Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
UM-Bot

Navy pilot saw object 'not of this world'

473 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

stereologist
4 hours ago, Fila said:

This is due to the way its being investigated. Not vice versa.

Because it is an interesting subject. If someone wants to look into any subject.., why get so worked up trying to prevent them from trying?

There is enough evidence regarding UFOs from reputable sources to warrant further investigation.

You do use conjecture and assumptions to solve cases. I will provide references if you wish.

You tell me I am wrong.., yet never explain how. I can only assume this is a throw off tactic.., designed to trick some who haven't read the entire thread.

It's funny what passes for interesting these days. The interesting aspect to this story ended a long time ago. It's an old story mixed with an unrelated video. The video shows a distant plane.

There are only anecdotes it seems. The sources are labeled as reputable because anecdotes is all there is. It has been nothing but anecdotes.

Go ahead and try to show whatever. I have repeatedly showed that you use mistake after mistake after mistake. When shown that you are incorrect you continue on with your blunders. Go ahead.

Stop telling lies. I have repeatedly shown you were wrong.

1. You were wrong about zoom yet you blundered on about the object in the video being large. Because you refuse to listen to the EVIDENCE I allowed you to make an ass of yourself in several posts. You never asked why you were wrong about the magnification.

2. You repeatedly made statements that witnesses were consistent about the Phoenix Lihts. Even a UFO believer posted a link showing they were not consistent and yet you blundered on with your glaring error about consistency.

There are two places where you were shown the evidence and now you lie that I never explain how you were wrong. I just posted the reason you were wrong about the magnification of the ATFLIR image and you lie the next day that I don't show you the reason.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
stereologist
5 hours ago, Fila said:

This is just your opinion. How can you scientifically say all reports of UFOs are BS. Explain your work and logic behind having 100% certainty in this conclusion.

Looking at this subject at first glance.., it appears to be all BS because you are only researching bad material (David Icke, greer, yt, etc).

When there is a real object that is still unsolved.., you ignore it.., and go back to the easy targets. I am more thorough and capable of understanding that false results don't define the experiment. Gotta look past the mistakes.., and find the hidden gem.

Or keep coming back to laugh at youtube clips and make ourselves feel big and smart.., when really.., really its kinda pathetic and shows indications of deep seeded underlying psychological issues.

You just stated that I use conjecture and here is conjecture after conjecture.

1. You wrote this conjecture "you are only researching bad material (David Icke, greer, yt, etc)." That's typical yu.

2. You wrote "When there is a real object that is still unsolved" What real object?

3. You wrote ' I am more thorough and capable of understanding ..."  Is that why you continue to claim consistency in the Phoenix Lights yet could not make a statement about what was consistent?

4. You wrote "really its kinda pathetic and shows indications of deep seeded underlying psychological issues." Stop being the source of glaring errors. You might do that by actually finding out what things are about before posting more nonsensical mistakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
1 hour ago, dwarf vs grey ufo said:

Only Fravor saw it?
"Commander Fravor said he and the trio accompanying him had their eyes glued on the airborne object for about five minutes."
Not to mention it appeared on radar-camera as well meaning it was definitely real

Fravor was made fun for 'seeing ufo's' when others didn't? Hmm
"Shortly after the two fighter jets began their training mission, they were redirected by a radio operator from the cruiser USS Princeton to a part of the Pacific Ocean where the Princeton had been tracking as many as a dozen mysterious objects for two weeks. Objects had been seen dropping straight down from above 80,000 feet and stopping at 20,000 feet."
In this quote it claims that it was well known that UFOs were in the area

"“In 18 years of flying airplanes, this thing had characteristics I never saw,” Commander Fravor said. “It was almost jaw-dropping. It was very strange.”"

Haha... and some thought saying he was known for seeing UFO's that others didn't dismissed this completely... He was the leader of the whole navy air crafts.. you had to have the sharpest vision to be the leader..

