Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6
xFelix

The Paranormal is it Fake?

853 posts in this topic

The powder would prevent suction and dry up moisture. It's a nice try at explaining something. But offering conjecture is not debunking. I could say he surgically had a magnet implanted in his hand to, but that is still just conjecture.

As Liquid Garden has said, I'm not debunking, and I never claimed I was. Magola, however, is in that very video claiming to be debunking Randi's exposure by using talc, of other so-called "magnetic people" . But what Magola is doing is not done under the strict conditions necessary to qualify as 'evidence', else I would not be able to point out that he could be achieving the effect via suction and be correct in stating that. Therefore it cannot be 'debunking'.

So, rather than accuse me of falsely claiming to be debunking - when I never made that claim - you should be accusing Magola of making that false claim. Because he did make that claim, falsely.

Edited by Leonardo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tricks are tricks; the magician or fraudster knows the trick and you don't, and it's simple foolish arrogance to think that seeing is believing.

Also, if it is possible for magicians to duplicate the trick, then the explanation is trickery; do not assume outré explanations when mundane ones are available. Even if magicians cannot duplicate he trick, give them awhile.

This sort of thinking is the foundation of healthy scepticism; thinking otherwise only leave you open to accepting lies.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record I do think this might be a trick, but I think suction is unlikely . The issue here is not the reality of what magola can or cannot do. I first saw this on stan lees superhumans. it features a skeptic that investigates these things, and magola passed his tests. Including scientific ones. I was intrigued. The test seemd real and the results were convincing for the host.

The issue here is that no matter what noone will really consider the possibility that magola may have somehow learned to magnetize his hands. His physiology changed according to stan lees testes. While im skeptical of any television show it seemed like a legitimate effort. Especially in other episodes there was nothing unbelievable. There dosnt seem to be any debunking other than speculation... suction, wet skin...etc etc. It seems that he is legitimately willing to be tested by Randi in public.

If magola was really doing this, no one would believe him. apparently His physiology can change, he makes videos like skeptic always ask, he put talcum powder as on it as Randi requested....there is plenty of powder on it after he wipes off the excess, any an all kind of conjecture has been used. No matter what he does, if it were real, he could not prove it was some sort of ability rather than trickery. Even if he hooks electrodes up to his brain and scientists measure him. Even if he did it a 1000 time people would always cry foul.

This is called psudo skepticism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tricks are tricks; the magician or fraudster knows the trick and you don't, and it's simple foolish arrogance to think that seeing is believing.

Also, if it is possible for magicians to duplicate the trick, then the explanation is trickery; do not assume outré explanations when mundane ones are available. Even if magicians cannot duplicate he trick, give them awhile.

This sort of thinking is the foundation of healthy scepticism; thinking otherwise only leave you open to accepting lies.

It is absolutely not. I don't assume anything that's the problem psudoskeptics have. Duplicating something does not invalidate something. It only proves that it can be duplicated. Im going to coin the phrase psudoskeptics Folly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incorrect....Frank...you disappoint me on this one. listen and learn.

There has always been a huge question about what caused the "rise" of civilization...the catalyst that caused thoughts like 'lets stack rocks together and make shelter"....

There is proof that the ancients began ingesting acacia wood and other hallucinogenics...aka...for the educated..."mind expanding drugs"....

These "shaman" that participated in these "journeys"...then rose to be the chiefs, the leaders, the kings and the pharaohs....there is no empirical proof of this...only hints and suggestion.

They are called "mind expanding" for a reason. Perhaps you have not read into it and I respect that. You can choose to look and see or you can choose to let sterotypes stand alone without investigation of your own...a choice.

Stanislav Grof did some absolutely amazing research into hallucinogens and the commonality of experience...I am not going to try and convince you because I am just a nut loose on a keyboard...but if you REALLY want to know...I suggest you start there. He did more studies into the effects and patterns of experience into hallucinogenic experiences than anyone else on the planet...ever. There is more to this than the "war on drugs" is willing to let you know...you have to hunt...and I mean bloodhound hard core hunt to find things...but you might just be surprised what the dean of psychiatry and psychology at John Hopkins University recorded in his studies....

