New topic
PrintableByron said: PanthaGirl said: Yah I understand that you can speak to astronauts etc but I need something more solid then just that. Other than going there yourself what could you possibly be shown that would erase your doubts? lol... Pretty much evidence without any anomalies present. It was estimated prior to the alleged moon landing that there was a .0014 chance of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth. The affects of radiation, solar flares and micro meteorites were also taken into account. There is also evidence that shows mistakes and anomalies on the official record of NASA film footage and still photographs. If you look for it, you will also see the actual official Apollo film footage to illustrate and also possibly educate you of the anomalies of what has become one of the biggest cover ups in history. If Man did go to the Moon during the missions, the Apollo films that we were told were filmed on the Moon are fake and not the real footage. Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt...etc etc etc | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
the fairy hoax was pretty impressive. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
hokie said: PanthaGirl said: Allegedly. You're certainly entitled to your own opinion, but are you serious? 
I always get a kick out of hearing people that think these things are some big conspiracy plot. I think beyond the small world most people box themselves in. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PanthaGirl said: Byron said: Other than going there yourself what could you possibly be shown that would erase your doubts? lol... Pretty much evidence without any anomalies present. It was estimated prior to the alleged moon landing that there was a .0014 chance of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth. The affects of radiation, solar flares and micro meteorites were also taken into account. There is also evidence that shows mistakes and anomalies on the official record of NASA film footage and still photographs. If you look for it, you will also see the actual official Apollo film footage to illustrate and also possibly educate you of the anomalies of what has become one of the biggest cover ups in history. If Man did go to the Moon during the missions, the Apollo films that we were told were filmed on the Moon are fake and not the real footage. Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt...etc etc etc I've heard and read about the NASA hoax myself, and I do agree that until folks have the opportunity or even the guts to go there themselves, this will always be the subject of debate  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
angel345 said: PanthaGirl said: Pretty much evidence without any anomalies present. It was estimated prior to the alleged moon landing that there was a .0014 chance of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth. The affects of radiation, solar flares and micro meteorites were also taken into account. There is also evidence that shows mistakes and anomalies on the official record of NASA film footage and still photographs. If you look for it, you will also see the actual official Apollo film footage to illustrate and also possibly educate you of the anomalies of what has become one of the biggest cover ups in history. If Man did go to the Moon during the missions, the Apollo films that we were told were filmed on the Moon are fake and not the real footage. Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt...etc etc etc I've heard and read about the NASA hoax myself, and I do agree that until folks have the opportunity or even the guts to go there themselves, this will always be the subject of debate there is definitly something funny about the photos, whether they landed and for some reason had to stage the photo op, | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
angelcat said: angel345 said: I've heard and read about the NASA hoax myself, and I do agree that until folks have the opportunity or even the guts to go there themselves, this will always be the subject of debate there is definitly something funny about the photos, whether they landed and for some reason had to stage the photo op, I'm neutral on this so far. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
angel345 said: If man evolved from apes, how come there's still apes left on this planet? Two different DNA patterns, and have you ever heard of DNA shifting like that? One of the biggest hoax on the face of this earth. EVOLUTION.
The theory concerning the evolution of man proposes that humans and apes derive from an apelike ancestor that lived on earth a few million years ago. The theory states that man, through a combination of environmental and genetic factors and the occurrence and build-up of mutations in the genetic sequence of an organism, emerged as a species to produce the variety of ethnicities seen today, while modern apes evolved on a separate evolutionary pathway. Anyways closer examination of the evidence reveals evolution to be increasingly less scientific and more reliant upon peoples beliefs, not proof. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PanthaGirl said: angel345 said: If man evolved from apes, how come there's still apes left on this planet? Two different DNA patterns, and have you ever heard of DNA shifting like that? One of the biggest hoax on the face of this earth. EVOLUTION.
The theory concerning the evolution of man proposes that humans and apes derive from an apelike ancestor that lived on earth a few million years ago. The theory states that man, through a combination of environmental and genetic factors and the occurrence and build-up of mutations in the genetic sequence of an organism, emerged as a species to produce the variety of ethnicities seen today, while modern apes evolved on a separate evolutionary pathway. Anyways closer examination of the evidence reveals evolution to be increasingly less scientific and more reliant upon peoples beliefs, not proof. Even the way it's broken down sounds fishy with them. Another problem I have with that theory is that the earth is not that old. Some people think it is so I am not going to debate it. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Biggest hoax? That man is the most intelligent creature on Earth. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PanthaGirl said: hokie said: You're certainly entitled to your own opinion, but are you serious?
