sensical"  use  Christ's  words  to  squelch  all  public  End  Times  speculation,  to  avoid  the  laughter  of  skeptics.

But,  Christ  said  more  --  a  lot  more.    Despite  his  "day  and  hour"  assurance,   if  we  look  at  Christ's  Own  general  indicators  of  the  arrival  of  the  time  for  "wrapping  things  up,"  coming  in  the  sky   amidst  a  thunderous  trumpet  blast  "to  judge  the  living  and  the  dead,"   one  can  plausibly  argue  that  hushing  talk  about  the  impending  nature  of  the  End  of  Time  is  irresponsible.

When  one  reviews  the  general  indicators,  it  is  astonishing  how  well  the  tumblers  seem  to  be  falling  into  place.

In  other  words,  "He  is  near,  even  at  the  door."

I  had  hoped  that  there  would  be  a  great,  sudden  victory  for  the  Church  of  the  Popes  over  evil  before  the  end  of  time,    but  to  be  perfectly  frank  it's  looking  more  and  more  like  lying  liberals  in  charge  of  the  lying  liberal  media  in  charge  of  the  minds  of  the  angry,  spoiled  people,  who  just  want  uninterrupted   food,  things,  screens  and  nookie  --  everything  else  be  damned  --  is  going  to  be  the   rule  in  the  world  when  everything  is  shook  by  the  trumpet  blast,  and  all  look  up,    and  realize  that  the  opportunity  for  grace-empowered  love  is  over,   and  that  each  is  just  a  rat  in  the  middle  of  the  floor,  and  that  the  Divine  Cat  has  come.  People  will  try  to  scurry  to  dark  corners  to  escape,  but  nothing  --  nothing  --  will  save  them  from  the  Divine  Cat.  

So,  go  ahead:  Contact  me.  Post  below.  Make  fun  of  me  in  public.  Criticize  me.  Attack  me  as  crazy.

But  read  the  following,  first.

THE  LEAFING  OF  THE  FIG  TREE

Matthew  24:32  et  seq.   is  the  key  verse  in  Jesus'  famous  Eschatological  Homily,  or  "end  of  the  world  homily,"   to  His  disciples ...

"Learn  a  lesson  from  the  fig  tree.  When  its  branch  becomes  tender  and  sprouts  leaves,  you  know  that  Summer  is  near.  In  the  same  way,  when  you  see  all  of  these  things,   know  that  He  is  near,  even  at  the  door."   Matthew  24:32-33.

In  the  Bible,   the  fig  tree  is  the  type,  or  symbol,  for  the  "Old  Testament  Church,"  the  Kingdom  of  Jews.  That  is  why  Jeremiah  24:1-5  symbolizes  the  Jews  with  figs.    That  is  why   Zaccheus,  the  Jewish  tax  collector,  is  portrayed  as  sitting  in  a  "sycamore"  or  fig  tree  when  Christ  first  meets  him  --  a  good  man,  the  text's  implication  is  that  Zacchaeus  is  "fruit  of  the  fig  tree,"  Judaism.  See  Luke  19:1  et  seq.  When  Christ  "curses  the  fig  tree,"  Mark  11:12  et  seq.,  He  is  foreshadowing  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  the  Romans.

The  branch  of  the  fig  tree  coming  back  into  leaf  would  therefore  by  the  re-establishment  of  Israel  by  the  U.N.  in  1948.    The  fundamentalists  are  right  about  this  one.

Christ  says  that  when  you  see  this,  you  should  "know  that  Summer  is  near."

Summer  was  harvest  time  in  Israel.

So,  "Tumbler  #1"  has  fallen  into  place.

THE  ABOMINABLE  DESTRUCTIVE  THING  ON  HOLY  GROUND

I  believe  that  the  1970  translation  of  the  New  American  Bible  for  Catholics  translated  the  Greek  of  Matthew  24:15  et  seq.  better  than  any  other ...

"When  you  see  the  abominable  and  destructive  thing  which  the  prophet  Daniel  foretold  standing  on  holy  ground  --  let  the  reader  take  note! --  those  in  Judea  must  flee  to  the  mountains."  Matthew  24:15-16.

Reference  to  Daniel  is  uninformative.

What  qualifies  as  an  "abominable  destructive  thing"?   How  about  this ? ...

