Global Warm? more like warm-mongering

despite reports that japan hotter than past, that is only partial picture. it is just an opportunity for "global warm-mongering" to make a sensation about a partial picture. firstly we must see the facts of night. people make a fuss about global warming and "greenhouse" while ignoring the fact that each and every night the heat LEAVES each and every night, is cooler so atmosphere not "green house walls" which keep in heat. also cumulatively i checked last year a two week period compared to this year. even one city "stable" challenges the claim of "trend warming"  we cannot accept the claim of warming. in fact the TREND is "not warmer". in 2017 the random sample this month most days 8/14 "same as average" that is the trend "same not warmer" so no tricky "climate change"; SAME as average is not a change.
2 not warmer as "emotionally concerned scientists" claim "warming" in fact 5 days were "less warm" than average. total 5+8=13 of 14 "same or less warm" TREND is "not warming." also compare this year in picture "despite" humans adding "another years worth" of pollution , some claim that should "keep the heat in" the TREND is 11 of 14 days were "less warm" than average. in farn degrees more precise 12 of 14 cooler. this shows cooling since last year 2017 "despite" humans adding another years pollution. both relative to last year and relative to the average "less warm or same" is the "trend" . yes a few days were warm is that the trend? the trend is "not warming" so people who say warming ignore part of the picture night and see photo. they MUST not have authority for action. obviously when new york is cold the antarctic ice melts... is that a sensation? it is only a trick because during summer there! and melting does not mean "warmer than usual" ice melts at 33 degrees it is still very very painfully cold.
if so no surprise that an average last year the average for the sample was 32.3 c same as historical average 32 centigrade while this year after humans added A WHOLE YEAR worth of added pollution the average cooled to 30.8 degrees centigrade and for farn. 12 of 14 same or cooler not warmer

the west

AREA 10.2 msk of land on the western side of Ural mt. range. almost half 4msk is russia [not counting ukraine] if we compare "amazon" continent [with big amazon river emptying into amazon ocean] area 17.8 so europe is too small to be considered "its own" unless truly separate like "south" continent but the land "contin-ues" like the word "contin-ent" so bad to separate from "ural" continent because land contin-ues.
now look at the remaining 6.21 msk see just how bad this smallest so-called-continent is crumbled into around fifty separate governments now compare to canada 10 msk one government we may conclude europe sucks! why do they need to crumble such a small "cookie" into tiny pieces when they SHOULD cooperate. jesus christ cooperate, europe sucks!   s
*consider in the last few decades they have crumbled further from yugoslavia and chekoslovakia into even more smaller crumbs that is terrible why can't people cooperate?   because they are bad.
similarly, chad egypt libya sudan could unite all muslim governments but bad cannot cooperate together like baad europeans and since you asked "yes same sunni".
same jordan and saud both sunni muslim in contrast to israel not muslim country but why cant the muslims cooperate and unite?

summary of gospel of jesus

assume "book matthew" is good, what is in it?
A. birth until reveals plan of die (a-l)
A.a. The HEIR of David's birth 1=chapter one. [not genealogy from ancestor because not ancestor if no dad.], b.  Go to and return from Egypt 2, c. john teaches "will come" 3, d. devil tempted 4.1-11, e. jesus teaching 4.12>7, f. Heals 8>9 , g. sending 12 9.38-10, h. teaching 11-12, i. parable style 13, j. wonders 14, k. free from law of moses 15, l. beware of bad teachings 16.1-12
B. Death and revived (a-k)
B.a. reveals plan of dying and standing revived from dead 16.21-17.9, b. parables 18, c. free from sabath and ten commandments, except ethics 19, d. parable and heal 20, e. entering jerusalem 21, f. parables and guidance 21.28>25, g. oil head 26, h. jesus prayer 26.36,  i. pilate dialog 27, j. romans torture and crucify and stab 27, k. the Christ stands revived  from dead 28.
note: instead  of reading every word, know the contents and the problem: the day described in this book conflicts the day in gospel john so which is true? neither are reliable so do not bother to read every word from a book known to be problematic. instead this summary is enuf and avoids the problem detail.

refuting einstein

one detail of einstien is that light moves in "energy pulses" an experiment of perpendicular slits proves that light is not a photon because it does not pass it is only a wave. refuted.
the wave-amplitude cannot pass the slits.
so how travel through space? not photon... as above energy form differs from matter wave so not like sound waves in physical gas. not like water wave ripples in water but energy wave does not need matter to move because light it is not matter. no problem.