If you need proof of aliens, look at the sun and moon in the sky on a full moon.. nearly the exact same size in the sky
Coincedence?? Nope..
Our 1 Earth that has an equal-sun moon from Earth, our 1 planet of many UFO reports, and our 1 planet where 1 species is much different then all the rest.
Shooting lasers at the sky while the next one is throwing tree nuts on the street to get cracked open by vehicles

A few corrections. The objects were not seen to drop. There were radar returns up high and then down low. It is unclear why the two returns were decided to represent the same object.

You assign Fravor to be the leader and have the best vision. I don't believe that is correct. You are free to try and support that "He was the leader of the whole navy air crafts." As far as the reports go he was a pilot, just one of the pilots.

You are correct that Fravor wanted to see UFOs and he reports seeing a UFO. He was not the only one out there. Why is only person deciding UFO?

The apparent sizes of the Sun and Moon indicate aliens? That's funny. That's what is known as a non sequitur.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dwarf vs grey ufo

In the article it says "At the time of his alleged sighting, he was commander of a 300-member Navy squadron aboard the USS Nimitz known as Strike Fighter Squadron 41."Remember we aren't enemies. The truth is there whether me or you finds it or not and we should both be working to encounter that.

Also you state in the video it was a jet, I don't know. But as you said that video was not the one in the incident. The one from the incident is this youtube clip where you can see it 'accelerate' off at the end. 

https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=x8T6PgYrAYI
They released an unrelated video just to kind of go along with the story to get the imagery and more proof that they had past encounters
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
1 hour ago, dwarf vs grey ufo said:

feel free to ask questions or specifics. there was some parts that made sense in the most basic english, so if you can't understand even that there is no point in conversing.

my basic English must be crap then because: 

 

1 hour ago, dwarf vs grey ufo said:

If you need proof of aliens, look at the sun and moon in the sky on a full moon.. nearly the exact same size in the sky
Coincedence?? Nope..

2

makes no sense to me-- maybe it will to others? we'll see- oh joy;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dwarf vs grey ufo

maybe this image of a solar eclipse will help 
did this 'size mash up' just happen out of chance? 
and humans, on a planet where they have books written "man was made in god's image, apart from beasts, and the beasts were put there to be eaten by man"  
i just mean if you examine what humans know, is they aren't animals identically 
another odd characteristic to have one species different. on this planet with an equal sun moon from earth. 
anything clicking?

Screen Shot 2018-05-07 at 6.00.38 AM.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
3 minutes ago, dwarf vs grey ufo said:

on this planet with an equal sun moon from earth. 
anything clicking?

unfortunately no--- are you suggesting the sun is the same size as the moon & they are both the same distance away? i'm confused

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dwarf vs grey ufo

no, i meant exactly what i said.  ".. nearly the exact same size in the sky" 
The definition of sky is the space and atmosphere we see from the ground. How does them being a certain distance have any relevancy to aliens where as them appearing to be the same size would? 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
2 hours ago, dwarf vs grey ufo said:

In the article it says "At the time of his alleged sighting, he was commander of a 300-member Navy squadron aboard the USS Nimitz known as Strike Fighter Squadron 41."Remember we aren't enemies. The truth is there whether me or you finds it or not and we should both be working to encounter that.

Also you state in the video it was a jet, I don't know. But as you said that video was not the one in the incident. The one from the incident is this youtube clip where you can see it 'accelerate' off at the end. 

https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=x8T6PgYrAYI
They released an unrelated video just to kind of go along with the story to get the imagery and more proof that they had past encounters
 

How do you explain that the jet Fravor was in did not have a FLIR? The one you call from the incident is from a plane other than the one Fravor was in.

The object does not accelerate off at the end. The plane turns as the magnification is changed from 1x to 2x. It is an illusion. The tictac video as it is known shows a plane as well. It is a distant plane.

What article states the quote you gave? Always good to give a reference to quotes. It really doesn't matter who he is. That does not support him having the best vision. He and others eventually got close enough to see the target, at least he claims a 1/2 mile closest point.

