Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next >  [ show all ]
Invisiblepsyka
Praetorian
 User Gallery

Registered: 06/09/03
Posts: 1,652
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: EternalCowabunga]
    #7518644 - 10/15/07 08:16 AM (16 years, 3 months ago)

I have to say Eternal Cowabunga, thats some heavy thinking and rather impressive you've seen that phenomena rely on conditions in order for it to emerge. However, I would say that if a God was the creator of all things, then why make everything impermanent, changing, and thus subject to dissatisfaction, especially if he himself is permanent and unchanging? To suggest that God is impermanent and changing is to imply there is no state of God at all :smile:


The beginning is not fathomable, and I'm highly suspect that the Big Bang was the absolute beginning. Perhaps, it was the beginning to the current state of this known Universe, however I do not believe it was the first or only Big Bang to occur. Rather, I believe the Universe is continually born and dying just like everything else in existence.


--------------------
As the life of a candle,
my wick will burn out.
But, the fire of my mind
shall beam into infinite.



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineBlueCoyote
Beyond
Male User Gallery


Registered: 05/07/04
Posts: 6,697
Loc: Between
Last seen: 3 years, 16 days
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: Veritas]
    #7518928 - 10/15/07 10:47 AM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Veritas said:
Yes, then we must ask the question "what created the Creator"?  If everything which exists MUST have an original cause, then the existence of an original Creator does not make sense.



The cause and creation thingy only works in linear time (after the big bang). As we all know (aeh or believe), in singularity, time is not linear, soooo it must not necessarily even be the past, if we look behind the big bang :wink:


--------------------
Though lovers be lost love shall not  And death shall have no dominion
......................................................
"Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men."Martin Luther King, Jr.
'Acceptance is the absolute key - at that moment you gain freedom and you gain power and you gain courage'


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEternalCowabunga
Being of Great Significance
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/04/05
Posts: 7,152
Loc: Time and Space
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: psyka]
    #7519679 - 10/15/07 02:22 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

psyka said:
I have to say Eternal Cowabunga, thats some heavy thinking and rather impressive you've seen that phenomena rely on conditions in order for it to emerge. However, I would say that if a God was the creator of all things, then why make everything impermanent, changing, and thus subject to dissatisfaction, especially if he himself is permanent and unchanging? To suggest that God is impermanent and changing is to imply there is no state of God at all :smile:


The beginning is not fathomable, and I'm highly suspect that the Big Bang was the absolute beginning. Perhaps, it was the beginning to the current state of this known Universe, however I do not believe it was the first or only Big Bang to occur. Rather, I believe the Universe is continually born and dying just like everything else in existence.




I was presenting ideas that I've studied in my philosophy course, I wasn't actually giving my opinion. I don't think it's really possible to know how it began since we weren't there.


--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleIcelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Male


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: EternalCowabunga]
    #7519703 - 10/15/07 02:26 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Who's we white man? I certainly was there, just not in this form. The answer to this question, I have, unfortunately, forgotten.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineonlynow
transformativeinformativeenergy
Male User Gallery


Registered: 02/06/07
Posts: 1,480
Last seen: 16 years, 3 months
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: psyka]
    #7520196 - 10/15/07 04:36 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

psyka said:however I do not believe it was the first or only Big Bang to occur. Rather, I believe the Universe is continually born and dying just like everything else in existence.




good idea :thumbup:


--------------------

Strive to be more than a codified manifestation of a generalized technological consciousness


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineonlynow
transformativeinformativeenergy
Male User Gallery


Registered: 02/06/07
Posts: 1,480
Last seen: 16 years, 3 months
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: Icelander]
    #7520202 - 10/15/07 04:37 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Icelander said:
Who's we white man? I certainly was there, just not in this form. The answer to this question, I have, unfortunately, forgotten.




oh common, surely you have remembered at times? :nut:


--------------------

Strive to be more than a codified manifestation of a generalized technological consciousness


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinea_guy_named_ai
Stranger
Male
Registered: 09/24/07
Posts: 767
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #7520982 - 10/15/07 08:55 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

David Hume argues that we can imagine something in our minds which appears to have no cause, it just pops into our minds from nowhere.