In  fact,   no  thing  in  the  history  of  man  better  qualifies  as  an  "abominable  destructive  thing."

But  where  in  heaven's  Holy  Name  do  we  find  thermonuclear  weapons  "on  holy  ground"?

Christ's  own  words  give  us  a  hint ...

"When  you  see  the  abominable  and  destructive  thing  which  the  prophet  Daniel  foretold  standing  on  holy  ground  --  let  the  reader  take  note! --  those  in  Judea  must  flee  to  the  mountains."

Lo  and  behold,  Israel's  nuclear  weapons  sit  atop  Medium  Range  Ballistic  Missiles  in  deep  silos   in  the  foothills  of  Judea.

Bingo.

The  prophecy  is  fulfilled.

So,  "Tumbler  #2"  has  fallen  into  place.

WOE  TO  PREGNANT  WOMEN  AND  NURSING  MOTHERS

The  1970  New  American  Bible  translation  of  Matthew  wildly  mistranslated  Matthew  24:19,  probably  because  the  New  Testament  Committee  was  deeply  puzzled  by  the  Greek.  The  contemporary  version  of  the  NAB  is  literal ...

"Woe  to  pregnant  women  and  nursing  mothers  in  those  days."  Matthew  24:19.

The  "problem"  with  the  literal  translation  is  that  the  Greek  term  underlying  "woe,"  ouai,   without  exception  in  the  New  Testament,  is  a  threat !  It  is  not  a  word  expressing  pity !  Functionally,  the  text  has  Christ  nastily  declaring,  "Watch  out !  I'm  gonna  get  you,  pregnant  and  nursing  mothers !"  If  you  don't  believe  it,  get  a  Bible  Concordance,  and  concordize  "woe"  in  the  New  Testament.  It's  a  threat.

Now,  many  Church  administrators  will  be  alarmed  at  this  extremely  undiplomatic  reverse  reading  of  the  normal  interp  for  Matthew  24:19.  Why  in  Heaven's  Holy  Name  would  loving  Jesus  threaten  pregnant  women  and  nursing  mothers ?  Has  He  flipped ?

I  believe  that  Jesus'  words  do  not  refer  to  "pregnant  women"  and  "nursing  mothers."    I  believe  that  the  Greek  carries  within  itself  a  colloquial  reference   to  women  who  would  be  pregnant  or  who  would  be  nursing,  but  for  the  fact  that  they  got  an  abortion !

When  Christ  makes  His  threat  to  the  aborting  women  of  "those  days,"    He  is  telling  those  listening  to  His  Eschatological  Homily,  "Keep  your  eye  out  for  the  aborting  ones  I  am  threatening  here.  They  are  another  sign  of  the  impending  nature  of  the  End.

In  other  words,  the  Pro-Choice  Movement  that  has  killed  tens  of  millions  of  helpless  humans  since  Roe  v.  Wade   is  itself   a  sign  of  the  End  of  Time !

We're  here.

So,  "Tumbler  #3"  has  fallen  into  place.

AS  IT  WAS  ... ON  THE  DAY  LOT  LEFT  SODOM ... SO  IT  WILL  BE  ON  THE  DAY  THE  SON  OF  MAN  IS  REVEALED

Luke  17:28  et  seq.  features  the  Eschatological  Homily  Sodom  warning.  What  is  up  above  in  the  subtitle  is  sufficiently  reflective  of  the  content.    I  know,  I  know,  there  is  that  claim  by  some  of  the  more  liberal  commentators  that   Sodom   was  destroyed  because  of  a  lack  of  hospitality  to  Lot  and  his  family  (when  the  men  of  Sodom  surrounded  the  house  where  Lot  was  and  demanded  custody  of  the  angels  to  have  sex  with  them).  However,   that  intrinsically  absurd  claim  is  well-contradicted  by  Abraham's  conversation  with  God   establishing  that  if  there  were  as  few  as  10  good  people  in  Sodom,  God  would  not  destroy  it,  and  by  Luke's  careful  specification  that  every  single  male  in  Sodom  was  gathered  outside  of  lot's  house  demanding  gay  sex  with  the  angels.   

Face  it:  It  was  about  mass  social  approval  of  gay  sex.

