Wednesday, July 13, 2011
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Dear Mayor Thomas:
Two points: First, banning the sale of beverages with sugar in them restricts the choice of consumers who are not all necessarily interested in drinking something during lunch and breaks that doesn't taste good to them. By banning the sale of these drinks, Boston is sending a message that consumers should be treated like children or cattle to be managed. This is not a good idea if you want Boston to be represented as a city that welcomes visitors to its government facilities. It's really an act of overt hostility to commerce, to city workers, to voters, to private citizens and to tourists.
Second, has anyone considered that there are people with special medical needs, such as insulin-dependent diabetes, who occasionally need a shot of sugar delivered in liquid form to, for instance, recover from accidental overdoses of insulin? I've seen this happen for myself, and in that situation a very fast acting sugar beverage saved a man's life. By banning these drinks the city of Boston may have irresponsibly created a danger of insulin shock or a similar medical crisis potentially killing someone unable to consume enough sugar in time to avert disaster. Boston may have opened itself up to significant liability in this issue.
Harry A. Van Twistern
St. Petersburg, FL
Friday, March 11, 2011
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Sorry that I worded the title so harshly, but I really can't characterize this controversy any other way in good conscience. After listening to the show this morning and then surfing the Web looking for information about chemtrails, I came to a site called http://educate-yourself.org/ct/ and some other links thereto and found what I unfortunately suspected -- a lot of blatantly false information and misrepresented photos about what are -- for real, honestly, hand to God, I swear -- CONTRAILS.
To recap what a contrail is, picture yourself in one of our modern passenger jet aircraft flying over, say, Missouri. While you are sitting and relaxing, reading a book, or if you happen to be terrified of flight, white knuckling and staring out the window hoping the engines don't fall off in mid-flight, you look out and happen to notice that behind the jet engine on your side of the plane is a white vapor appearing a certain distance behind the engine. You ask the stewardess what that is, and she says "Oh, that's just the contrail." She gives this explanation so glibly that it's as if you are supposed to be satisfied with that information, but the word itself means nothing without a definition.
Here's one from Merriam-Webster online: "streaks of condensed water vapor created in the air by an airplane or rocket at high altitudes." The most important thing to get out of this is the content of a contrail is WATER. And water does certain things under certain conditions. At certain altitudes, under what weathermen call saturated conditions, it condenses into a cloud.
Now, before I go into explaining what saturation of air is, let me first go into my background as a recently graduated auto mechanic trainee and discuss what actually comes out of an airplane engine exhaust. Air and fuel are mixed for combustion, in order to provide thrust for the aircraft, at a given ratio which is known as the stoichiometric ratio. Stoichiometric just means that the ratio is the correct ratio for the type of fuel used and the oxidizer used to combust it. For gasoline, for example, the stoichiometric ratio of air to gasoline is 14.7 to 1. For methane, it's a lot higher, about 37.6 parts air to 1 fuel. For jet fueled engines it's technically about 15:1, similar to gasoline, however additional air is added to flow through the engine to cool the turbines because otherwise they overheat. The end result of this is the same regardless of the hydrocarbon-based fuel used -- you get energy production and waste products, which under the best combustion conditions yield some carbon dioxide and a much greater amount of water. There are also traces of unburnt hydrocarbons and if the reaction is too hot or too lean, some nitrous oxides as well, but the vast majority of the waste generated is primarily water vapor, secondarily carbon dioxide. This comes out the tailpipe of your car, and mixed with uncombusted coolant air, it comes out the back end of a jet engine.
Now about saturation -- this is an atmospheric condition which occurs when the humidity level -- the percentage of water vapor the air can hold at a given temperature -- is up close to 100 percent. This occurs when the dew point of air is close to the actual air temperature, and the dew point is a more direct measurement of the actual water content of the air. Now there are a few things to remember about this -- one is that the dew point can vary considerably depending on the overall weather conditions, and another is that temperature changes do not translate to dew point change or vice versa, except when air temperature falls into or below the dew point, thus forcing condensation to take place.
