|
| 
 |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Captain | 829 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Nov 2015 | 9 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2016 | May 2016 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote wrongFerocious Aardvark Wrote: [iGPS is entirely based on SATELLITES which constantly broadcast to the ground.[/i '" Quote wrong
Ferocious Aardvark wrote:If you want to claim I'm "wrong", give us a clue about what?=#FF0000[i Who said planes "have a satellite feed"'" [/i
Hahaha you're getting all tangled up in your Copy and paste frenzy. Make your mind up. I don't need to prove you're wrong, you do a Grand job doing it yourself. Please carry on 
As my research has indicated there are a plethora of platforms that can mimic satellite utility, so lets review.
=#BF00001. Land-based technologies. Loran (long range navigation) =#FF0000. 2. GPS uses Cell-tower triangulation not Satellites
=#FF00003. High Altitude Airships (HAA) =#BF0000 4. High Altitude Platforms (HAP)
=#FF00005. Lighter-than-air vehicles (LAV) =#FF00406. High Altitude Long Endurance (HALE)
=#BF00007. High Altitude Long Operation (HALO) =#FF00408. StratSat
=#FF00009. Airborne Relay Communication (ARC) =#FF0000 10. HeliPlat which connects to the HeliNet System
=#FF000011. High Altitude Shuttle System (HASS) =#FF0000 12. Small Balloon Systems (SBS)
=#FF000013. Nano Balloon Systems (NBS) =#BF0000 14. Google Loon System
=#FF000015. Stratospheric Platform Systems (SPS) =#FF0000 16. High Altitude Long Endurance Demonstrator (HALE-D)
=#FF000017 Undersea Cable =#FF0000 18. DARPA Integrated Sensor is Structure or ISIS
So as you see there are at least 18 platforms that can be used independently, in tandem or groups to provide all the services that satellites supposedly provide. The most glaring aspect of satellite fakery is cost. All 18 platforms I've mentioned are substantially more cost-efficient than satellites and inherently more reliable. It makes no sense to continually risk hurling satellites into space if more cost-efficient, reliable and readily maintainable terrestrial systems already exist, which they do, the dubious existence of satellites is even more definitive since NASA cannot furnish a single actual photo or video footage of real satellites.
Which is more probable. That satellites exist but NASA seems incapable of confirming their existence or simply they do not exist at all? =#BF0000Occam's Razor makes it simple, they don't exist at all.
I await the next batch of cranial insults and the tongue twisted comedy | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 28357 | Bradford Bulls |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2024 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Poor Stanley. You, of all people, praying Occam in aid must be one of the most ironic and amusing things I've read in a long while. You are to Occam what Toulouse Lautrec was to pole-vaulting.
There are over 1,000 active satellites currently in orbit around the Earth, and over 2,500 more which no longer function.
Careful watch is also kept on as many as possible of the tens of thousands of pieces of space junk/debris as these could pose a threat to live satellites and also for warning when larger debris is going to re-enter the atmosphere.
On a clear night, any short spell of sky watching will enable you to see several of these satellites passing overhead. If you have the right app, you can easily identify them.
There are a number of independent bits of software for you to identify track etc as many satellites as you want, for example www.satflare.com
I would highly recommend stuffin.space/
Despite the tracking, given the sheer volume of metal whizzing around the globe, collisions are inevitable, and on 11 February 2009 Russia's Cosmos 2251 satellite collided with one of the network of 66 Iridium satellites at 0455 GMT over Siberia at an altitude of 490 miles (790 km). This would have been much less inconvenient for all concerned had the satellites not actually existed.
Your convoluted net of cellphone masts etc and millions of balloons is obvious plain bollox given that 70% of the Earth's surface is ocean, and doesn't have either masts or tethered balloons or any of the other weird and wonderful figments of your mentors' imagination, which strangely no human eyes have ever seen, despite them running the entire world "satellite based" technology. Yet GPS works just as well in mid-Pacific or at the Poles as it does in Leeds.
You are a special kind of gullible. "NASA incapable of confirming the existence of satellites"? That is one of your best ones yet. Any reasonably educated human on the planet can within seconds confirm the existence of any of the thousands of satellites as suggested above. And you can watch them with your own eyes when they are due to pass across.
One of them - the International Space Station - often has a live feed and you can watch it's track around the globe all day and all night and when available, a live feed from its cameras. This afternoon as I posted earlier you can even watch Tim Peake's live spacewalk.
If you are up at 05:46 in the morning, and the sky is reasonably clear, here's a good one for you. The ISS will emerge from Earth's shadow quite high in the South, and you can watch it until it disappears over the eastern horizon. A decent pair of binoculars and you will even me able to make out its shape. It will be exactly where the orbit prediction software in various apps and programs predicts it will be.
Which enables astronomers/amateur photographers on Earth to take gazillions of photographs of it as it makes its way. For example, google "ISS crossing sun". Any number of photographers have indpendently taken images and here is a tiny sample of that search
Similarly images of ISS crossing the moon - here is just one, but a very nice one, taken not by NASA or any science organisation, just an independent photographer called Dylan O'Donnell
You could do it too.