It is more than just..."a thing"...

I invite you on a journey Frank...and the Journey starts with studying the research of a man named Stanislov Grof (or Graf as it is sometimes spelled)

I agree with frank. If you require a drug to alter your brain's normal function then the evidences your brain produces are neither "normal" nor reliable. But Shamanism requires no drugs, only the abilty to naturally enter a state of altered consciousness, or to learn how to interconnect with the world/environment /other people in different but natural ways. One can talk wth animals trees etc without the aid of any drug. One can reach into the cosmic consciousness and "meld" minds, without any form of drug and using a perfectly sane, non delusional,a nd very rational mind.These are natural normal albilities for human beings No drugs of any sort required, and not taking drugs ensures they can be observed, recorded and analysed, accurately, dispassionately, and with a clear rational mind..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shamans use all sorts of ways to alter consciousness besides drugs. I can do so with hypnotic breathing and it is perhaps interesting but not spiritual. When I begin to converse with trees I know things have gone too far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is absolutely not. I don't assume anything that's the problem psudoskeptics have. Duplicating something does not invalidate something. It only proves that it can be duplicated. Im going to coin the phrase psudoskeptics.

The folly is you trust your own personal judgement without standards. This is arrogance, and leaves you open to being conned.
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record I do think this might be a trick, but I think suction is unlikely . The issue here is not the reality of what magola can or cannot do. I first saw this on stan lees superhumans. it features a skeptic that investigates these things, and magola passed his tests. Including scientific ones. I was intrigued. The test seemd real and the results were convincing for the host.

The issue here is that no matter what noone will really consider the possibility that magola may have somehow learned to magnetize his hands. His physiology changed according to stan lees testes. While im skeptical of any television show it seemed like a legitimate effort. Especially in other episodes there was nothing unbelievable. There dosnt seem to be any debunking other than speculation... suction, wet skin...etc etc. It seems that he is legitimately willing to be tested by Randi in public.

If magola was really doing this, no one would believe him. apparently His physiology can change, he makes videos like skeptic always ask, he put talcum powder as on it as Randi requested....there is plenty of powder on it after he wipes off the excess, any an all kind of conjecture has been used. No matter what he does, if it were real, he could not prove it was some sort of ability rather than trickery. Even if he hooks electrodes up to his brain and scientists measure him. Even if he did it a 1000 time people would always cry foul.

This is called psudo skepticism.

But let me guess, you 'for the record' think that it might be a trick but that's because of real skepticism, not that pseudo kind. I'll consider the possibility that he magnetized his hands somehow, that alone is also an incredible claim unless he's had magnetic metal implanted or something, I'll consider that he has telekinesis, which is what I thought he must really have, I thought he could do this with non-magnetic material also but not sure. Regardless, you don't really think that the evidence that has been provided here is very good do you? There's nothing 'pseudo-' about questioning claims provided by television shows and internet videos of all things, jeez.

And of course he could prove he has some sort of ability rather than this being trickery, again, these bias accusations aren't really arguments or evidence. I'm supposed to not notice that for some reason he oddly (i.e., conveniently) actually has to touch what he's going to lift? Magnetism and telekinesis both work at a distance I thought. I'm not supposed to notice that the magnetic people who stick a metal pot to their forehead are always tilting their head back? Let me guess, if they tilt their head forward much more their powers won't be strong enough to stick it there, how incredibly convenient. There are multiple ways these powers could be demonstrated pretty much without question, and I really don't think you should be discussing skepticism, pseudo or otherwise, if you really think any of this evidence is close to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The folly is you trust your own personal judgement without standards. This is arrogance, and leaves you open to being conned.