Now,  compare  Christ's  words  to  what  is  happening  as  we  speak ...

After  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States,  a  little  more  than  a  decade  ago,  constitutionally  disconnected   our  laws  from  the  4,000  year  old  Judeo-Christian   rules  against  sodomy,  it   "found"  within  a  Constitutional  Amendment  that  can  not  possibly  have  anything  to  do  with  forcing  states  to  marry  men  to  men  and  women  to  women   (otherwise,  no  one  would  have  voted  for  it  in  1867  and  1868)  the  power  to  do  precisely  that,  thus  disconnecting  the  Constitution  itself  from  an  historical  understanding  of  the  words  and  so   destroying  its  essential  meaning,  forcing  states  to  marry  men  to  men  and  women  to  women,    and  generating  the  philosophical  basis  by  which  gays  are  now  empowered  to  strip  devout  Christians  of   their  jobs,  their  businesses,  their  assets  and  their  homes,  while  cold  liberals  on-line  in  Facebook  dress  up  in  rainbows  and  cheer  them  on,  just  because  a  devout  Christian  or  Jew  or  black  who  loves  God  and  Scriptute  will  not  commit  the  sin  of  helping  them  marry.

Astonishingly,   with  crystal  clarity,  my  brothers  and  sisters  in  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  have  themselves  fulfilled  what  one  would  have  thought  to  be  the  least  likely  of  Jesus'  Eschatological  Homily  prophecies!

So,  "Tumbler  #4"  has  fallen  into  place.

Hey  !!!  Keep  those  rainbows  on,  you  rainbow  readers !  Be  proud  of  them !    It  will  help  the  Divine  Cat  to  know  exactly  what  kind  of  rat  you  are when  He  suddenly  appears  at  the  door !

NATIONS  PERPLEXED  BY  THE  ROARING  OF  THE  SEA  AND  THE  WAVES

Everyone  reading  this  with  half  a  brain  knows  where  I  am  going  with  Luke  21:25 ...

"On  Earth,  nations  will  be in  dismay,  perplexed  by  the  roaring  of  the  sea  and  the  waves.  Luke  21:25.

Global  warming.

The  global  atmospheric  inventory  of  greenhouse  gases  is  shooting  up,  up,  up,  up,  up.     

In  the  meantime,  fools  are  "fiddling  while  Rome  burns,"   forcing  states  to  marry  gays,  and  helping  gays  begin  the  process  of  wiping-out  Christianity  and  Judaism,  while  the  oceans  get

deeper  and

deeper  and

deeper,

faster  and

faster  and

faster.

In  10  to  20  years,  there  will  be  calls  to  evacuate  Miami,  southern  Delaware  and  Manhattan.

Hate-filled,  Nazi-like  rainbowers  can  distract  themselves  from  the  impending  225  foot  increase  in  ocean  depth   by  helping  gays  to  persecute  Christians  and  pressing  "Like"  as  they  do  so  --  as  they  sink.

So,  "Tumbler  #5"  has  fallen  into  place.

Now,  we  must  flip  over  to  one  of  Paul's  Epistles,  in  2  Thessalonians  2.  Those  who  study  Bible  know  where  I  am  going ...

THE  GREAT  FALLING  AWAY

"We  ask  you,  brothers,  with  regard  to  the  coming  of  our  lord  Jesus  Christ  and  our  assembling  with  him,    not  ...  to  be  alarmed  either  by  a  'spirit'  or  by  an  oral  statement,  or  by  a  letter  allegedly  from  us  to  the  effect  that  the  Day  of  the  Lord  is  at  hand.  ...  For  unless  the  apostasy  comes  first  [then  the  end  is  not  here]."  2  Thessalonian  2:1-3.

Translators  and  commentators  of  Paul,  upon  seeing  Paul's  words,  here,    figured  that  since  Paul  was  surrounded  by  "apostasies"  of  all  sort  at  the  time,    then  he  could  only  be  referring  to  a  giant,  frightening  falling-away   from  Judeo-Christianity.  so,  they  very  loosely  translated  Paul's  word  apostasia  to  read  "the  Great  Falling  Away."  Very  appropriate.

And  I  believe  that  it  is  happening  as  we  speak.