Can you explain why 6 planes in the air with 12 people in those planes only have one person calling it a UFO? What did the other 11 people in the air have to say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
2 hours ago, dwarf vs grey ufo said:

maybe this image of a solar eclipse will help 
did this 'size mash up' just happen out of chance? 
and humans, on a planet where they have books written "man was made in god's image, apart from beasts, and the beasts were put there to be eaten by man"  
i just mean if you examine what humans know, is they aren't animals identically 
another odd characteristic to have one species different. on this planet with an equal sun moon from earth. 
anything clicking?

Screen Shot 2018-05-07 at 6.00.38 AM.png

Yes it is coincidence. You are making a pretend story to fit what is seen. The Moon used to be a lot closer to Earth. Tides in Devonian times were over 20 times bigger than today. As the Moon recedes from the Earth the eclipses will all be annular eclipses.

All I see clicking is fantasy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
dwarf vs grey ufo

I don't know why he didn't have FLIR it doesn't seem too relevant there is likely some reason.
To say what happened in the clip is coming to your own conclusions. You could also say that it's all just an edited clip with a ship photoshopped on. But the story goes that the people who saw that claimed it zoomed off, and they likely have a way of knowing when the FLIR cam zooms in or out. So they would know.
Here is link to quote http://www.toledoblade.com/local/2018/03/31/Toledo-native-David-Fravor-recalls-close-encounter-with-UFO.html 11th citation.
Fravor was contact by Eluziondo and encouraged to share his tail of the incident. It also states in the article the other 3 who were with him had their identities not disclosed because they were still in service. Not sure about the second group. Maybe they weren't contacted, still in service, or don't want to be known publicly.

For moon/sun I am not making a pretend story to fit what is seen. Once again I see someone who sees in the world what they are doing themselves. There is no proof that the moon has been closer. You see fantasy that means that that is what you are. I see truth. Think of a person who truth is important to. They see someone talking about seeing a ghost. The truth-inquirer considers maybe they saw it, maybe they were delusional.

Now imagine what it takes for someone to claim it as fantasy. It means that was the first opinion formed, dropped it on, and didn't look any deeper. In essence this person didn't even consider any of the truths. They didn't even find truth of potential psychological problems that could have caused them to see the potential ghost. But the truth seeker will find out what they saw. The one claiming fantasy claims such because they had no interest in truth. And inevitably being the reflection they judge.

Even if we are to accept the 1 in a million probability that we, are alive during the amazing time that the sun/moon are equal in vision
and ignore the 999 999/ 1 000 000 chance it's not
Is like taking the drink out and sipping it 
right as the bottle runs dry to the mouth
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
12 minutes ago, dwarf vs grey ufo said:

I don't know why he didn't have FLIR it doesn't seem too relevant there is likely some reason.
To say what happened in the clip is coming to your own conclusions. You could also say that it's all just an edited clip with a ship photoshopped on. But the story goes that the people who saw that claimed it zoomed off, and they likely have a way of knowing when the FLIR cam zooms in or out. So they would know.
Here is link to quote http://www.toledoblade.com/local/2018/03/31/Toledo-native-David-Fravor-recalls-close-encounter-with-UFO.html 11th citation.
Fravor was contact by Eluziondo and encouraged to share his tail of the incident. It also states in the article the other 3 who were with him had their identities not disclosed because they were still in service. Not sure about the second group. Maybe they weren't contacted, still in service, or don't want to be known publicly.

For moon/sun I am not making a pretend story to fit what is seen. Once again I see someone who sees in the world what they are doing themselves. There is no proof that the moon has been closer. You see fantasy that means that that is what you are. I see truth. Think of a person who truth is important to. They see someone talking about seeing a ghost. The truth-inquirer considers maybe they saw it, maybe they were delusional.

Now imagine what it takes for someone to claim it as fantasy. It means that was the first opinion formed, dropped it on, and didn't look any deeper. In essence this person didn't even consider any of the truths. They didn't even find truth of potential psychological problems that could have caused them to see the potential ghost. But the truth seeker will find out what they saw. The one claiming fantasy claims such because they had no interest in truth. And inevitably being the reflection they judge.