Actually I I should have said I try not to assume anything. Yes I am an individualist I trust myself before others I am open to being wrong but not just because someone says I am. They better be able to prove it to me. Unlikely, I have never been conned and quit a few in my life have tried. I keep an open mind but make my own decisions. Well maby I did get conned on the mortgage on my first house ... But I was only 27. It won't happen again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But let me guess, you 'for the record' think that it might be a trick but that's because of real skepticism, not that pseudo kind. I'll consider the possibility that he magnetized his hands somehow, that alone is also an incredible claim unless he's had magnetic metal implanted or something, I'll consider that he has telekinesis, which is what I thought he must really have, I thought he could do this with non-magnetic material also but not sure. Regardless, you don't really think that the evidence that has been provided here is very good do you? There's nothing 'pseudo-' about questioning claims provided by television shows and internet videos of all things, jeez.

And of course he could prove he has some sort of ability rather than this being trickery, again, these bias accusations aren't really arguments or evidence. I'm supposed to not notice that for some reason he oddly (i.e., conveniently) actually has to touch what he's going to lift? Magnetism and telekinesis both work at a distance I thought. I'm not supposed to notice that the magnetic people who stick a metal pot to their forehead are always tilting their head back? Let me guess, if they tilt their head forward much more their powers won't be strong enough to stick it there, how incredibly convenient. There are multiple ways these powers could be demonstrated pretty much without question, and I really don't think you should be discussing skepticism, pseudo or otherwise, if you really think any of this evidence is close to that.

Yes I think I heard he did it with ceramics. Don't know I didn't see it. The point is LG, if the effect was a real bio electric ability the world would miss out if a bunch of stuffy cynical Randy's mounted a smear campaign against him, and so far it sort of looks like that.

I heard from reading somewhere a while ago that national geographic was planning on doing a documentary on him soon. After the tests performed on him on Stan lees super humans. It could be propaganda on magolas part, but it will be awesome if they do make one.

Edited by White Crane Feather

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To say ask if the paranormal itself is fake is far to general. It's a very broad subject.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.. One can talk wth animals trees etc without the aid of any drug. .

But if you require an answer I recommend a parrot

fullywired

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look cut all the phony bs about what is not verifyable. For what I have personally delt with myself as well as hundreds of others you can stuff your notions about paranormal activity as being fake ina stromboli. I don't care who believes or who is skeptical because to me none of you all matter.what does matter is the many families and people who have experienced these phenomina. As I always say there are things science can not explain so to insist there has to be an explanation and proof ?,...it doesn't always fall inline like that. To deny there is no proof is absent minded as hell and really no matter how much proof you present somebody always wants to find an explanation for every damn thing.Honestly if you don't believe stay of the post you do more than infuriate me. If parasychology was fake why study it? Although we know that there are fakes but that's best explained like having a piggy bank full of pennies and out of 1000 pennies ther are 23 fakes or canadian pennies. All in saying skeptics stay skeptic utill it happens to you and folks who believe don't worry about who doesn't because when it's all over they will learn.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Look cut all the phony bs about what is not verifyable. For what I have personally delt with myself as well as hundreds of others you can stuff your notions about paranormal activity as being fake ina stromboli. I don't care who believes or who is skeptical because to me none of you all matter

Then why are you wasting your time here?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then why are you wasting your time here?

Same reason as me I believe, because I believe most of you are more capable of holding an unoffensive conversation about this topic than just "proof please". I've been proven wrong on a few accounts on that though. You can always draw your own conclusions about proof and come up with an alternative theory, everyone can conceive alternative possibilities. So I've done my time wasting on these kind of things here, I hope. Just begs the question, why do you waste your time here to try to "educate" us that an one-eyed view is better than giving room for other theories, swinging your proof around as if you didn't understand what I've just said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same reason as me I believe, because I believe most of you are more capable of holding an unoffensive conversation about this topic than just "proof please". I've been proven wrong on a few accounts on that though. You can always draw your own conclusions about proof and come up with an alternative theory, everyone can conceive alternative possibilities. So I've done my time wasting on these kind of things here, I hope. Just begs the question, why do you waste your time here to try to "educate" us that an one-eyed view is better than giving room for other theories, swinging your proof around as if you didn't understand what I've just said.