The  vast,  vast  majority  of  God's  people   are  rebelling  against  Him  in  the  flesh  day-in  and  day-out,  by  ignoring  really  nasty  contraceptive-condemning  provisions  in  the  Bible.  (Three  of  them  say  that  users  are  Hell-bound.)    And  now  they  are  dressing  themselves  up  in  the  rainbow  flag  to  celebrate  the  Supreme  Court's  constitutionally-unauthorized  destruction  of  state  authority  over  marriage  and  the  accelerating  attack  on  Judeo-Christianity.  There's  no  way  they're  going  to  give  up  their  perspective.    They  aren't  really  Judeo-Christian's  anymore.  They  have  switched  sides.

And  then  gay  priests  and  enabling  bishops and  popes  have  completely  demolished   the  ability  of  the  Church   to  advance  in  most  places,    with  the  sex  abuse  cases.

And  the  churches  are  emptying  faster  and  faster,  consolidating,  re-consolidating,  re-re-re-re-re-re-consolidating,  so  that  soon  a  Catholic  will  have  to  travel  200  miles  to  attend  Sunday  Mass  or  receive  absolution !

The  end  of  the  Church  is  in  sight.

So,  friends,  we  are  here.   It's  apostasia  time.

"Tumbler  #6"  --  the  evil  tumbler  --    has  fallen  into  place.

In  Matthew  24:33,  Jesus  says,  "When  you  see  all  of  these  things,  know  that  He  is  near,  even  at  the  door."

I  see  all  of  those  things.

EVOLUTIONIST OR BIBLE LITERALIST -- EVERY PERSON IN THE WORLD REALLY IS YOUR COUSIN

When  I  was  maybe  13  years  of  age,  I  was  watching  a  1930s  Charlie  Chan  movie  on  black-and-white  TV  when  the  movie  made  reference  to  the  pre-communist  Chinese  penchant  for  tracing  family  lines  by  having  Charlie  Chan  introduce  someone  as  his  "31st  cousin."  

The  concept  of  "distant-cousin-ness"  stuck  with  me.   When  I  was  in  church  or  at  a  stadium  watching  a  football  game  or  other  place  with  a  large  audience,    I  used  to  think  how  cool  it  would  be  if  the  locale  were  plunged  into  darkness, and  God  were  to  first  light-up  all  of  my  first  cousins;  then  all  second  cousins;   then  all  third  cousins;   then  all  fourth  cousins;    and  so  on.

Then  it  dawned  on  me  that   every  living  soul  would  eventually  light  up,    because  literally  everybody   is  one's  cousin.

As  I  came  to  understand  that  there  were  millions  of  people  out  there  who  did  not  ascribe  to  an  evolutionist  understanding  of  world  history  as  we  were  raised  to  think  in  our  family,  who  instead  were  committed  to  a  literalist  comprehension  of  the  time  line  in  Genesis  2  et  seq., it  dawned  on  me   that  that,  irony  of  ironies,   entailed  an  even  closer  relationship   between  people  than  the  evolutionist  perspective.

Why  "irony  of  ironies"?    Well,  though  no  one  has  confirmed  such  to  me  by  admission  or  by  way  of  some  kind  of  unimpeachable  zillion  dollar  federal  study,    one  gets  that  feeling   from  the  whiteness  of  some  white  churches   that  the  distinctness  of  the  races  is  important  to  a  lot  of  Christian  fundamentalists.  As  one  Christian  fundamentalist  lady  said  to  me  years  ago  when  I  worked  at  Jordan  Kelsall's  Unity-Frankford  Grocery  Store  on  Penn  Street  at  Sanger  Street  in  Frankford,    "Look  at  their  ears!    Look  at  their  noses!   Look  at  their  lips!    Those  blacks  are  monkeys!"  I  gently  responded,  "Aren't  our  [meaning  'whites' ']  lips  actually  closer  to  those  of  a  monkey?   Blacks  are  more  evolved!"   [I  was  just  a  kid  at  the  time,  so  I  didn't  put  up  a  bigger  fight.]  She  gave  me  a  dirty  look  and  stomped  out  of  the  store.