Even if we are to accept the 1 in a million probability that we, are alive during the amazing time that the sun/moon are equal in vision
and ignore the 999 999/ 1 000 000 chance it's not
Is like taking the drink out and sipping it 
right as the bottle runs dry to the mouth
 

The point is that the video you linked to does not match up with Fravor's statement.

I stated what is seen in the video. The zoom increases. Are you denying that? Maybe you need to look at the video. The video speaks for itself. People have analyzed the video and have shown that it did not zoom off. The video is the evidence. It tells us quite clearly there is no zoom off.

The information in that link does nothing but make an appeal to authority. Is that all there is? Only Fravor, 1 out of 4, thought it was a UFO.

The evidence that the Moon was closer is overwhelming. Just because you don't know that is not surprising. You definitely do NOT see truth. Let's get you away from fantasy and teach you something today.

http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-12311119

Quote

On early Earth, when the Moon was newly formed, days were five hours long, but with the Moon's braking effect operating on the Earth for the last 4.5bn years, days have slowed down to the 24 hours that we are familiar with now, and they will continue to slow down in the future.

We can see some evidence of the slowdown in the fossil records of some creatures.

By looking at the daily growth bands of corals we can calculate the numbers of days that occurred per year in past periods, and from this we can see that days are getting longer, at a rate of 19 hours every 4.5bn years.

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/about-us/37-our-solar-system/the-moon/the-moon-and-the-earth/111-is-the-moon-moving-away-from-the-earth-when-was-this-discovered-intermediate

Quote

Many physicists considered the effects of tides on the Earth-Moon system. However, George Howard Darwin (Charles Darwin's son) was the first person to work out, in a mathematical way, how the Moon's orbit would evolve due to tidal friction, in the late 19th century. He is usually credited with the invention of the modern theory of tidal evolution.

So that's where the idea came from, but how was it first measured? The answer is quite complicated, but I've tried to give the best answer I can, based on a little research into the history of the question.

There are three ways for us to actually measure the effects of tidal friction.

* Measure the change in the length of the lunar month over time.

This can be accomplished by examining the thickness of tidal deposits preserved in rocks, called tidal rhythmites, which can be billions of years old, although measurements only exist for rhythmites that are 900 million years old. As far as I can find (I am not a geologist!) these measurements have only been done since the early 90's.

* Measure the change in the distance between the Earth and the Moon.

This is accomplished in modern times by bouncing lasers off reflectors left on the surface of the Moon by the Apollo astronauts. Less accurate measurements were obtained in the early 70's.

* Measure the change in the rotational period of the Earth over time.

Nowadays, the rotation of the Earth is measured using the Very Long Baseline Interferometry, a technique using many radio telescopes a great distance apart. With VLBI, the positions of quasars (tiny, distant, radio-bright objects) can be measured very accuarately. Since the rotating Earth carries the antennas along, these measurements can tell us the rotation speed of the Earth very accurately.

However, the change in the Earth's rotational period was first measured using eclipses, of all things. Astronomers who studied the timing of eclipses over many centuries found that the Moon seemed to be accelerating in its orbit, but what was actually happening was the the Earth's rotation was slowing down. The effect was first noticed by Edmund Halley in 1695, and first measured by Richard Dunthorne in 1748--though neither one really understood what they were seeing. I think this is the earliest discovery of the effect.

You say no evidence and it has been known about for hundreds of years.

As I already pointed out Devonian tides were 20 plus times higher than today.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

Need to fix a big mistake on my part. Tides during the Devonian were only 7 times higher, not 20 times as I stated above.

http://www.miguasha.ca/mig-en/a_devonian_day.php

Quote

we can calculate that the Moon is now twice as far from Earth as it was during Devonian time. As a consequence, Devonian tides were up to seven times larger than today’s tides.

Sorry about that mistake.

The fossil evidence is very clear that the Moon has been receding at a steady rate from the Earth for hundreds of million of years. The gray claim is nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fila
On 07/05/2018 at 10:16 PM, stereologist said:

It's funny what passes for interesting these days. The interesting aspect to this story ended a long time ago. It's an old story mixed with an unrelated video. The video shows a distant plane.