So here we go -- hot gas at some hundreds of degrees comes out the back end of the engines on our passenger jet. This hot gas is mostly air, with water vapor and carbon dioxide. The CO2 doesn't affect the formation of clouds so we can ignore that, it's invisible and inert. The hot air coming out of the engine may have a dewpoint of, let's say, 30 degrees Fahrenheit. In gas that's 200 plus degrees it appears to be very dry air, and you do not see vapor forming at that point. However, the air at a high altitude may be as cold as -50 deg F, with a dew point of -60 F. In those conditions you could have a bright clear blue sky without a cloud in it, since the temperature is still 10 degrees away from saturation. However, with the plane passing through it, now you have this part of the air heated to 200 degrees, with the dewpoint rising past 30 degrees as the engine's exhaust water is added to this part of the air. Very soon, the air temperature returns to ambient (what it was before the plane passed through it.) But the dewpoint which was at -60 F has now been raised over 90 degrees in that parcel of air!
Upon cooling down below 30 degrees vapor forms as the air is now saturated and cannot hold the moisture as vapor, it has to condense. By the time the air temp has dropped below -40 the condensation has already frozen into ice particles. These form the contrail that fans out behind the plane as wind currents push and pull at the trail. Now, with the dew point around the trail (not in it) still about -60 F, the ice particles which have formed a pretty dense contrail begin to evaporate into the surrounding air. However, they will normally take hours to do so because the dewpoint is not very low for that altitude and ice takes longer to evaporate than water droplets do. So basically the plane has done nothing more or less than create a type of cirrus cloud, and cirrus happens to be a kind that can hang around for days given the right conditions.
Now I can tell you, on my honor as a weather buff of 25 years with some courses under my belt in the field, experience taking weather readings, and studying the subject on my own time, that all of the pictures I have seen of trails in the sky are contrails. It seems extremely unlikely to me that if nefarious organizations could even pepper the sky with noxious powders and whatnot, that they would give away their activities by using substances that reflect as much light as a cloud -- and by the way most aerosols are invisible to the human eye, including volcanic ash below certain concentrations and sizes and most dust. Also, given the vast scale of the atmosphere and the complexity of wind patterns in it, it seems very very unlikely to me that high altitude spraying would have any meaningfully intentional consequences on any ground targets. Effective spraying has to be done at as low an altitude as safely possible, to limit the area covered and to ensure that the area you WANT to cover is reached by the sprayed contents.
Now about the photos -- some of them show contrails that can form at midlevel altitudes in saturated conditions where the contrail is a cloud of water droplets, too warm to freeze. These contrails will last just as long as any of the other streetlike clouds (altocumulus or altostratus) that may be in the vicinity, and they can be fairly thick for a while, again depending on saturation conditions. Other trails seen in photos, notably the ones with "rainbow effects," are no doubt higher altitude ice particle trails. What happens here is the light from the sun hits a certain angle from the viewer or photographer, and the ice particles scatter the colors in it forming a rainbow or a sun dog, from the viewer's perspective. Same thing happens in cirrus clouds -- it's not magic and it's not chemically induced, it's a property of the optical physics of water. Ice particles are more highly reflective than liquid cloud droplets, so you will tend to see that more often in ice particle trails, though it's also possible in droplet trails.
Certain photos show crisscrossing trails as well. This is common because air travel routes do often cross over each other, usually at different altitudes (when air traffic controllers are doing their jobs, which we like to think is all of the time.) You will probably see this sort of thing a lot in regions between several airport hubs.
I hope this helps to clear up the contrail mystery somewhat. :)
Friday, February 25, 2011
A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be very liberal, and among other liberal ideals, was very much in favor of higher taxes to support more government programs, in other words redistribution of wealth.
She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch conservative, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.
One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the need for more government programs.
The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking how she was doing in school.
Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying.
Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Audrey doing?"
She replied, "Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over."
Her wise father asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct 1.0 off your GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA."
The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, "That's a crazy idea, how would that be fair! I've worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!"
The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently, "Welcome to the conservative side of the fence."
If you ever wondered what side of the fence you sit on, this is a great test!
If a conservative doesn't like guns, he doesn't buy one.
If a liberal doesn't like guns, he wants all guns outlawed.
If a conservative is a vegetarian, he doesn't eat meat.