I  thought  it  was  so  interesting,  a  year-or-so  ago,  when  my  Ancestry-com  DNA  sample  verified  that  one  or  more  of  my  family's  slave  owning  ancestors  on  my  mother's  side  had  begotten  offspring  by   one  or  more  African  Americans,  almost  certainly  as  part  of  the  widely-accepted  culture,  in  the  pre-emancipation  South,  of  concubinage  of  female  slaves.  The  implication  of  the  results  obtained,  so  far,  is  that  as  a  consequence  several  hundred  to  several  thousand  blacks  in  the  United  States  are  distant  cousins  of  my  white  family.   

I  would  have  loved  to  have  had  DNA  verification   of  that  silly  fundamentalist  woman's  relationship  to  blacks  --  and  I  would  have  loved  to  have  been  there  when  the  evidence  was  shown  to  her.  I  would  have  said,  "Hey!  Guess  who's  comin'  to  dinner!"

For  me,  the  importance  of  the  DNA  connection  was  that  it  drove  home  how  much  we  are  all  members  of  the  Family  of  Man  --  from  the  blondest  blue-eyed  SS  stormtrooper    to  the  blackest,  most effeminate  gay  Australian  aborigine.  We  are  all  cousins.

That  would  be  a  very  cool  photo:   A  grim-looking  fully-uniformed  blonde-haired  blue-eyed  Nazi  stormtrooper   holding  hands  with  a  short,  very  fat  aborigine  woman  with  a  really  big  Afro.  The  caption  would  read,  "Not  such  distant  cousins."

In  law  school,  I  was  immensely  delighted  to  see  that  one  of  my  textbooks  on  Wills  and  Estates  contained  The  Lawyer's  Table  on  Consanguinity,  the  chart  showing  things  like  what  a  "third  cousin,  once  removed"  is ...

Suddenly,  I  understood  the  system  assigning  a  descriptive  title  to  each  of  my  distant  cousins  --  every  human  being !   [Perhaps  the  most  distant  cousin  would  be  something  like  my  "14,354th  cousin,  117  times  removed."]

The  "bottom  line,"  here?  Literally,   ever  thermonuclear  MIRV  atop  every   ICBM  awaiting  launch  in  every  silo  in  the  world  is  aimed  at  cousins,  only!  

And  when  Muslim  fundamentalists  in  Afghanistan  did  this  to  Bibi  Aisha ...

... they  literally  did  it  to  their  screaming  cousin.

When  Nazis  rammed  as  many  screaming  Jews  as  possible  into  fake  showers  to  gas  them  all  with  Zyklon  B ...

... they  were  ramming  their  cousins  into  those  showers.

Be  nice  to  your  cousins  --  the  Muslims,  the  Jews,  the  blacks,  the  gays,  the  Asians,  the  Latinos,   and  so  on.      All  of  them !

YES, COURT REALLY IS LIKE THIS ...

LAWYER:  Is  your  appearance  here  this  morning  pursuant  to  a  subpoena  which  was  served  on  you?

WITNESS:  No.  I  dress  like  this  every  day.



LAWYER:  As  county  coroner,  how  many  autopsies  have  you  performed  on  dead  people?

WITNESS:  All  of  them.



In  an  action  for  divorce  for  adultery,   the  "corespondent"  (1  "r")   is  the  legal  term  for  "the  other  woman"  [or  man]  forced  to  testify ...

LAWYER:  Did  you  make  love  with  him  in  New  York?

CORESPONDENT:  I  refuse  to  answer  that  question.

LAWYER:  Did  you  make  love  with  him  in  Chicago?

CORESPONDENT:  I  refuse  to  answer  that  question.

LAWYER:  Did  you  make  love  with  him  in  Miami?

CORESPONDENT:  No.



LAWYER:  Were  you  at  home  that  day?

WITNESS:  [Shakes  head.]

LAWYER:  No,  ma'am!    All  of  your  answers  must  be  oral!

WITNESS:  Oral.

LAWYER:  Yes,  that  is  correct.   So,  tell  the  Court  if  you  were  at  home  that  day.

WITNESS:  Oral.



WITNESS:  Oh,  it  was  a  terrible  barroom  brawl,  with   punching,  yelling,    wrestling,  shooting!  It  was  a  mess!

LAWYER:  And  you  were  shot  in  the  middle  of  the  fracas?

WITNESS:  No,  no,  no.  My  fracas  is  fine.  The  bullet  went-in  midway  between  my  fracas  and  my  navel.