I always get a kick out of hearing people that think these things are some big conspiracy plot. I think beyond the small world most people box themselves in. Whoa. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PanthaGirl said: Byron said: Other than going there yourself what could you possibly be shown that would erase your doubts? lol... Pretty much evidence without any anomalies present. It was estimated prior to the alleged moon landing that there was a .0014 chance of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth. The affects of radiation, solar flares and micro meteorites were also taken into account. "The likelihood of success was calculated to be so small that it is inconceivable the moon landings could have actually taken place. Bill Kaysing has claimed that the chance of a successful landing on the moon was calculated to be 0.0017% (1 in 60,000). The source of this information appears to be a report prepared by the Rocketdyne company in the late 1950s. This assessment was, of course, based on understanding and technology existing at the time of the report. As tremendous resources were poured into the problem over the next decade, the reliability studies improved dramatically. During the mid-1960s the Apollo Support Department of the General Electric Company in Florida conducted extensive mission reliability studies for NASA. These studies were based on very elaborate reliability models of all of the systems. A reliability profile over the course of a mission was generated by computer simulation, and a large number of such simulations were carried out for different scenarios. Based on those studies, the probability of landing on the moon and returning safely to earth never dropped below 90%. " There is also evidence that shows mistakes and anomalies on the official record of NASA film footage and still photographs. If you look for it, you will also see the actual official Apollo film footage to illustrate and also possibly educate you of the anomalies of what has become one of the biggest cover ups in history.
Are you talking about things like the flag moving, moon shadows and the infamous "Coke bottle"? lol...All of those "anomalies" have been thoroughly and validly explained. If Man did go to the Moon during the missions, the Apollo films that we were told were filmed on the Moon are fake and not the real footage. Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt...etc etc etc
"A big staple of the HBs is the claim that radiation in the van Allen Belts and in deep space would have killed the astronauts in minutes. They interview a Russian cosmonaut involved in the USSR Moon program, who says that they were worried about going in to the unknowns of space, and suspected that radiation would have penetrated the hull of the spacecraft. Good: Kaysing's exact words in the program are ``Any human being traveling through the van Allen belt would have been rendered either extremely ill or actually killed by the radiation within a short time thereof.'' This is complete and utter nonsense. The van Allen belts are regions above the Earth's surface where the Earth's magnetic field has trapped particles of the solar wind. An unprotected man would indeed get a lethal dose of radiation, if he stayed there long enough. Actually, the spaceship traveled through the belts pretty quickly, getting past them in an hour or so. There simply wasn't enough time to get a lethal dose, and, as a matter of fact, the metal hull of the spaceship did indeed block most of the radiation. For a detailed explanation of all this, my fellow Mad Scientist William Wheaton has a page with the technical data about the doses received by the astronauts ( http://www.wwheaton.com/w...mad19.html ). Another excellent page about this, that also gives a history of NASA radiation testing, is from the Biomedical Results of Apollo site ( http://lsda.jsc.nasa.gov/.../S2ch3.htm ). An interesting read!" | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Byron said:[quote] PanthaGirl said: Are you talking about things like the flag moving, moon shadows and the infamous "Coke bottle"? lol...All of those "anomalies" have been thoroughly and validly explained. If Man did go to the Moon during the missions, the Apollo films that we were told were filmed on the Moon are fake and not the real footage. Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt...etc etc etc
"A big staple of the HBs is the claim that radiation in the van Allen Belts and in deep space would have killed the astronauts in minutes. They interview a Russian cosmonaut involved in the USSR Moon program, who says that they were worried about going in to the unknowns of space, and suspected that radiation would have penetrated the hull of the spacecraft. Good: Kaysing's exact words in the program are ``Any human being traveling through the van Allen belt would have been rendered either extremely ill or actually killed by the radiation within a short time thereof.'' This is complete and utter nonsense. The van Allen belts are regions above the Earth's surface where the Earth's magnetic field has trapped particles of the solar wind. An unprotected man would indeed get a lethal dose of radiation, if he stayed there long enough. Actually, the spaceship traveled through the belts pretty quickly, getting past them in an hour or so. There simply wasn't enough time to get a lethal dose, and, as a matter of fact, the metal hull of the spaceship did indeed block most of the radiation. For a detailed explanation of all this, my fellow Mad Scientist William Wheaton has a page with the technical data about the doses received by the astronauts ( http://www.wwheaton.com/w...mad19.html ). Another excellent page about this, that also gives a history of NASA radiation testing, is from the Biomedical Results of Apollo site ( http://lsda.jsc.nasa.gov/.../S2ch3.htm ). An interesting read!" Most succinct and empirical  What you don't remember never happened | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PanthaGirl said: hokie said: You're certainly entitled to your own opinion, but are you serious?