If a liberal is a vegetarian, he wants all meat products banned for everyone.
If a conservative is down-and-out, he thinks about how to better his
A liberal wonders who is going to take care of him.
If a conservative doesn't like a talk show host, he switches channels.
Liberals demand that those they don't like be shut down.
If a conservative is a non-believer, he doesn't go to church.
A liberal non-believer wants any mention of God and religion silenced.
(Unless it's a foreign religion, of course!)
If a conservative decides he needs health care, he goes about shopping for it, or may choose a job that provides it.
A liberal demands that the rest of us pay for his.
If a conservative reads this, he'll forward it so his friends can have a
A liberal will delete it because he's "offended."
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
33 1/2 AR Fall of 64 AD Paul the Apostle was somewhere in Western Europe or Britain preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ. His mother had already married a Roman Senator with British lineage -- the same royal family that Mary was related to.
1484 years BR (before the Resurrection) -- 1452 BC The Torah was given to Moses on Mt Sinai, a year after the Exodus, instituting full orbed legalism in religion.
1484 years AR (after the Resurrection) -- 1517 AD Martin Luther nailed his 95 Theses to the Castle Church door in Wittenberg, igniting the Protestant Revolution and setting fire to legalism.
1885 BR 1853 BC 400 years before the Exodus, Isaac was born, the child of promise to Abraham and Sarah by miracle. Abraham was 100, Sarah 90 years old.
1885 AR 1918 AD World War 1 ended after General Allenby marched into Jerusalem freeing it from the Ottoman Empire, paving the way for the founding of the state of Israel.
1899 BR 1867 BC Ishmael was born illegitimately to Abraham via his wife's Egyptian slave Hagar.
1899 AR 1932 AD the Kingdom of Nejd and Hejaz was renamed Saudi Arabia, and Iraq became an independent monarchy.
1900 BR 1868 BC was the infamous "tent meeting" between Abraham and Hagar.
1900 AR 1933 AD was the year Hitler ascended to power in Germany.
1910 BR 1878 BC Abraham left Haran for Canaan at 75 years of age.
1910 AR 1943 AD was the height of World War 2, when Polish Jews arrived in Palestine and began working for the future independence of Israel, and interestingly also the year Martin Noth published his seminal work on the Pentateuch... it's got a long German title. :)
1915 BR 1883 BC The Book of Jasher tells us that Abraham received promises from God about his descendants inheriting from the Euphrates to the Nile. He was 70 years old.
1915 AR 1948 AD A new nation appeared on the Earth, in 1948 AD, called Israel.
1985 BR 1953 BC was when Abraham, called the "Father of Faith," was born.
1985 AR 2018 AD ought to be a very interesting year. ;)
The eight little wings are Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, and Yugoslavia, all appearing just after 1918. Two were conquered by Germany in 1939, Czechoslovakia and Poland (also by the USSR.) Four fell in World War 2, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania in 1940 as well as Hungary in 1944. At the end of the war Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and the rest of Poland came under Soviet control. Yugoslavia was conquered by Germany in 1941 but regained independence in 1945; Finland was battered by the USSR but remains to this day. So for over 40 years there were only two little wings remaining on their own more or less, Yugoslavia and Finland, but with a dictatorship remaining awake in Soviet Russia, the head on the right.
The six wings under Russia's thumb during the Cold War era, namely Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Czechoslovakia, and Hungary regained independence in the late 1980s-early 1990s; with Yugoslavia and Finland continuing to this time, the initial conditions of the prophecy were re-created with all 8 little wings present once again. But this time, Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia both broke up, more exactly following the wording in II Esdras that they would VANISH -- not go under an eagle's head. This prophecy was originally thought to have been fulfilled by World War 2 but it was not really even close to being an exact fulfillment. There were only supposed to be two of the eight still independent as the middle head awakened (Italy) and united the other two heads (Russia and Germany) to itself. Not quite square with the sequence of events in context... Mussolini took power in 1922, Stalin a little later, Hitler in 1933. Italy/Mussolini perished in "his own bed" -- he was executed by antifascist Italians in 1945 as Italy was split by the Allied conquest and civil war. The head on the right (Russia) did eat the head on the left (Germany, partly.) However that triple alliance did not form the Axis, Germany broke its pact with the Soviets in 1941 with its invasion of the USSR and I find no indication the Italians ever invited Russia to a table with them, at least not prominently. Moreover instead of World War Two starting with just two of the eight little countries still on their own, it started with the invasion of only the SECOND of the eight nations to lose their independence, Poland. Czechoslovakia alone was gone, there were seven left, not two, and six left after Poland was devoured by BOTH left and right heads.