This type of arguement depends upon the mind as a valid tool to begin with. Nevertheless, it it granted that ultimately there is a limit to our knowledge of the world around us. The arguement must start, as any arguement must, with the premise that our minds are valid tools to begin with. Ultimately the argument I used depends upon Spiritual evidence. It has to.

Quote:

Counter: We can picture this but it's simply the title we give the image. In reality it is impossible for us to actually contemplate something coming into being without a cause.




When you use the word "coming" this necessitates a cause. You've already necessitated it by your previous logical premise, that it came. It is a product of a mind that uses logic. It is unavoidable, and there is no alternative. But the logic fits with what we know about the outside world. There is no schism. We never chose the spectrum of light that our eyes perceive. It makes no sense to say that our minds made it up to make sense of the world. That would require a sentience before there was a sentience.

Quote:

An argument for the Universe having a beginning comes from the concept of Infinity...
If there is no beginning, there have been an infinite series of past events. But to say that events can be added to infinity (as in, the present) is self-contradictory. Can we then say there is a defined set of things (past events)? Every event has a possible predescesor but this doesn't entail that the Universe never began.




This arguement does not adequately adress the physical evidence of our universe. Every event in the physical universe does not have a "possible" predecessor, it must have a predecessor. This is according to everything we know about the natural universe. It is inescapable from time, a natural consequence.


Quote:

We can explain the Universe by scientific explanation by appealing to how the laws of the material universe govern creation, but this wouldn't explain WHY those laws are the given laws. Or we can explain it by appealing to personal explanation (free will). Or maybe it's both, like I said - immanent and transcendent. As john said, E=MC2 which means energy and matter are interchangeable.




It's not neccesary to explain ultimately why the laws of the universe are the given laws. I don't understand what your arguement might be concerning free will.


Quote:

One problem we have to address however is whether the world actually exists in the first place for it to have a creator. Bertrand Russel would say we don't need to ask "why", it just is.




It can be said to exist for very good reason. Existence is that which is, and we know the Universe is, therefore it exists.

Quote:

The problem as I see it, is that since this supernatural being is beyond us, we can't really know if we are seeing him and then defining him, or defining him and then seeing him as a result. It's important to make it clear what this supernatural being's attributes are. Is it like a machine, is it like a living organism, can it be anything at all like the creation it has become or being?




Your questions would find answers if you actually looked at the evidence rather than just philosophical speculation. If we can perceive God, then why can't we determine his nature? Isn't perceiving God in itself require us to perceive his nature, whether actual or merely intended ? I believe so. You really seem to be begging the question.
Quote:


Kant argues that we don't need this concept of God because it doesn't add anything. And this is partly true I think, it doesn't add anything. This is because God, or the supernatural being, could be seen as being the negative of everything this reality is - (non-corporeal, timeless, spaceless, etc). On the other hand, a creator is seen as something creating positive attributes, and order is something that is positively present when we look for it. How can we intuit the supernatural if it is the opposite of everything material?




can you prove that God can't exist inside of time and outside of time at once? I think not. In a universe that depends upon a creator, it's time and material essence must depend upon him. But by the same token it must also be required that he is outside of time, or else he would depnd upon time, and God cannot depend upon anything.

Quote:

To exist necessarily would mean it is impossible not to exist by it's very nature. We can say something exists either contingently or necessarily. "I am typing on this keyboard" - this is only contingently true because I don't HAVE to be typing on the keyboard. Does God (existence) HAVE to exist?




Yes, existence requires existence...

If the physical universe depends upon God we can't say exactly how, just like we can't say why the laws of the universe are the given laws. But it's really not necessary.

Quote:

2) Everything apart from God is instrinsically dependent - apprehending this is like apprehending God




everything God created, but not necessary directly apprehending, like for instance rather in the form of an allegory.

Quote:

Hume even goes to say that God, even if there is a supernatural creator, is not necessarily omnipotent or infinite.




There are other routes to determine God's omnipotence etc., starting with differnet place in logic. But even if the being that created this world did not have those attributes, there must have necessarily been an eternal omnipotent God ultimately.

Quote:

unless you accept Aquinas mode of logic which says God is the most simple thing there is and order is just one of these perfect simplicities inherent in the nature of God.