humans have changed very very much

the "values" of our generation are so far away from the method of thinking when the "entent" fought  the "central"s. reminder the "great" war in 1914.
by the ideas of our culture no violence can begin until somebody aims a weapon threateningly.... if so in the "so-called" start of the "great war" when somebody [born in serbia] was about to shoot the austrian royal guy... that is the time to shoot at the threat and since he surprised them... the result by THIS GENERATIONS  values should be "the serbian court will judge its citizen' for the crime and nobody outside should be involved. sadly the austrian empire was ruled by one person. and he was personally connected to his relative so he ordered his army to shoot at the serbs.
July 28: Austria-Hungary declares war on Serbia this was a month after the killing. the story is the austrians demanded concessions from the serbs. by our values this is bad because the court in serbia could judge the killer.
anyway a month later austria declared war on serbia.
at that point russia who was allied with the serbs would be expected to have SENT soldiers into serbia and belgrade "now capital of serbia/yugoslavia" to defend the smaller serbs because they were allied. they would claim by the values of our culture "we are helping the weaker serbs" our ally similar to america involvement in vietnam.
the border of russia could simply keep the border gaurds and send some helpers to serbia. but that is not what happened.
the following week the humans did the wildest stuff:
instead of FIRST "Aug. 12: United Kingdom and France declare war on Austria-Hungary" for shooting at serbs... the humans acted crazy insane...

Aug. 1: Germany and Russia declare war on each other

Aug. 3: Germany and France declare war on each other
Aug. 4: Germany declares war on Belgium, United Kingdom declares war on Germany
as we say these days W-T-F !! at most the russian [as allies with serbs] would attack austria... from north to draw pressure off serbia and threaten the capital and emperor...even that is silly since the point is defend serbs but if the austria is the bad guy... at most attack the bad guy... even that is bad just defend serbs not more but beyond attacking the austrians is so far from reasonable it is absurd worse than absurd=crazy. unless...
this war was TRULY about each one trying to grab more land.
the ACTIONS show that these moves had nothing to do with the serbs.
also when france and germany declare war on each other at that time did france invade germany? that would be bad... except they had weapons and had declared war... invading germany hen would be justifiable... after the declaration of august 1. but as above even the declaration is just so far away from the thinking in our culture. but after the declaration they were now a threat... no. the french idiots did not strike their aggressor.... instead the french fools waited for germany to declare war on belgium... august 4 as above.
for more details:  i like the timeline and some of the well-worded details at the website:
https://www.familytreemagazine.com/premium/ww1-war-declarations-timeline/