If it did not exist - how is any of this this possible? |
|
Poor Stanley. You, of all people, praying Occam in aid must be one of the most ironic and amusing things I've read in a long while. You are to Occam what Toulouse Lautrec was to pole-vaulting.
There are over 1,000 active satellites currently in orbit around the Earth, and over 2,500 more which no longer function.
Careful watch is also kept on as many as possible of the tens of thousands of pieces of space junk/debris as these could pose a threat to live satellites and also for warning when larger debris is going to re-enter the atmosphere.
On a clear night, any short spell of sky watching will enable you to see several of these satellites passing overhead. If you have the right app, you can easily identify them.
There are a number of independent bits of software for you to identify track etc as many satellites as you want, for example www.satflare.com
I would highly recommend stuffin.space/
Despite the tracking, given the sheer volume of metal whizzing around the globe, collisions are inevitable, and on 11 February 2009 Russia's Cosmos 2251 satellite collided with one of the network of 66 Iridium satellites at 0455 GMT over Siberia at an altitude of 490 miles (790 km). This would have been much less inconvenient for all concerned had the satellites not actually existed.
Your convoluted net of cellphone masts etc and millions of balloons is obvious plain bollox given that 70% of the Earth's surface is ocean, and doesn't have either masts or tethered balloons or any of the other weird and wonderful figments of your mentors' imagination, which strangely no human eyes have ever seen, despite them running the entire world "satellite based" technology. Yet GPS works just as well in mid-Pacific or at the Poles as it does in Leeds.
You are a special kind of gullible. "NASA incapable of confirming the existence of satellites"? That is one of your best ones yet. Any reasonably educated human on the planet can within seconds confirm the existence of any of the thousands of satellites as suggested above. And you can watch them with your own eyes when they are due to pass across.
One of them - the International Space Station - often has a live feed and you can watch it's track around the globe all day and all night and when available, a live feed from its cameras. This afternoon as I posted earlier you can even watch Tim Peake's live spacewalk.
If you are up at 05:46 in the morning, and the sky is reasonably clear, here's a good one for you. The ISS will emerge from Earth's shadow quite high in the South, and you can watch it until it disappears over the eastern horizon. A decent pair of binoculars and you will even me able to make out its shape. It will be exactly where the orbit prediction software in various apps and programs predicts it will be.
Which enables astronomers/amateur photographers on Earth to take gazillions of photographs of it as it makes its way. For example, google "ISS crossing sun". Any number of photographers have indpendently taken images and here is a tiny sample of that search
Similarly images of ISS crossing the moon - here is just one, but a very nice one, taken not by NASA or any science organisation, just an independent photographer called Dylan O'Donnell
You could do it too.
If it did not exist - how is any of this this possible? | |
|
| | | |
|
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Oct 2023 | Aug 2021 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Now I don't want to derail the subject here, just making an observation.
Anyone who holds a radically different view about something like the Earth's shape has to then squeeze and bend more and more associated things to fit the idea, rather than drop an idea based on overwhelming evidence. What I see on this thread is one of those things.
If you don't believe the Earth is a globe then you need to have other ideas about obvious things. Satellites, Gravity, Astronauts, GPS, Relativity, Mathematics, Climate, astrophysics, Stars, planets, Aircraft, communications. Then you have to find out a reason why Governments, corporations, universities, hobbyists, explorers, scientists, (A lot of which are not overly friendly with each other) and the general public are deliberately hiding the truth. Then you have to formulate a reason why they would do it.
It must be exhausting.
This is how I see it at least, and I'm sure they truly believe what they say.
What really interests me is why they have the core belief in the first place? Whatever drives it must be strong and underpin their whole world view. The only thing I can think of is a religious reason. Although, it is a fairly modern phenomena, contrary to the popular belief that religion always thought the earth was flat, which isn't strictly true. At least, not to the levels people think.
Anyway, sorry for the slight derailment.
| | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Captain | 829 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Nov 2015 | 9 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2016 | May 2016 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Oh my word i'm in hysterics sat in my chair. Just look at the fake CGI on display. Hahahahaha
Quote NASA incapable of confirming the existence of satellitesThere are over 1,000 active satellites currently in orbit around the Earth=#FF0000, and over 2,500 more which no longer function '"
The above comment proves my last paragraph in my last post. 2500 Malfunctions Great value for money there. So as you see there are at least 18 platforms that can be used independently, in tandem or groups to provide all the services that satellites supposedly provide. The most glaring aspect of satellite fakery is cost. =#BF0000 [iAll 18 platforms I've mentioned are substantially more cost-efficient than satellites and inherently more reliable. It makes no sense to continually risk hurling satellites into space if more cost-efficient, reliable and readily maintainable terrestrial systems already exist, which they do, the dubious existence of satellites is even more definitive since NASA cannot furnish a single actual photo or video footage of real satellites.[/i
Quote NASA incapable of confirming the existence of satellitesFerocious Aardvark Wrote =#FF0000You are a special kind of gullible. "NASA incapable of confirming the existence of satellites"? That is one of your best ones yet. Any reasonably educated human on the planet can within seconds confirm the existence of any of the thousands of satellites as suggested above. And you can watch them with your own eyes when they are due to pass across. '"
Gullible. You're the one who's believing the all the nonsense matey not me. NASA cannot supply one authentic Satellite shot.