But then what about complexity? How could certain complexities exist without a complex being?

I know I haven't answered everything in your post, but I felt to give it a reponse.







Edited by jonathan_206 (10/15/07 09:16 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinea_guy_named_ai
Stranger
Male
Registered: 09/24/07
Posts: 767
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: a_guy_named_ai]
    #7521056 - 10/15/07 09:13 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

veritas:

Quote:

So "something" automatically equals God? :rolleyes: This is a huge leap of illogic, IMO.




I never said that. But you haven't seen the whole portion of my arguement. Nevertheless, I think I posted enough to show that the creation of the universe requires an intelligence able to direct force.



   
Quote:

Q
Quote:

uote:
    E=MC2 which means energy and matter are interchangeable.






Not quite. It means that we can compare mass and energy using this formula. Star Trek transporter evidence to the contrary, we are not accelerating mass times the speed of light to transform it into energy. :lol:




If you said this to a physicist, he would be the one laughing at you. The very implecation of special reletivity implies that mass has an associated energy and energy has an associated mass.

Quote:

The Law of Conservation of Mass-Energy says that the sum total of mass and energy in the Universe is constant. Mass can be converted into energy and energy can be converted into mass. However, the loss of one will be exactly balanced by the creation of the other.

        - This law was developed to take into consideration the mass-energy conversions that occur in nuclear processes.
        - Mass and energy do not undergo conversions during the more traditional processes that take place in a chemistry lab.

The need for this law only became obvious after Einstein determined that matter and energy were interchangeable. That idea is the core concept of nuclear processes and is derived from the equation.




Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEternalCowabunga
Being of Great Significance
Male User Gallery


Registered: 04/04/05
Posts: 7,152
Loc: Time and Space
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: a_guy_named_ai]
    #7521213 - 10/15/07 09:47 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

I'm not going to go through all that jon, but a lot of your arguments are ones I already presented and I agree that they're logical..

Quote:

If we can perceive God, then why can't we determine his nature?




Possibly because the very concept of God is that it is greater than our comprehension of it. How could we be sure that we weren't personifying it or that our definitions were leading us in the wrong direction. For instance, the idea of the creator being intelligent - is this statement any more meaningful than saying the creator is the color blue? I just don't know.

Complexity could be an illusion, maybe it doesn't exist at all. Maybe everything is really, really simple and it's us who complicate it.

Quote:

If the physical universe depends upon God we can't say exactly how, just like we can't say why the laws of the universe are the given laws. But it's really not necessary.




I agree, but if we're going to have a concept of God, I think it's important to know it's attributes and how it operates. Otherwise the knowledge of that thing isn't giving us any more information - we could just say "the physical universe depends on something we don't understand."



--------------------


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineonlynow
transformativeinformativeenergy
Male User Gallery


Registered: 02/06/07
Posts: 1,480
Last seen: 16 years, 3 months
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: EternalCowabunga]
    #7521275 - 10/15/07 09:59 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Possibly because the very concept of God is that it is greater than our comprehension of it.

:thumbup:

one uses the mind to determine.  the whole of existence cannot be contained within mind.  never.


--------------------

Strive to be more than a codified manifestation of a generalized technological consciousness


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinea_guy_named_ai
Stranger
Male
Registered: 09/24/07
Posts: 767
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: onlynow]
    #7521692 - 10/15/07 11:35 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:


one uses the mind to determine. the whole of existence cannot be contained within mind. never.




That's really not an issue. It's a given that we cannot comprehend all the fullness of God in his eternal splendor. But that does not mean we cannot perceive anything about God. If we can perceive anything, then we must by that same token perceive a portion of his attributes.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineonlynow
transformativeinformativeenergy
Male User Gallery


Registered: 02/06/07
Posts: 1,480
Last seen: 16 years, 3 months
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: a_guy_named_ai]
    #7521758 - 10/15/07 11:59 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

perception and determining are two different things, and never did I say we can't perceive His Holiness Him.


--------------------

Strive to be more than a codified manifestation of a generalized technological consciousness


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs
Female User Gallery


Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: a_guy_named_ai]
    #7521926 - 10/16/07 01:20 AM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

jonathan_206 said:
Quote:


one uses the mind to determine. the whole of existence cannot be contained within mind. never.