absurd borders and strategies in the nazi war

remember the game "risk" with the cool shaped pieces and the world map?
something is dreadfully wrong
africa is divided into 5 regions yet africa is 4 times the area of australia. australia area is 7.7 million square kilometers and this game described australia 2 regions so africa with 4 times the area 30 msk  should be just as hard to attack or defend with 8 areas...
and canada 9.9 msk= 3  and soviet union 22 million sk [now only 17msk] 3*2=6
now we can compare to the game axis and allies also cool pieces  and in version of 1984 the area of 7.7 msk was one region how convenient...
imagine troops from philipines landing in the undefended desert of west australia... clearly a bias to make aust. easier to defend uet is that just?
well if africa was 5 regions because not industrialized then yes africa should be four regions and australia one.
canada 2 and russia 3 muscva river region bordering dneiper river region then ob river region then soviet amur rr because 22/7.7=3.
how absurd that the bias makes the game unjustly difficult for the axis... on all 3 conflicting issues preventing japan to land in australia while the conflicting idea cut africa into more than 4 parts so axis cannot capture... when empty and axis cannot capture the 8 zones of soviets when there is a conflict the same area should be 3 and 4
also the production potential as i pointed out in the pasty africa was not industrialized
the four zones in australia should be each one.
the nile rr including east africa similar to teh division of "risk" worth one. and orange rr worth one mostly jungle. madagascar worth zero  and axis because of french especialy if the  number 1942 was chosen.
and atlas mountain region should be all the axis land area same as ara of asutralia 7.7msk leaving one more region same 7.7 msk in french west africa for axis to call them french is correct but to give production pptential to britian? that is absurd the axis controlled it and as above worth for brits 2 and for nazis 2. not 11 for brits when controlled by axis...
and why china potential to america?? the potential there could not be used to build submarines in whitney mountain region... that is absurd instead the potentiol should be soviets and on soviet turn because resources nearby so compare justly
japan 20 pp 8+2+2+2+3+1+1+1=20 justly but 25 not justly
soviets 8+2+1+1+2=14 but 24 and many ice zones is absurd as above australia area so 3 regions and icy so 8+2+1 plus desert of china 1 plu 2.
and color of soviets and turn of sovietys unless uniforms.
nazis 32 because instead of algeriia 1 and libya 1 the axis controlled the fench stuff so atlas m.r. 1 and iger r.r. 1=32. total axis 20+3252.
brits new zealand not industrialized zero pp!
as facing sun 2+3+1 fior murray r.r. ganges rr and one long area like length of australia tifris rr the same as  footsoldeirs in the east coast can defend the west same in tigris rr defend both nile sea coast and ganges rr border. 2+3+1=6 +2 for nile continent as above four regions 2 axis and 2 brits so 1+1=2. total 8+8+3+1= 20 same as japan.
last washington claiming 1942 i so brazil and mexico NEUTRAL no production apotential and mississippi rr same as main rr ten each [not 12 but same] and whitney mr 8 same as japan and brits temz rr.
 and alaska icy only 1 total 10+8+1=19 while lua is same as solomon zeor and midway same as wake zero.now total 19+14=34 almost matching nazi 32 that would be a balanced game... for comparison the game the way it is is jsut absird. to make the allies win unjustly... what is the message? the axis was not a threat?? and
the allies strategy building ships is not efficient
use the chinese and soviet resources to build tanks in tugris rr assist soviets with tanks and soldiers from india and nile continent so many soldiers and tanks from the same side as soviets the brits  would have ended the war in 1941 conquering berlin and removing the threat to the brits instead they said build ships the goal could have bben berlin. capture the berlin and the factories and no weapons the war would have ended in 1941 with the millions of soldiers from india and nile continent what idiot decide to sen dsoldiers into france... ah unemployment was high... no we understand...

august 6 ATOMIC BOMB

AUGUST 6 the atom bomb. it is difficult to justify the use of a weapon that kills thousands at once how can we know which is the soldier and which is not a dangerous threat? in the story of japan the atom bomb only killed soldiers... the government led by a god-emperor appointed the whole population to be soldiers so the bomb only killed soldiers. AUGUST sixth is the day i focus on japans surrender OBVIOUSLY the moment the bomb exploded on the morning of the sixth, emperor shoa ordered all his soldiers to lay down the weapons... oh... he did not?? well then i understand the need for a second atomic bomb... when by the next day the government leaders had not yet ordered the soldiers to LAY DOWN lay down weapons to enforce stop shooting... yes august seventh. but is that what america did? they gave japan several days during which both sides shot at each other. august tenth still no order to lay down weapons? then additional ones were NEEDED a third and a fourth were needed. imagine... if prime minister tojo instead of quitting in 1944 when he realized japan had no hope would have given the order to the army to lay down weapons... he knows then and showed with actions then the war was lost so only he can be blamed for the deaths on both sides between 1944 and the surrender. i emphasize the options were not atom bomb or invade. consider what was the plan of germany against britian? submarines sinking all supply ships... once americans [that name is good because it refers to the country whose name includes the word america USA not canada] controlled the air and water around japan the method could be the same as "island hopping" not invading each island and similarly not invading japans 4 islands... the issue was the soldiers in the mainland both sides were shooting at each other... stop ignoring the soldiers were shooting at each other the war had been too long and needed to end fast... was the fiorst one needed? stop arguing about the first one once a second one was needed and even a third one was needed as above. america was not choosing between "either invade japan" or atom bomb there was no option to invade japan only to end the war quickly and after 2 the government still hadnot ordered the soldiers to lay down the weapons so without justifying anything a third was needed. the surrrender on paper is only paper which day did the soldiers all lay down weapons i do not know propaganda said even after september 3 japanese did not lay down weapons... but whatever that is the day to mention it is this evening august 6 from 18.00-23.59 had hitler called all citizens soldiers then an atom bomb on berlin would have only killed soldiers.