LAWYER:  Do  you  happen  to  know  your  IQ,  sir?

WITNESS:   I  suspect  it's  pretty  good.    I've  never  needed  glasses.



LAWYER:   When  the  tree  surgeon sawed  the  branch  off  the  tree,  and  it  fell  and  hit  you  in  the  head,    how  did  it  affect  you?

WITNESS:   Well,  it  really  affected  my  memory.  I  keep  forgetting  things.

LAWYER:  Would  you  please  list  for  the  Court  some  of  the  things  which  you  have  forgotten?



LAWYER:  So,  ma'am,  you  happen  to  know  the  exact  date  of  conception  of  the  child.

WITNESS:  Yes.  On  September  8  of  last  year.

LAWYER:  And  what  were  you  doing  at  the  time?



LAWYER:  And  how  was  your  first  marriage  terminated,  ma'am?

WITNESS:  By  death.

LAWYER:  And  by  whose  death  was  it  terminated?



Full-fledged  divorce  cases  are  rare.    Because  the  results  are  normally  the  same  despite  bad  behavior  by  one  or  both  spouses,  usually  the  divorce  itself  is  awarded   with  only  one  party  appearing  in  court,    to  put  the  facts  underlying  the  party's  entitlement  to  a  divorce  on  the  record;  and  then  there  is  a  separate  trial   on  equitable  distribution  --  on  the  money.  However,  occasionally,    where  the  aggrieved  party  feels  that  the  "bad"  spouse's  bad  behavior  will  impact  how  equitable  distribution  is  awarded,   there  is  a  trial  on  the  "juicy"  part  of  break-up,  to  drag  the  other  spouse  "through  the  mud" ...

LAWYER  FOR  THE  HUSBAND  [anxious  to  make  his  client  look  decent]:   And  when  did  this  feeling  you   had,  that  there  was  something  wrong  with  your  marriage,  start  growing  on  you?

WIFE:  I  was  in  bed  with  my  husband.   I  was  under  the  sheets  on  my  side  of  the  bed,  turned  away  from  him.    When  my  husband  awakened,  he  started  lovingly  running  his  hand  over  my  body  through  the  sheets,  and  he  whispered,  "Katherine,  you're  so  beautiful!"  That  was  very  disturbing.

LAWYER  FOR  THE  HUSBAND:   What???  You  found  that  'disturbing'???!!!

WIFE:  My  name  is  Susan.



LAWYER:   You  say  that  there  was  a  doorway  in  the  kitchen  that  led  to  stairs?

WITNESS:  Yes.

LAWYER:  And  where  did  the  stairs  lead  to?

WITNESS:  They  went  down  to  the  basement.

LAWYER:  Did  the  stairs  also  go  up?

COULD WE FIT THE ENTIRE POPULATION OF THE WORLD INTO THE STATE OF DELAWARE?

For  those  of  you  laying  awake  in  bed  at  night  worrying  that  guys  with  guns  might  break  into  your  home  to  herd  literally  everyone  into  the  State  of  Delaware,  and  then  actually  join  them  there,  this  is  an  extremely  important  question!   So,  let's  deal  with  it.

First,  how  many  people  are  there?

Well,  those  babies  keep  poppin'  out.   The  world  population  keeps  going  up,  up,  up ...

http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/


I'll  round  the  number  off  upwards  to  7.33  billion,  to  keep  this  article  relevant  for  a  few  weeks.   That's   seven  billion  330  million   (7,330,000,000)  people.

Next,    how  big  is  the  State  of  Delaware?

That  turns  out  to  be  an  extremely  difficult  question  to  answer.

Google  itself  will  tell  you  that  Delaware  is  2,489  square  miles  in  size.  Wikipedia's  estimate  of  the  total  area  is  about  one-quarter  of  a  square  mile  less.

But,  that  number  is  shrinking  every  year.    Why?  Global  warming  is  now  increasing  ocean  depth  about  1/32  of  an  inch  per  year,  at  our  latitude.    That  translates  out  to  a  surprising  loss  of  land   each  year,  for  the  State  of  Delaware.