Given post-1990 history and the prophecy in II Esdras 11, do not expect Yugoslavia or Czechoslovakia to ever reunite. They're gone for the duration of the prophecy. Instead, two more nations will go "under the head on the right," meaning Russia's influence in Eastern Europe will expand and two more of the six left -- Poland, the three Baltic countries, Finland, or Hungary -- will become Russian satellites. That's next in that region. Now... time for a thought exercise: Let's say the two nations that go into the Russian orbit are Hungary and Finland -- just using them for an example, for political reasons briefly given later. Who would be left? Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland. The prophecy indicates two moving to the head on the right, and that appears to be a willing walk, not a devouring act or a simple disappearance as seen in other parts of the prophecy.
Parenthetically, in history the two most territorially ambitious of those six states have been Poland and Hungary, in the 1920s in Poland's case, in the 1940s in Hungary's case. Partial initial fulfillments at the time, perhaps.
After that four will be left, and of those four Eastern European nations, which in my thought exercise are Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland, two will become territorially ambitious, rising up one by one and quickly disappearing. (For the sake of the thought exercise we'll say it's Lithuania and Poland... both might have significant grudges against Germany and Russia historically... the other two really aren't big enough to have realistic territorial ambitions.) It will be THEN that a form of Fascist or Communist state in Italy will arise... the other two heads, Germany and Russia, will unite with it (presumably in alliance or confederation similar to the European Union, perhaps in repudiation of the EU.)
In any case, the next two rising up (Poland? and Lithuania?) will be eaten up by the three heads when they awaken. So only two of the six (Estonia? and Latvia?) will be left when the Italian-German-Russian autocrats arise and align with each other. They will destroy the last two (Estonia and Latvia, in the thought exercise) of those nations in the Great Tribulation. The three heads then also end up at war with the Antichrist ruler in the Middle East, joining forces with the Eastern powers and ultimately seeming to defeat the Antichrist at the end, but then foolishly attacking Israel at Megiddo where they too will perish when the Messiah returns (this is from a combination of Ezekiel 37, Daniel 11 and 12, and Revelation.) II Esdras adds the detail that it's after the middle head (Italy or its ruler) disappears that things really get bad... perhaps a hint that by then the latter and worse half of the Great Tribulation is under way, and that's when the head on the right, Russia presumably, eats and finishes off Germany, quite firmly bringing Gomer under Gog's wing in Ezekiel 37 although the alliance is complete before then anyway. When Russia, however, is coming to its end among the tumult of those last days, the first two of the six -- thought exercise-wise, Finland and Hungary -- will take over in Central Europe for a very short time as either the ruler or simply the power of Russia is broken at the end.
If this is confusing, all you really have to remember is the next two little wings -- two from the following six will move to the Russian side: Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, or Hungary. They're prophetically shown going in a way that might be voluntary, and they are the two that when Russia turns its attention away to fight with the forces of Antichrist, they will seize power at the very end of the Tribulations, and during their rule is the crescendo of the end times that ends with Christ (the Messiah) returning and wiping the floor with all of the opposition.
Ezekiel 37 ties into this as well. Ezekiel 37 is about Russia; it says an alliance will be formed with Rosh, Meshech and Tubal (Russia, Moscow, Tobolsk) expanding to include Beth Togarmah (House of the Turks, which to me may signify both the entire former Ottoman Empire and the Central Asian Turkic nations), Gomer (Germany), Put (Libya), Cush (Ethiopia or Sudan, or possibly Iraq or Afghanistan by other usages), and Persia (Iran.) So far, they pretty much have Iran, Turkey is wavering, Libya's in the fomenting sandwich between Tunisia and Egypt, Sudan is splitting apart, and with the incredible foreign policy of Obama these days, who knows what else is about to happen. One thing to note about southern Sudan, that area had recently been proposed to be named "Republic of Kush," but is due to be independent this year as Southern Sudan (2011.)