But you do understand that the burden of 'proof' is on those making the claim that the paranormal is real right? The point of people 'explaining' certain paranormal phenomena with rational non paranormal explanations is simply to show that the 'paranormal' event does not HAVE to be paranormal and can be explained with conventional reasoning. Because most paranormal 'events' can be rationally explained it means that those who say the paranormal is real are going to have a pretty hard time explaining with any rationality why they think said event was paranormal in nature. Because the human mind is so easily tricked (pareidolia, optical illusions, etc), not to mention the huge numbers of people suffering from mental illnesses it means that sadly, eyewitness accounts and experience do not count for much in this pursuit of truth. What is required is objective, real, hard, measurable, reproducible, evidence to support it. Something that most paranormal phenomena are very much lacking in- which begs the question- if paranormal phenomena are real then why so little evidence? The evidence for Santa Clause is in some cases more compelling than the evidence for some paranormal phenomena. So why is this?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Things can be explained rationally because rational is physical and physical is at least almost always one side of things, and seems to be always connected in some level to these things. So it's a given there's a rational explanation to things in most cases.

One thing you sceptics seem to ignore somewhat, or be less sensitive to, is placebo, the power of the mind, willpower, whatever you want to call all that. It all works similiarly to me. When you doubt just because it's fun or "your thing" to doubt instead of doubting because you have a hunch it's wrong or because there's something that you actually think makes it sound wrong instead of your conditioning speaking out, conditioning that paranormal is supposed to be fake and unscientific. I dont believe a sincere doubt with a real reason hurts when you aim to discover the true state of the matter instead of bash other peoples' beliefs, but how often is that the case really? Can you say sceptics have not taken camps and dug moats where they fortify themselves and keep using whatever means necessary to make their point come across?

Sorry for being awfully focused on how it's on a lot of sceptics too, but you need to understand that if you want to explore something like this, I think. Arguments and fights dont have to be bad but when you let your predisposition dominate you on these matters it's hard to exchange things.

....

What you say about human mind being easily tricked and all that is true, I feel the same. And those cases where this seems to be the case, where it seems to be just someone seeking attention or money or something like that, just leave them alone... not worth it. And you're right, paranormal event doesn't have to be paranormal. In fact what is paranormal at the end of the day? Placebo? Something science can't now explain? Nah... that's just things we can't explain yet on the physical level. Parallel levels can exist because physical and what's beyond physical can exist parallel. I believe they do, but if you find something that you think might convince me to change my stance on that belief, I ain't going to keep demanding you for proof but just take what you got and see how far I can question myself. Why can't a lot of you sceptics do the same when we give something?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing you sceptics seem to ignore somewhat, or be less sensitive to, is placebo, the power of the mind, willpower, whatever you want to call all that. It all works similiarly to me.

Not at all, as matter of fact one could say it is exactly the power of the mind that in my view has led people to believe with too much certainty in the paranormal. The mind is incredible, it basically assembles and orders and makes sense of our shared reality from a relatively small amount of sensual inputs. There is absolutely no doubt however that the brain is not always 100% perfect at assembling internally what is reality, it does make mistakes, both perceptually and cognitively, and can mislead. Skeptics are not necessarily any more immune to that compared to anyone else, but what a lot of skeptics do recognize is that because the brain and especially the interpretations we make can be prone to error, then our confidence in what we think are the cause of things we experience should be tempered by that, especially for things that we classify as paranormal since they cannot be demonstrated and have other possible more mundane interpretations.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The folly is you trust your own personal judgement without standards. This is arrogance, and leaves you open to being conned.

One MUST be able to trust one's own personal judgement and standards This requires education and understanding /knowledge but is an imperative for an individual to live in any world. Who else's judgements and standards should one live by but ones own ethical, moral, logical and spiritual values? These must be tested against logic, philosophy, and historical/socilogical, and other standards. They mus tbe compared/contrasted and evaluated for comparative benefit and worth to one's self, to one's society and to humanity. But still, ONLY ones own judgements can be relied upon, because one can only be sure of one's own integrity standards etc. Never anothers.

Naturally standards are important, but only one's own standards in any thing should determine the way a person lives.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But if you require an answer I recommend a parrot

fullywired

Not necessarily. The cosmic consciousness can supply logical and responsive dialogue from any source. One can learn a great deal via communing with all forms of nature, and people.