I always get a kick out of hearing people that think these things are some big conspiracy plot. I think beyond the small world most people box themselves in. I think you need to open the lid of yours and let some air in | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Byron said: PanthaGirl said: I think beyond the small world most people box themselves in. I think you need to open the lid of yours and let some air in I love you.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
endymion said: Byron said: "A big staple of the HBs is the claim that radiation in the van Allen Belts and in deep space would have killed the astronauts in minutes. They interview a Russian cosmonaut involved in the USSR Moon program, who says that they were worried about going in to the unknowns of space, and suspected that radiation would have penetrated the hull of the spacecraft. Good: Kaysing's exact words in the program are ``Any human being traveling through the van Allen belt would have been rendered either extremely ill or actually killed by the radiation within a short time thereof.'' This is complete and utter nonsense. The van Allen belts are regions above the Earth's surface where the Earth's magnetic field has trapped particles of the solar wind. An unprotected man would indeed get a lethal dose of radiation, if he stayed there long enough. Actually, the spaceship traveled through the belts pretty quickly, getting past them in an hour or so. There simply wasn't enough time to get a lethal dose, and, as a matter of fact, the metal hull of the spaceship did indeed block most of the radiation. For a detailed explanation of all this, my fellow Mad Scientist William Wheaton has a page with the technical data about the doses received by the astronauts ( http://www.wwheaton.com/w...mad19.html ). Another excellent page about this, that also gives a history of NASA radiation testing, is from the Biomedical Results of Apollo site ( http://lsda.jsc.nasa.gov/.../S2ch3.htm ). An interesting read!" Most succinct and empirical There is GOBS of literature and studies out there that debunk the whole "Moon Landing Hoax" theory, very easy to find ...and it's all very persuasive. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
hokie said: Byron said: I think you need to open the lid of yours and let some air in I love you. Of course you do lol  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Byron said: hokie said: I love you. Of course you do lol
It's easy to do. You're smart, funny, handsome, caring, and SENSIBLE and LOGICAL. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Byron said: PanthaGirl said: I think beyond the small world most people box themselves in. I think you need to open the lid of yours and let some air in Says the man who found it necessary to cut and paste material from other sites! One theory will always try and debunk the other. It all comes to down to your own personal beliefs, I'm not here to change your opinion, I'm here to express my own. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I think the earth we live on is one big hoax.
I think we're all not really here. It's all in our imagination. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PanthaGirl said: Byron said: I think you need to open the lid of yours and let some air in Says the man who found it necessary to cut and paste material from other sites! One theory will always try and debunk the other. It all comes to down to your own personal beliefs, I'm not here to change your opinion, I'm here to express my own. surely a subject like this would need researching i don't think anyone can claim to know all things without a little bit of investigation... would they? Does it come down to personal beliefs? some peoples personal beliefs on some subjects aren't correct. What you don't remember never happened | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PanthaGirl said: Byron said: I think you need to open the lid of yours and let some air in Says the man who found it necessary to cut and paste material from other sites! What does that have to do with "living within a box", as you put it? lol...does the fact that I copied and pasted this info mean that I didn't understand it? Not in the slightest. Does the fact that I copied and pasted the info mean that the info is somehow invalid? Not in the slightest. I'm not sure, but was your "copy and paste" comment meant to devalue its merits or my belief that they debunk your conclusions?...You lost me there lol. One theory will always try and debunk the other. It all comes to down to your own personal beliefs, I'm not here to change your opinion, I'm here to express my own.