That's really not an issue. It's a given that we cannot comprehend all the fullness of God in his eternal splendor. But that does not mean we cannot perceive anything about God. If we can perceive anything, then we must by that same token perceive a portion of his attributes.




And if we can't fully perceive and GRASP the ENTIRE notion of Holiness, then whatever definition we might try to settle regarding it, would be a distorted one. This is exactly why we should hold ourselves from giving it names and attributes, because it could never be in tune with what it really is. So why name it god and give it different attributes, when in fact it could be something else, far away from what we might think? Why should we believe that "it/he" gave us life and expects something from us, when the only being that gather these attributes are other human beings? Doesn't it sound a little weird? :smirk:

What might seem to be a face, can, in reality, two human hands.



I think that this analogy can be applied in many other domains. :hehehe:
I'll let you draw your own conclusions. :smirk:


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs

:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleIcelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Male


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: onlynow]
    #7522517 - 10/16/07 10:21 AM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

onlynow said:
Quote:

Icelander said:
Who's we white man? I certainly was there, just not in this form. The answer to this question, I have, unfortunately, forgotten.




oh common, surely you have remembered at times? :nut:




True, but I forget again right away.


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleIcelander
The Minstrel in the Gallery
Male


Registered: 03/15/05
Posts: 95,368
Loc: underbelly
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #7522520 - 10/16/07 10:23 AM (16 years, 3 months ago)

I think that this analogy can be applied in many other domains. :hehehe:
I'll let you draw your own conclusions. :smirk:


Oh yes! Yes, indeed!:thumbup:


--------------------
"Don't believe everything you think". -Anom.

" All that lives was born to die"-Anom.

With much wisdom comes much sorrow,
The more knowledge, the more grief.
Ecclesiastes circa 350 BC


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinea_guy_named_ai
Stranger
Male
Registered: 09/24/07
Posts: 767
Last seen: 15 years, 7 months
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: MushroomTrip]
    #7523320 - 10/16/07 01:56 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

And if we can't fully perceive and GRASP the ENTIRE notion of Holiness, then whatever definition we might try to settle regarding it, would be a distorted one.




Not necessarily at all. That's not accurate. For instance, you can know some attributes of a person, but do we know all that goes on within the mind of an individual? We don't know all of the workings of their body, their mind or perceive all the fullness of their metaphysical essence in every detail. But we can know enough to say, so and so is very kind. Or so and so has a great sense of justice. Or  so and so is very graceful. We can perceive the basic image of a person, and we can understand their attributes because we are in the same likeness.

Quote:


So why name it god and give it different attributes, when in fact it could be something else, far away from what we might think? Why should we believe that "it/he" gave us life and expects something from us, when the only being that gather these attributes are other human beings? Doesn't it sound a little weird? :smirk:




It only sounds weird if you do not accept the knowledge of God that has been given to us. If it were only for our own striving, without having received knowledge from God, then we would be lost in try to understand who God is.

But it makes perfect sense if you consider that God created us in his own likeness.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineonlynow
transformativeinformativeenergy
Male User Gallery


Registered: 02/06/07
Posts: 1,480
Last seen: 16 years, 3 months
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: a_guy_named_ai]
    #7523342 - 10/16/07 02:00 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

jonathan_206 said:But it makes perfect sense if you consider that God created us in his own likeness.




god likes me more than you, he made me more like him.  sorry, maybe next life :tongue2:


--------------------

Strive to be more than a codified manifestation of a generalized technological consciousness


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineMushroomTrip
Dr. Teasy Thighs
Female User Gallery


Registered: 12/02/05
Posts: 14,794
Loc: red panda village
Last seen: 2 years, 10 months
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: a_guy_named_ai]
    #7523426 - 10/16/07 02:16 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

Not necessarily at all. That's not accurate.




Not necessarily at all? :what:
Well, then let's let's get to the bottom of it, shall we?  :rastamon:

Quote:

For instance, you can know some attributes of a person, but do we know all that goes on within the mind of an individual? We don't know all of the workings of their body, their mind or perceive all the fullness of their metaphysical essence in every detail. But we can know enough to say, so and so is very kind. Or so and so has a great sense of justice. Or so and so is very graceful. We can perceive the basic image of a person, and we can understand their attributes because we are in the same likeness.