I have even won a few bets on the melbourne cup from tips given by " trees". IMO this is not the tree speaking to me, but a response form the cosmic consciousness, who/which responds using the tree as an avatar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What I've seen is that largely those who were raised in fundamentalist ("we are right and all who disagree are evil") homes who nevertheless end up not believing retain the fundamentalist attitude, except they turn it back on their origins and end up hating religion.

Those raised in more liberal environments generally aren't as interested in how wrong the believers are and are more tolerant of what they only view as somewhat intellectually behind the times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same reason as me I believe, because I believe most of you are more capable of holding an unoffensive conversation about this topic than just "proof please".

Unlike you, the opinions of people here matter to me. There are a lot of smart people here who have different experiences from me that I like reading about.

Just begs the question, why do you waste your time here to try to "educate" us that an one-eyed view is better than giving room for other theories, swinging your proof around as if you didn't understand what I've just said.

Because some people are jumping to conclusions without understanding the evidence.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Proof please." or at least "show me credible evidence, not just testimony," is the only appropriate and healthy response when someone makes extraordinary claims. It does not matter that you believe it -- no matter who you are.

There is a difference between skepticism (not believing things just on someone's word" and cynicisms (refusal to believe no matter what."

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Proof please." or at least "show me credible evidence, not just testimony," is the only appropriate and healthy response when someone makes extraordinary claims. It does not matter that you believe it -- no matter who you are.

There is a difference between skepticism (not believing things just on someone's word" and cynicisms (refusal to believe no matter what."

That's an opinion, Frank. We're all entitled to those. My opinion, what you make of the proof matters too. Like Scowl said. Not just any proof, it's a question what kind of proof, and you'd be expected to be able to give a solid reason why you want the proof you do, what makes you believe the proof you seek would be the kind of proof you need. Not your motives, but why you think the proof you want will actually prove and will actually be there in those conditions you require. An explanation why you think those conditions would be valid for proving the thing. In cryptozoology and murder mystery cases it's pretty often pretty evident, but there too you would do yourself a favor if you put more thought to this, if you really want to find out about those things.

And it's been handled over and over in this topic too probably, but the proof ain't always there in all conditions, and even those who might be able to produce proof might not fully be aware of what kind of conditions they can truly reproduce it. Instead of just calling it their fault, if you're truly interested in finding out about things, why not encourage them for a better path instead of discouraging them or wasting their time? Because they were many of the audacious enough to waste yours? And how would you know if the phenomena was real and they just had some little thing wrong and that why the evidence came out invalid? Would you know what caused the evidence to turn out faulty even if the phenomena was real, or know someone who knows why? I know there's more or less evident cases of charlatans or some who really come across as such, but that explanation isn't a default, not something you should assume of everything that goes against your beliefs.

...

I guess it all boils down to whether you treat this forum (or any other) a debate arena, a place to just discuss, or a place from where you might advance your research and worldviews. I like to mix them up always but the latter is my priority, exploration of all kind. And while I most certainly cannot blame people having different motives than my own for coming here, can you blame me for not serving your motives? If you're here for the same motive as me as your first priority, you dont need proof, because you're driven enough to get it if you know where to look, if someone gives you a map or a clue. We usually research things because they're interesting or important. If you dont feel that way about what you ask proof for, why should I be any more interested than you in addition to all this?