The difference is, what I presented wasn't "theory"...it was fact. I didn't theorize that NASA must have done a lot of testing to improve the probability of a successful moon landing mission...NASA really DID do all those tests. I didn't theorize how astonauts could survive the radiation from the van Allen Belts...I gave factual information as to why the radiation was not an issue. Now you can choose to include those facts into your already-formed conclusions and see if they change your mind...that's what I tend to do when someone presents a conspiracy theory that seems far too unlikely. I go in search of facts that debunk the conspiracy and see if what's being said makes sense or if it just sounds like more hypothesizing. Believe me, EVERYTHING I read concerning the facts that debunk the moon landing hoax made an insane amount of sense. I believe and follow Occam's razor: the simplest explanation for any event or phenomenom is usually the right one. The twists of logic and the insane level of involvement and secrecy required of hundreds if not thousands of people to pull off a fake moon landing pretty much eliminates it from being the "simplest explanation" in my mind. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
 | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
endymion said: PanthaGirl said: Says the man who found it necessary to cut and paste material from other sites! One theory will always try and debunk the other. It all comes to down to your own personal beliefs, I'm not here to change your opinion, I'm here to express my own. surely a subject like this would need researching i don't think anyone can claim to know all things without a little bit of investigation... would they? Does it come down to personal beliefs? some peoples personal beliefs on some subjects aren't correct. Yah of course some personal beliefs won't be correct on the subject yet in saying that ones own beliefs will change the outcome of how it is perceived. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Byron said:[quote] PanthaGirl said: What does that have to do with "living within a box", as you put it? lol...does the fact that I copied and pasted this info mean that I didn't understand it? Not in the slightest. Does the fact that I copied and pasted the info mean that the info is somehow invalid? Not in the slightest. I'm not sure, but was your "copy and paste" comment meant to devalue its merits or my belief that they debunk your conclusions?...You lost me there lol. One theory will always try and debunk the other. It all comes to down to your own personal beliefs, I'm not here to change your opinion, I'm here to express my own.
The difference is, what I presented wasn't "theory"...it was fact. I didn't theorize that NASA must have done a lot of testing to improve the probability of a successful moon landing mission...NASA really DID do all those tests. I didn't theorize how astonauts could survive the radiation from the van Allen Belts...I gave factual information as to why the radiation was not an issue. Now you can choose to include those facts into your already-formed conclusions and see if they change your mind...that's what I tend to do when someone presents a conspiracy theory that seems far too unlikely. I go in search of facts that debunk the conspiracy and see if what's being said makes sense or if it just sounds like more hypothesizing. Believe me, EVERYTHING I read concerning the facts that debunk the moon landing hoax made an insane amount of sense. I believe and follow Occam's razor: the simplest explanation for any event or phenomenom is usually the right one. The twists of logic and the insane level of involvement and secrecy required of hundreds if not thousands of people to pull off a fake moon landing pretty much eliminates it from being the "simplest explanation" in my mind. Exactly it's the simplest explanation in your mind so that's great, but these are my own opinions formed after much study and reading into the numerous claims, theories, and so called facts! I have exhausted all means of the why's and how's and still keep coming up with the same conclusions because they are the most logical. And as stated below, once again it too falls under beliefs. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
The absolute biggest? Religion. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PanthaGirl said: Byron said: The difference is, what I presented wasn't "theory"...it was fact. I didn't theorize that NASA must have done a lot of testing to improve the probability of a successful moon landing mission...NASA really DID do all those tests. I didn't theorize how astonauts could survive the radiation from the van Allen Belts...I gave factual information as to why the radiation was not an issue. Now you can choose to include those facts into your already-formed conclusions and see if they change your mind...that's what I tend to do when someone presents a conspiracy theory that seems far too unlikely. I go in search of facts that debunk the conspiracy and see if what's being said makes sense or if it just sounds like more hypothesizing. Believe me, EVERYTHING I read concerning the facts that debunk the moon landing hoax made an insane amount of sense. I believe and follow Occam's razor: the simplest explanation for any event or phenomenom is usually the right one. The twists of logic and the insane level of involvement and secrecy required of hundreds if not thousands of people to pull off a fake moon landing pretty much eliminates it from being the "simplest explanation" in my mind. Exactly it's the simplest explanation in your mind so that's great, but these are my own opinions formed after much study and reading into the numerous claims, theories, and so called facts! I have exhausted all means of the why's and how's and still keep coming up with the same conclusions because they are the most logical. And as stated below, once again it too falls under beliefs.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
And by the way...