So an so... that one individual we're talking about to be kind, shows signs of existence. As opposed to god. That individual had a body, we see him moving, interacting with his surroundings which have as effect producing changes. He picks up a glass full of water, the glass in now in his hand, going to his mouth, we see his lips moving and the water disappearing from the glass. Now that's sign of existence.
As for judging his kindness everything is relative. The same individual can be judged by a person as being very kind and by another as being mean. And maybe by a third person as being insane. Which is the truth? The truth is that each of those persons see only aspects of that guy's personality and judge them compared to what appeals to them or not.
So allow me to point to you that through this example you only proved me right.
How can we be able to establish what "god" is or even if there is such a god, and having the attributes one might thing god has, when we fail big style on doing that with people? Who at least show indubitable signs of existence? :strokebeard:

Quote:

It only sounds weird if you do not accept the knowledge of God that has been given to us. If it were only for our own striving, without having received knowledge from God, then we would be lost in try to understand who God is.




And again, who is god? What are his teachings? Until now, the only reliable evidence that we have i that some people wrote some words in the name of god.
Noe tell me, if I were to give you a list with detailed instructions on how it's best to live your life and tell you that god said so, and that it is know that the list contains the most important knowledge in the world, would you do what that list says?
I would find it as an insult towards my intelligence. :smirk:

Quote:

But it makes perfect sense if you consider that God created us in his own likeness.




If it makes perfect sense, how come that you or anybody else trying to prove that "sense" fails miserably? :strokebeard:


--------------------
:bunny::bunnyhug:
All this time I've loved you
And never known your face
All this time I've missed you
And searched this human race
Here is true peace
Here my heart knows calm
Safe in your soul
Bathed in your sighs

:bunnyhug: :yinyang2:


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: OrgoneConclusion]
    #7523606 - 10/16/07 02:51 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

Quote:

some people just make shit up with no supporting evidence in order to feel superior




Yeah, and some people steal other peoples ideas and try to debunk them to feel superior.:rolleyes:

The evidence was that energy is never lost - this is accepted.  Theres also no doubt that humans have energy - so wheres the problem?
You havn't stated ANY evidence for you theory that it is not possible that human energy is transfered.

Moderator edit: Removed personalisms.


Edited by fireworks_god (10/16/07 02:55 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleEgo Death
Justadropofwaterinanendlesssea
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/27/03
Posts: 10,447
Loc: The War Machine
Re: Law of Conservation of Energy and The Afterlife [Re: Ego Death]
    #7523682 - 10/16/07 03:03 PM (16 years, 3 months ago)

I do expect that my questions won't be answered though.

When ever it gets to the nitty gritty people either avoid the question or call you a liar.

But then how else can they maintain their personal belief system without challenging it?


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: < Back | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* There is a limited amount of energy.. get yours while supplies last
( 1 2 all )
Mixomatosis 2,094 23 01/12/05 01:43 AM
by Zekebomb
* Free Energy
( 1 2 3 all )
gettinjiggywithit 4,475 58 12/08/04 08:31 PM
by Diploid
* You silly afterlife-believing fools...
( 1 2 3 4 5 all )
Mixomatosis 6,842 99 11/30/03 08:04 PM
by trendal
* Patent granted on Free Energy Device!
( 1 2 all )
Anonymous 3,132 20 04/17/02 08:24 PM
by Anonymous
* Breakin the Law! gettinjiggywithit 556 12 12/08/04 09:21 PM
by gettinjiggywithit
* artifitial afterlife
( 1 2 all )
OldWoodSpecter 2,124 32 05/10/05 08:26 PM
by Huehuecoyotl
* energy mr crisper 742 11 01/30/03 08:01 PM
by minusrestraint
* Do you believe in Reincarnation / Born Again, or an Afterlife? Death is What?
( 1 2 all )
My Elysium Trips 1,820 33 03/17/18 07:56 PM
by BrendanFlock

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, DividedQuantum
10,322 topic views. 0 members, 11 guests and 2 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.034 seconds spending 0.009 seconds on 15 queries.