There are only anecdotes it seems. The sources are labeled as reputable because anecdotes is all there is. It has been nothing but anecdotes.

Go ahead and try to show whatever. I have repeatedly showed that you use mistake after mistake after mistake. When shown that you are incorrect you continue on with your blunders. Go ahead.

Stop telling lies. I have repeatedly shown you were wrong.

1. You were wrong about zoom yet you blundered on about the object in the video being large. Because you refuse to listen to the EVIDENCE I allowed you to make an ass of yourself in several posts. You never asked why you were wrong about the magnification.

2. You repeatedly made statements that witnesses were consistent about the Phoenix Lihts. Even a UFO believer posted a link showing they were not consistent and yet you blundered on with your glaring error about consistency.

There are two places where you were shown the evidence and now you lie that I never explain how you were wrong. I just posted the reason you were wrong about the magnification of the ATFLIR image and you lie the next day that I don't show you the reason.

UFOs are interesting.., so are ghosts and religion. Anecdote is a broad term.., but yes.., "an interesting story about a real incident or person."
You accuse me of lying? Please provide details.

You say I am wrong.., but never tell me how. I think you are an internet troll.

1) Provide details please

2) This is an outright lie Stereologist. I am not comfortable with you spreading lies about me around the forum. Please refrain from outright lying about me.

Show me. Quote it and post it. Otherwise you are constantly talking utter nonsense as usual. If you continue this pattern.., I have no option but to label you as an internet troll.., with an obvious biased agenda to simply dismiss any information regarding UFOs.
I am very busy and rarely get a chance to come to this forum.., so I need to manage my time wisely. You do nothing to move the conversation forwards.., and you ONLY look at one side. I cannot work with biased individuals.

In fact.., from now on I am boycotting ANYONE who displays bias. Including biased "believers" who do not check facts.., and biased "scoffers" who claim to be sceptics but are clearly one sided. If you have chosen a side based on the current evidence.., then you are officially biased. Simple.

I am a true sceptic.

Edited by Fila
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fila
On 06/05/2018 at 7:00 PM, pokingjoker said:

Ya know it never fails to amaze me of the people here who just utterly dismiss people like this. This is a professional aviator after 18 years of flying and experience of which I can't truly comprehend, yet people just dismiss him without a thought. What he claims to have witnessed should be looked at from his perspective. This guy has a way better understanding of his job than the majority of people. I'm not saying it was ET, just that a trained professional saw something he has never seen before, and defies his knowledge, yet people are like it was nothing. To come out on record and state he witnessed something of that extreme, my hat goes off to him and the many others who have. That takes guts. Could it have been a thousand other things, sure. Yet he states otherwise, I don't know about you but his experience certainly trumps mine in the sky.

I have seen "scoffers" like Stereologist make statements about witnesses not seeing an unknown event.., simply because 1 pilot saw a plane.


Scoffers will say anything to win an argument, and use "rules" when it suits them. (I.e. pilots are professionals if they see a plane.., but crackpots if they report an unknown object which could be anything). Its automatic dismissal. Very obvious too.

Rather than looking into the case and perhaps finding a new discovery like ball lighting.., more time and effort is spent NOT looking into the actual case to see what it could be. This is very obvious bias and unscientific. We don't analyse any other topic this way. Look at the facts.., not waste time looking into Richard Feynman's personal life. Read his work. If you cannot find facts.., stop reading the nonsense and move on to something that will produce sufficient data. And most importantly.., do not dismiss a case due to a lack of evidence. Take note of what facts you can find. These are not negated by a lack of proof. This is evidence.

A lack of proof does not equate to a solution. It simply means we need more data.

Edited by Fila
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist
39 minutes ago, Fila said:

UFOs are interesting.., so are ghosts and religion. Anecdote is a broad term.., but yes.., "an interesting story about a real incident or person."
You accuse me of lying? Please provide details.

You say I am wrong.., but never tell me how. I think you are an internet troll.

1) Provide details please

2) This is an outright lie Stereologist. I am not comfortable with you spreading lies about me around the forum. Please refrain from outright lying about me.