Delaware  has  a  "mean  elevation"  (an  "average  elevation"  above  sea  level)  of  60  feet.  Since  the  entire  east  coast  of  Delaware  is  on  tidal  water  --  the  Atlantic  Ocean  and  Delaware  Bay  --  we  can  assume  with  relative  statistical  accuracy  that  Delaware  slopes  upward  from  the  east  coast   westward  to  the  western  boundary,    which  is  120  feet  above  sea  level   (since  60  feet  is  an  average,  right?).  Since  the  state  is  96  miles  long,  and  since  2489  square  miles  / 96  miles  long  =  25.93  miles  wide,  we'll  use  that  as  the  base  of  our  average  slope  running  from  Delaware's  coast  inland  to  the  Western  Boundary.   25.93  miles  =  136,910  feet.   If  we  do  a  rise-over-the-run  slope  calculation  --  remember  Algebra,  which  your  teacher  said  would  save  your  life  someday?  --  we  get  1 / 1,141.   So,  for  every  1/32d   of  an  inch  UP  the  ocean  depth  increases  each  year,    the  water  comes  IN  1,141  1/32d's   of  an  inch,  or  rough  44  inches.   Let's  say  the  length  of  the  coast  is  exactly  equal  to  the  State's  length.  (Coves  and  estuaries  make  the  coast  effectively  much,  much  longer,    but  I'd  blow  a  cork  if  I  tried  to  calculate  the  "true"  coastline  of  Delaware,  taking  those  things  into  account.)   So,   let's  say  we  have  a  rectangle   96  miles  long  and  44  inches  wide.  That's  how  much  land  Delaware  loses  each  year  to  global  warming   --   at  least!  96  miles  x  5280  feet / mile  x  12  inches  =  6,082,560  inches  in  length.  If  we  multiply  that  by  44  inches  of  rectangular  width,  we  get  267,632,640  square  inches  of  land  lost  every  year  to  global  warming.   That  comes  out  to  1,858,560  square  feet.  If  we  divide  that  by  27,878,400  square  feet  per  square  mile,  we  discover  that  Delaware  is  losing  about  .0666666666666666666666666  square  miles  per  year  to  global  warming.     Hey,  man,  that's  like,   uh,  a  really  eschatological   number,  man!  It  scares  me!

Back  to  "reality" ...

So,  how  accurate  that  number  describing  Delaware's  total  area  is  depends  on  how  old  it  is.  It's  going  down  about  7%  of  a  square  mile  each  year.  (Actually,  way  more,  because  of  the  true-length-of-coastline  business,  above.)

Presumably,    none  of  our  guests  to  Delaware  --  all  of  mankind,  remember   --  wants  to  stand  in  a  lake  (although  to  tell  the  truth  they  might  be  the  lucky  ones  in  our  hypothetical).  So,  we  have  to  back  Delaware's  540.18  square  miles  of  water  out  of  the  equation.     That  leaves  1,948.82  square  miles  of  standing  space  in  Delaware.

Now,  literally  speaking,  that  changes  more-or-less  constantly  --  with  the  tide!  As  the  tide  comes  IN,  the  number  of  square  miles  SHRINKS!     As  the  tide  goes  OUT,  the  number  of  square  miles  GROWS,  right?   Also,    local  and  not-so-local  storm  surges  --  special  tides  generated  by  low  pressure  weather  systems  which  generate   sometimes  pretty  visible  mountains  of  water  in  the  oceans,  bays   and  estuaries  --  vastly  affect  tides,  and  therefore  the  number  of  square  miles  of  Delaware  unencumbered  by  the  seas.

Since  knowing  what's  happening  in  the  tide  department   is  just  too  complex  to  guess  at,    we'll  just  assume   that   guests  standing  on  Delaware's  coasts  will  be  standing  midway  down  the  beaches  between  the  high  point  and  low  points  of  the  tides,  and  that  they  don 't  mind  getting  their  footsies  wet  when  the  tide  comes  in,  and  that  that  achieves  1,948.82  square  miles  of  area.

There's  another  calculation  problem   --  ups  and  downs  in  the  terrain.

It  is  said  that  if  one  got  an  enormous  clothes  iron  and  used  it  to  flatten-out  mountainous  Colorado,  it  would  have  more  surface  area  than  any  other  state  of  the  Union.

Perhaps  so.

