Restoring america

Marxism is the perrect weapon for destroying everything tht made America great, for tearing down its Christian base and its institutional structures, its economic foundations and all of it.  It couldn't have been better deasigned for that purpose.

And yet Mar xism is thritiving in the  Democratic Party and if the current candidates for that party win it will be enacted against our fragile nation with a furty that will leave nothing standing.   this is what you are voting for you liberals, wehter you know it or not, in your irrational hatred of Donald Trump wyou are bringing down your own culture \.

I do like that Jordan peterson and Ayaan Hirsi Ali seem to be getting this much about the problem we are faing though I don't think they've come up with  much of  solution to it.  I just jlike that she particularly aims at Restoration even in th title of her Substack site.  Glad there are people  thinkig long these lines adn of course they aren't the only ones, I hear from people on the radio every day who are strenouuously working to save the nation.   It's frustrating though because the liberals aren't listening and if they\\\\\\\\\\ we need them to see that they are believing lies so that they can join in the cause.  How ever many of them there are who would be shocked at the lies if they saw them and I know there are many of them though scertaily not the whole population of them.  enogh at least to make a big difference I wuld hope.  But getting the word to them is just about impossiblbele.  In my experience any attempt to start a conversation about the important issues is just shut down by them immediately, don't want to talk about it, too incendiary or something.   Well NOT talking bout it is incendiary in a worse way I'm afraid, burning down the society we live in.

 Marxism has to bgo and Christianity has to be recovered and the whole conceptual framework of the Consitutuioal founding of the nation, preerably with the Christian mentality of all the colonies introduced into it that were fraudulaently left out of it.  that in fact is probably the achilles heel that is allowing Marxism to bring us down, tht even our founders set isus off on the wrong track despite the wonderfully powerful goverment they crafter for us at the same time.

I can bleat all I want out here in my little corner of cyber space and nobody will hear though.   Are we going down for good?  I mean of course for bad, for evil.  I don't know how to stop it.  Does anybody?

Prayer done right, to the Christian God and njot to any pagan gosds, is really our best hope.

================================

If you would like to comment on anything in my blog, whether to pat me on the head or thrash me to death you can write me at this new email which is being managed by a family member:  faithswindow@mail.com.

For an explanatory onote about this you can sear\\\\\put Contact Possibility in the search box at rhe upper left of the page.

Thanks

A Leftover Bit of Geological Evidence Against the Theory of Evolutio

 Going back to a post to include somjething I left out isn't easy when it's been some time seince the post ws writen so I'm going to put here as a separate post just one small point I left out of the discussion of gthe geological evidences against evolution.

It's all about observing the physical facts about the strata or layers of sedimentary rocks found all over the world, in which the fossils are buried that are used to prove the idea of a fossil record of evolution from simple to complex.    The strata themselve sare physical structures you can see and think about in terms of their phyhsical properties, but oddly enough that isn't much done that I can see by those who use them to prove an Old Earth and evolution through the fossil record.

I've made the point that they lie flat and straight across thousands of scquare miles which alone makes them useless as a representative of time periods since nothing could live on such a landscapte>  first it has to be recorniizesd as a landscape, that that is what is implied by their use as markers for time periods of millions of years.  theyh are rocks, they are of one sediment, they can't represent anything that was ever the surface of this earth.

Second I've made the point that they lie undisturbed in thier original horizontal form from bottom to top, just a placid stack of sedimentary rocks one on top of another.  What this shows is that they can't be time periods on the usrface of the earth becaucause this planet is known to be very active with weathering and earthquakes and fovolcanoes and so on and so forther.  Ther is no sigh of any such activity within the strata themselves aywhere.  All that activity doews up acting UPON the strata whether in small or large chunks, as those forces batter and break and tilt and twist them .  All as a unit, however large the broken unit may be.  the Greand Canyon experienced none of that, only the pushing up of the land underneath which cut the canyon itself as I uinterpret it, but the upheaval wasn't enough of a jolt to break up the strata for at least the depth of a mile.  

Now I want to point out just one liettle proof that the earth is not old by looking at the strata:  that is that these layered walls wherever you find them, erode and conllect the products of the erosion at their bbase.  You see this in the grand Canyon where the walls are all skirted at the bottom by such debris.  And in Monument Valley where the huge buttes called Monuments also are surrounded at their bases by such skirts of debris.  These skirts as I'm calling them, although I know there is a scientific terms for them that I can't remember right now, should be a measure ot he time that has elapsed since the monument began to exist.  They've been eroding since all the other layers once part of were washed away and they were left standing alone on top of one of those layers that stayed intact.  For some reason hunks of the layers were left standing as those monyuments.  The same happened in South America on an even grander scale in the "tepui: gigantic buttes of a mile in thickness and fairly broad too, five of them in Venezuela as I recall, all made of sandstone in that case.  They o must have such skirts collected around them as they've been eroding since they were carved out of the totality of the staraa and left standing separately there.

You'd think, and this is my oint, that if the Earth were really millions of years old, or billions, that theyse strata which in conventiaonal time analysises go back hundreds of millios of years, might ave eroded away down to nothing but dust, not merely accumulated these fairly substantial but nevertheless pretty paltry piles of debris around their bse.   Millions of years for such a tiny bit of accumulated erosion?  I think they've veven made some measurements of the rate at which the erosion occurs but I don't know the numbers, it just seems pretty obvious that hundreds of millions of years of erosion would have made a much larger pile and in  fact would have completely obliterated the structures from which it is falling.  

A few thousand years perhaps?