That said, go on demanding your proof in debates. But dont expect it like it'd be written down in a law. Because I dont care if forum rules or real life rules or universe's god-given rules or your personal rules demanded it, it ain't gonna force me to be a servant to someone who doesn't have the heart for what they ask. You know it's a poor form of discussion, unless you want to end the discussion, because there's conclusive proof of nothing. Nothing. There can always be something that'll change our views so profoundly that even the most trusted things we thought were solid, turn upside down. People just lean more towards the explanation they're used to, rather than the new explanation, if the new one feels uncomfortable for them. It doesn't fully govern us, but it influences enough to not accept the slightly more likely new explanation over the old and safe one. How much, is up to individuals themselves. And the new explanation is of course the one which you dont feel comfortable about because it fundamentally changes your view(s), the one new and breaking to your views in particular. We are still going throught the process of accepting something new to our world of how things should go, always will be. It'll always be a challenge, but not tackling up to it isn't gonna make it any easier, just harder the more you try to hold on to your old truth because someone, somewhere in the world is eventually bound to surpass you if you're wrong. And you're bound to be stuck to your place if you're wrong. That why I keep myself open to explanations that might shake up my worldviews completely, even if those who gave it had no proof whatsoever. I'm a big man now, I can get it myself, and I know to rather persuade them or subterfuge them to give me proof than go demand it without making any appealing argument for it, nor even making the effort to truly understand what it's all about, if I want someone to give it to me. Because it works better that way for the both of us, wastes less time and leaves both parties walking away happier.

Why waste your time even asking for proof if you aint that interested and know you ain't gonna get it?

Just thoughts I wanted to toss at you about this. Not saying you're in the wrong in all this, but your power doesn't extend to assume people would cater for your views of how things should work.

And if you were a more paranoid or suspecting person (sceptical) than me, you'd probably think this forum was full of debate-bots hired to mislead people and waste their time and energy if you shared my view on this, but I doubt it. Maybe here's some people hired to do that, but I believe just as many just dont think things this way and dont realise people can see things the way I do on this. And that you can't turn my head on this, unless you bring something with sincerity and without a backstabbing intent.

Edited by Mikko-kun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

World is magic. With a supreme effort of will you can pushed the unwanted pain. Once you notice something, you can never return to the time when you did not notice it. Then you ask yourself „How didnt I see this before?“ You was just not awared. Power of will is amazing. If you believe you can change something you realy can. But if you dont have power of will its all decided. Curiosity have own reason of existing. Otherwise it would not exist at all. If you tell someone to not open a box one will peak into box. Its human nature. And what is normal? To do only what the masses do? Or to follow your dream and heart. Why people feel anxiety? Because they not doing what heart told them. Dont listen inner being. Ofcourse we are not immune to all. Everything is interconnected. Everything is fated and the inevitable. World is not random. Things dont happen by randomness. There are no coincidences. Everything is interconnected. Even if you are lonely someone cares. Thats why we feel love and sorrow. And both we carry with us all the way. When you loose loving person you will always feel sorrow when remember that he/she isnt with us. There’s no such thing as an one sided connection. Everything is fated. There is reason why we two met on Internet. Science art religion are brenches of same tree. And its hard to understand all brenches. But if you understand seed, it easier to understand whole tree. When we learn we become specalize into one field as we learn-we learn one tiny part of it. That way we can never see whole picture. People forget about good things in life. Laugh, family, walk, sleep, love, friend, learning, kids, truth, loyality, respect for elders, forgivness, redemption, generousity, delicious food and finally hope. And guess what? They are all free. Humanity forget whats comfortable. We live in pain constantly not even noticing it. But if you become self awared of it, your life will be improved. You need to know yourself first. Remember -who looks outside dreams, who looks inside awakes. Worst thing in your life you can do its ignoring yourself. There are people who knows all about specific science yet they do not never meet themselves. And to even try to explain to person what he/she needs to do is hard because its hard to explain something what you can feel and he/she dont. Life is compesation. Everything you do and want, you have to pay the equal price. You want to be athlete looking you must spent hours in gym. If you kill someone you will pay for that life taking the burden which is hard and in the end which will burried you. Words have powers. Names have power. Insults can hurt you more then Katana. Sometimes you will need years to recover yourself from insults. We all have inner scars. We all have scars on bodies from childhood. And we all forget that our childhood friend who push us when we were playing ball. But body didnt forget. We have scars. And our souls have scars. Of words and evil deeds. We humans forget whats comfortable. We built unhumanic world. You must ask yourself how can bird built un-bird nest? Like we stop being humans. World is rotting. And world is rot because of us. We need to change that.

Big Bad Voodoo

Edited by Big Bad Voodoo
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 6

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.