PanthaGirl said: Says the man who found it necessary to cut and paste material from other sites! From your other post, you said this: It was estimated prior to the alleged moon landing that there was a .0014 chance of landing a man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth. The affects of radiation, solar flares and micro meteorites were also taken into account.
From http://engforum.pravda.ru...p?t=247168 : "...it was estimated in 1959 that there was a .0014 chance of landing man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth. This took into account the effects of radiation, solar flares and micro meteorites" From http://michaeltsarionmedia.blogspot.com : "...it was estimated in 1959 that there was a .0014 chance of landing man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth. This took into account the effects of radiation, solar flares and micro meteorites." From http://www.alienhub.com/s...ad.php?t=5 : "...it was estimated in 1959 that there was a .0014 chance of landing man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth. This took into account the effects of radiation, solar flares and micro meteorites." And from about 20,000 other sites out there dedicated to the moon landing hoax. You also said this: Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt..
From http://www.thekeyboard.or...aysing.htm : "Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay in near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt." From http://www.ufos-aliens.co...pollo.html : "Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay in near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt!!!" From http://www.alienhub.com/s...ad.php?t=5 : "Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay in near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt!!!" And from about 20,000 other sites dedicated to the moon landing hoax. Now, what was that you were saying about copying and pasting? lol  ... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Byron said: And by the way...
PanthaGirl said: Says the man who found it necessary to cut and paste material from other sites! From your other post, you said this: From http://engforum.pravda.ru...p?t=247168 : "...it was estimated in 1959 that there was a .0014 chance of landing man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth. This took into account the effects of radiation, solar flares and micro meteorites" From http://michaeltsarionmedia.blogspot.com : "...it was estimated in 1959 that there was a .0014 chance of landing man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth. This took into account the effects of radiation, solar flares and micro meteorites." From http://www.alienhub.com/s...ad.php?t=5 : "...it was estimated in 1959 that there was a .0014 chance of landing man on the Moon and returning him safely to Earth. This took into account the effects of radiation, solar flares and micro meteorites." And from about 20,000 other sites out there dedicated to the moon landing hoax. You also said this: Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt..
From http://www.thekeyboard.or...aysing.htm : "Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay in near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt." From http://www.ufos-aliens.co...pollo.html : "Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay in near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt!!!" From http://www.alienhub.com/s...ad.php?t=5 : "Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay in near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt!!!" And from about 20,000 other sites dedicated to the moon landing hoax. Now, what was that you were saying about copying and pasting? lol ...I don't need that function with my selective and photographic memory. But hey thanks for trying to make a fool of me and failing completely. Bzzzzz next. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
PanthaGirl said: Byron said: And by the way...
From http://www.thekeyboard.or...aysing.htm : "Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay in near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt." From http://www.ufos-aliens.co...pollo.html : "Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay in near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt!!!" From http://www.alienhub.com/s...ad.php?t=5 : "Evidence suggests that Man could not travel to the Moon's surface, but instead they had to stay in near Earth orbit within the safety of the Earth's magnetic field that would have protected them from the radiation that is emitted by the Van Allen radiation belt!!!" And from about 20,000 other sites dedicated to the moon landing hoax. Now, what was that you were saying about copying and pasting? lol ...I don't need that function with my selective and photographic memory. But hey thanks for trying to make a fool of me and failing completely. Bzzzzz next. 
Keep going! Keep going! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
angel345 said: One of the biggest hoax on the face of this earth. EVOLUTION.
It is not known why FuNkeNsteiN capitalizes his name as he does, though some speculate sunlight deficiency caused by the most pimpified white guy afro in Nordic history.
- Lammastide | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