Well,  Delaware  would  also  get  slightly  larger,  if  ironed-out.    In  other  words,   1,948.82  square  miles  is  actually  a  "projection"  --  the  area  you  would  see  from  space,  looking  down,  which  doesn't  account  for  additional  area  from  Delaware's  relatively  few  hills.

We'll  ignore  that  factor,  also,  and  assume  that  1,948.82  square  miles  is  perfectly  flat.

There's  one  last  problem  to  consider.

If  you  look  on  any  good  map  of  the  Delaware  Bay,    you  will  see  that  the  boundary  of  all  of  Newcastle  County,  Delaware  runs  clear  across  the  Delaware  River  over  to  the  coast  of  New  Jersey.  I  used  to  think   that  there  were  only  two  points  where  the  Army  Corps  of  Engineers  dumped  dredge  spoil  dredged  off  the  bottom  of  the  Delaware  to  make  way  for  larger  ships,  onto  the  coast  of  new  Jersey,  so  that,  because  they  were  on  the  Delaware  side  of  the  border,  they  were  actually  additions  to  the  territory  of  Delaware,  though  the  new  acreage  is  attached  to  New  Jersey,  not  Delaware.  In  fact,  it  turns  out  that  Google  Maps  portrays  almost  the  entire  coast  of  New  Jersey  along  the  Delaware  River  up  to  the  latitude  of  northernmost  Delaware,  where  the  famous  Twelve  Mile  Circle  crosses  the  Delaware  River  into  New  Jersey,   as  belonging  to  Delaware,  apparently  due  to  alluvial  accretions  over  the  centuries,  implicitly  pre-empting  the  Rule  of  Alluvial  Accretions  (which  says  that  alluvial  accretions  increase  the  riparian  lands  of  the  abutting  owner).  Though,  technically,  doing  this  is  probably  correct,  since  Interstate  Compacts (one  of  which  created  the  Delaware/New  Jersey  border)   are  generally  viewed  as  being  above  state  law  (which  would  include  the  common  law  Rule  of  Alluvial  Accretions)  but  inferior  to  federal  law,  God  knows  what  the   United  States  Supreme  Court  would  say,  since  we  all  know  that  NOTHING  binds  the  United  States  Supreme  Court,  right?  (In  reality,  they're  autocratic  kings,  right?)

In  any  event,  that's  another   variable  we  will  ignore,  because  it's  just  too  complex.  Delaware  refuses  to  cross  the  river  and  police  it,  anyway  (with  the  consequence,   according  to  one  urban  legend,  that  for  years  the  Mafia  buried  their  victims  in  Finn's  Point,  the  largest  tract  of  Delaware  land  on  the  Jersey  side  of  the  Delaware,  so  that  neither  state  would  bother  looking  there  for  grizzly  evidence.)  (And  here's  a  good  argument,  this  time  for  Pennsville  Township  Municipal  Court:  Suppose   a  really  old  geezer  who  has  trouble  holding  his  water  goes  for  a  walk  on  the  banks  of  the  Delaware  in  Pennsville  Township  between  Finns  Point  and  the  Delaware  Memorial  Bridge   --  the  famous  "Twin  Bridges."  He  walks  out  onto  the  spit  of  land   at  the  end  of  Ferry  Road,    drops  his  pants,   and  pees  in  broad  daylight,  in  view  of  all  of  the  neighbors.   Technically,  he  perpetrated  that  heinous  act  100%  in  the  State  of  Delaware  [unless  he  aimed  east,  not  west].  Is  he  prosecutable  in  Pennsville  Township  Municipal  Court?  Do  Pennsville  Township  Police  have  to  extradite  him  to  New  Jersey  to  process  him  in  to  the  system?)

At  any  rate,   back  to  "reality"  and  the  main  problem,  again:    Fitting  the  entire  world's  population  in  Delaware:  Can  it  be  done?

From  here  on  end,  it's  a  simple  fraction:   7,330,000,000 people / 1,948.82 square  miles  =  roughly  3,761,250  people  per  square  mile.  Since  each  square  mile  has  27,878,400  square  feet,    each  person  would  have  27,878,400 / 3,761,250  square  feet,  or  7.41  square  feet,  to  dwell  in.

That  seems  doable  --  so  long  as  nobody  lays  down,    and  that  old  geezer  from  Pennsville  Township  doesn't  cause  problems.