After researching Eastern European politics, it seems to me the two nations the most likely to waver and head over to the Russian side are Hungary and Finland. It's not at all certain to me but I'd say odds on, they're the next two wings to go, and they won't be dissolved like Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia were, they will simply go under the head on the right (Russia.) That will leave four, which accordingly may be Poland and the 3 Baltic nations, who so far remain quite nationalistic. (About them, the prophecy says they will try to set up the rule... nationalism at work.) But, they could be any two of the six.
After having figured out that the prophecy of II Esdras rebooted itself and began to be fulfilled much more accurately, I have a lot more confidence that that prophecy is sound, plus by referring back to Daniel, it confirms Daniel, which is cornerstone stuff for figuring out where the Antichrist is going to come from. There is an introductory phase to the II Esdras 11 passage describing the 12 kings -- they happened to be the last 9 rulers of the Holy Roman Empire plus the 3 German kaisers. This is determined by the second of the 12 rulers ruling the longest, which was Leopold I who ruled the Holy Roman Empire from 1658-1705. The II Esdras beast -- the 3 headed eagle -- is the latter day version of the Roman Empire in Europe, comprising the three nations that have had Caesars ruling -- Russia with the tsars, Italy of course, and Germany with the kaisers. That vision covers the last roughly 400 years of history in Europe plus the near future... with fulfillments restarted beginning in 1991 for the 8 little 1918-born wings, as 2 of them vanished in the 1990s and six are left.
So there are apparently several stages of fulfillment left to go before the Great Tribulations happen, that are left in the prophecies of Ezekiel 37 and II Esdras 11. Egypt is only now turning and it will end up the troubler of the last days. But these nations will be part of the Russian alliance: Turkey (not gone yet but wavering), possibly other Central Asian Turkic countries, and Iran, Ethiopia, Libya, and and Germany, notably Iran which already has an alliance with Russia today. Russia will also expand into Eastern Europe again; by the time the Tribulations arrive there will only be two of the eight little wing nations left that were born in 1918... two are gone now, six remain and they go by twos. Next phase of that is two nations going into the Russian sphere of influence -- not destroyed, but becoming satellites judging from the wording. After that two others disappear -- they don't just move, they're gone, and I think that happens just before the Tribulations begin and the triple tyrannies appear in Italy, Germany, and Russia. Two only are left when the neofascist or communist regimes take over in Italy, Germany, and Russia, and they will perish at the hands of that alliance. My guess is that's still years away at least. After that, at the end, the two satellite nations that went willingly to Russia will revolt from Russia successfully, but last only long enough to see the final end of the Tribulations as Christ returns.
THE LAST TWELVE KINGS OF ROME (HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE, GERMANY) -- Equated to the 12 wings of the Three Headed Eagle of II Esdras 11, dates covering rulership as Emperor-Elect:
(source, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_German_monarchs )
1. Ferdinand III 1637-1657
2. Leopold I 1658-1705 (note... this is the longest reign of the last 12 Emperors.)
3. Joseph I 1705-1711
4. Charles VI 1711-1740
5. Charles VII 1742-1745
6. Francis I Stephan 1745-1765
7. Joseph II 1765-1790
8. Leopold II 1790-1792
9. Francis II 1792-1806
Following dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire, the next three German kings called Kaiser (from Caesar for Emperor of Rome) were not crowned by Rome and II Esdras considers them as "did not rule." They were the only three monarchs of the German Reich or German Empire.
10. William I 1871-1888
11. Frederick III 1888 (3 months)
12. Wilhelm II 1888-1918
I see a lot of people say, "Keep Christ in Christmas..." I'm like why? Did He pop out of it somehow? Has He escaped? Or isn't He as interested in it as a lot of us like to think He is?