Show me. Quote it and post it. Otherwise you are constantly talking utter nonsense as usual. If you continue this pattern.., I have no option but to label you as an internet troll.., with an obvious biased agenda to simply dismiss any information regarding UFOs.
I am very busy and rarely get a chance to come to this forum.., so I need to manage my time wisely. You do nothing to move the conversation forwards.., and you ONLY look at one side. I cannot work with biased individuals.

In fact.., from now on I am boycotting ANYONE who displays bias. Including biased "believers" who do not check facts.., and biased "scoffers" who claim to be sceptics but are clearly one sided. If you have chosen a side based on the current evidence.., then you are officially biased. Simple.

I am a true sceptic.

I already provided the details. Once again you ignore them. I expect no less from your posts.

If you can't remember what you posted then take the time to go back and read your posts.

I'm really not interested in posting your glaring mistakes more than once.

What is clear is that YOU do not check fact and make up blunders and when told that you are dead wrong you don't seem to care.

You have the opportunity to learn so when people point out your blunders you might take the time to ask instead of obstinately continuing on in a fruitless wrong manner as you always seem to do.

No. You are definitely not a skeptic. A skeptic would welcome corrections and move forward.

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fila
17 minutes ago, stereologist said:

I already provided the details. Once again you ignore them. I expect no less from your posts.

If you can't remember what you posted then take the time to go back and read your posts.

I'm really not interested in posting your glaring mistakes more than once.

What is clear is that YOU do not check fact and make up blunders and when told that you are dead wrong you don't seem to care.

You have the opportunity to learn so when people point out your blunders you might take the time to ask instead of obstinately continuing on in a fruitless wrong manner as you always seem to do.

No. You are definitely not a skeptic. A skeptic would welcome corrections and move forward.

Haha, sorry man. I gotta laugh. I finally figured you out hey. Keep up the lies Stereo.., and whatever you do.., don't go into detail. As long as you talk loud and repeat yourself I'm sure you will trick someone. 

I know the truth.., and I know you do too. :) Anyone can click my username.., and review my posts to see the truth.

Edited by Fila
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kismit

3. Behaviour Please be civil and courteous to other members at all times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

This topic looks rather dead. It's a story that IIRC was supposed to be followed up by more information from the TTSA, but that has not been the case.

I doubt that it will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fila
On 31/05/2018 at 8:50 PM, stereologist said:

This topic looks rather dead. It's a story that IIRC was supposed to be followed up by more information from the TTSA, but that has not been the case.

I doubt that it will.

I guess this is another cold case that needs to be added to the database. Technically and officially an 'unknown' object. +1 reason for scientific observation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
stereologist

It was identified as a distant plane. 

Add this to the pile of junk being pushed by the TTSA who are trying to openly make a buck off the believers.

There is no official statement here. Some people simply need to read the thread and see that there is NO official statement.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ChrLzs
7 hours ago, stereologist said:

It was identified as a distant plane. 

Add this to the pile of junk being pushed by the TTSA who are trying to openly make a buck off the believers.

There is no official statement here. Some people simply need to read the thread and see that there is NO official statement.

I forget who it was, but someone here said they had donated to TTSA about a year back - I'd love to hear their comments now about how worthwhile that expenditure was... One born every minute ... (and one more who will take their money off them).

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fila
8 hours ago, stereologist said:

It was identified as a distant plane. 

Oh great. I must have missed it. Can you please show me where this was concluded, thank you.

I reviewed the last few pages but don't see how you formed this conclusion since then.., or how you can speak with 100% certainty.
I think you will need to provide evidence to support your claims from now on.

If you cannot provide a sufficient rational, or evidence.., then this post will be proof that you are a liar.., who spams opinions using language that makes it seem like an official conclusion.

Similar posts in the future will automatically be labelled as such.., as you set the precedent on yourself.

What is the reasoning behind this? Why would someone constantly spam their opinions.., but using language to make it seem like an official conclusion. Why?
Very strange behaviour.

Edited by Fila

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.