I say, if Christ is in Christmas, He will evince it (make it evident), for the Scripture says Jerub-Baal, or let the Lord contend. If He's not, then somebody's been trying to put His name on someone else's holiday. Like, say, oh.... Saturnalia? Tammuz? Odin's birth? ... Hmmmm..... Funny how they all land on Dec. 25 and predate Christ. I'd hate to think God's not original.
The astronomer Adam Rutherford, using Biblical clues and evidence from Flavius Josephus among other sources, as well as astronomical science, actually determined that Jesus Christ was not born on Christmas (which is a word meaning Christ-Mass, mass being from masa, the barley cakes Babylonians and other pagan nations baked to Astarte the Queen of Heaven.) He was born, but not at that time of year.
A common farming and shepherding practice of seasonal migration, called transhumance, which was practiced in the Mediterranean results in herdsmen taking to the mountains for summer forage, not winter -- so you didn't see shepherds hanging around the Jerusalem hills in December to get rained and snowed on when the valleys are milder. They came up for the summer half of the year after the hot sun and lack of rain dried out the lowlands. (So much for Silent Night, huh.) That means Jesus's birth had to occur, from the Biblical evidence, during the summer half of the year, May to October.
Next factor for time of year was the birth of John... that can be dated on the calendar from the week his father Zechariah served his course in the Temple in Jerusalem. Luke records that he was in the course of Abijah, which served the 8th week after Passover and after the Feast of Tabernacles (Sukkoth.) When he came home he "knew" his wife Elizabeth -- 80 plus years old and a miracle happened. Six months later Mary the BVM encounters Elizabeth and little John in the womb leaps, and Mary is pregnant soon thereafter. Add nine months and out comes Jesus. Well... here's some math -- add 6 plus 9 and you get 15 months after Zechariah's turn at the altar (not his wedding, but pleasure follows.) :) If it's after Passover, his course occurs somewhere in June (depending on the year), and if after Sukkoth, it ends up in December. Add 15 months, you get either September the year later, or March. You can go to Adam Rutherford for the exact calculation which also figures in the spectacular astronomical conjunctions of 3 to 2 BC.
In any case, from the Bible clues we know Jesus was born either in early spring or in early fall... well... transhumance tells us early spring is out -- still too cold and wet for the shepherds to take to the hills. They didn't get there till May or June in most places. There is also not much going on in Jerusalem in early spring -- Passover is still a month away generally. So... no room at the inn? I'd say there is. A little evidence changes the whole story, doesn't it?
So what about September? Rutherford's dating brings the birth of Jesus to late in the month, landing RIGHT ON Rosh Hashanah that year, 2 BC, as he calculated it -- not using the common medieval formula which was not in use for centuries still to come, but the practical dead reckoning of the day, which involved tracking the vernal equinox, spotting new moons, and other astronomical observations made by the priests. It comes out to September 29, 2 BC, to make a long story short. What's going on in Jerusalem and Bethlehem then?
How about throngs of people crowding into the Jerusalem metro area for the High Holy Days which begin with Rosh Hashanah itself? No room at the inns, they're all taken... people are loaded with offerings and money to bring to the Temple... which is how the Romans get to tax them, too. And the shepherds? It's still hot in Israel in late September. They're in the hills, in the right spot, plus they too worship at the Temple.
Rutherford and Dr. Gene Scott have gone into more depth, but basically I'm convinced the birth of Christ had nothing to do with the "16" or now I hear "30 crucified saviors" or "white masters" -- white being their clothing -- or other such December 25 related connections. He was born on or very close to September 29, 2 BC, Rosh Hashanah, a holiday God ordained on Mount Sinai to Moses; the wise men's gifts of gold, myrrh, and frankincense were for Him alone as gifts from subjects giving to their King. The closest you get to December 25 is maybe His conception... but count back 280 days from September 29 for a normal term... December 23. Give or take a few days or even a week, still a normal pregnancy. It's possible. But who ever mentions an Immaculate Conception being Dec. 25 for the "16 crucified saviors" or the "30 Ascended Masters?" It's always a birth, isn't it. But it ain't Jesus's birth.
Maybe some prophet way back when received info about how and when the Messiah would enter the world... but didn't get the rest of the memo...the BIRTH DATE.... and all those ancient idolaters never got the rest of the story....?