And the CGI cartoon pictures are hilarious. Please take up a photography course my stomach aches through laughter. Duping you is a doddle
Here's a link to all supposed [url=https://62e528761d0685343e1c-f3d1b99a743ffa4142d9d7f1978d9686.ssl.cf2.rackcdn.com/files/2110/width668/aapone-20090212000154539144-us-space-accident-satellite-original.jpgSatellites[/url that allegedly surround the alleged globe. How come the ISS pictures don't show these orbiting Satellites or stars in the background its because they're composites, any decent eye can figure that out.
And Freemason Twin Peake doing a space walk in a vacuum travelling 5 miles per second is double hilarious. I bet we don't see the orbiting Satellites below or any star constellation what you'll see is a pre recorded Green screen film aided by Hollywood. | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Captain | 829 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Nov 2015 | 9 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2016 | May 2016 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote TheButcher="TheButcher"What really interests me is why they have the core belief in the first place? Whatever drives it must be strong and underpin their whole world view. =#BF0000The only thing I can think of is a religious reason. Although, it is a fairly modern phenomena, contrary to the popular belief that religion always thought the earth was flat, which isn't strictly true. At least, not to the levels people think.'"
Nail on head. Ever since the 1500's. Heliocentrism eliminates God. Heliocentrism is Sun worship. Who wants to hide God and Sun worships. ? Freemasonic Luciferian NWO doctrine. Full stop. The same people who run the World Governments, All Media and NASA Simples. | | | |
|
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 28357 | Bradford Bulls |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2024 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote FLAT STANLEY="FLAT STANLEY"Oh my word i'm in hysterics sat in my chair. Just look at the fake CGI on display. '"
There is NO doubt - as in ZERO - that ANYONE, you included, can photograph the ISS as it passes by.
You ignore this. How could you do it? Does NASA transmit CGI into your visual cortex or what/
Why do you ignore the very obvious and very basic points put to you?
Quote FLAT STANLEY="FLAT STANLEY"The above comment proves my last paragraph in my last post. 2500 Malfunctions Great value for money there. '"
Space is an extremely harsh environment and all satellites have a limited shelf life. They must be VFM, though, as otherwise, why would all the major countries and many private companies continually launch 'em?
Quote FLAT STANLEY="FLAT STANLEY"NASA cannot furnish a single actual photo or video footage of real satellites.'"
Of course it can. But even if provided with a billion photos or videos, you would say "Those are all fake".
Here's one for starters: a shuttle capturing the Hubble telescope, on a service mission
By the way, Hubble has produced squillions of images over many years, none of which could be obtained from Earth. If it did not exist, how could that happen?
Quote FLAT STANLEY="FLAT STANLEY"How come the ISS pictures don't show these orbiting Satellites or stars in the background its because they're composites, any decent eye can figure that out. '"
if NASA or ESA wanted to create a fake scenario, your hypothesis relies on the odd idea that - oops-a-daisy - they would forget to "put the stars in" or whatever. Really? That is a dumb proposition even for you. (But oddly it does echo one of the more stupid "moon hoax" claims that you couldn't see the stars in the photos - have you learned nothing from those?) As it happens I do know quite a lot about photography. As you don't know the answer to such a simple question, you are clearly ignorant in the subject.
Quote FLAT STANLEY="FLAT STANLEY"And Freemason Twin Peake doing a space walk in a vacuum travelling 5 miles per second is double hilarious. I bet we don't see the orbiting Satellites below or any star constellation what you'll see is a pre recorded Green screen film aided by Hollywood.
'"
It's a pity you can't hear everyone laughing at you claiming the spacewalk is a grenscreen hoax. You do make yourself look naive, gullible and mad in equal measure with consummate ease.
But as ever you avoid the questions that you can't answer. Like, if there is no ISS - how come YOU can with your unaided eyes see the ISS?
Come on Stan, it's a simple challenge. Or do you even reject the evidence of your own eyes in favour of your barking bats[size=5 =#FFFFFF.[/sizehit fabric of multilayered nonsense? | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Captain | 55 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Jan 2016 | 9 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2016 | May 2016 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
Ive been a silent viewer of these boards for many years. I was tickled into joining this particular forum as certain topics besides my beloved Leigh Centurions Thread tickled my fancy. I was obviously drawn to the Nuclear thread where I have a strong family interest within that field, but as I read through most of the off topic threads Its damn right clear as snow that theres a massive sway of anti Stanley screeches. The stick hes swallowed is absolutely diabolical. Theres an outright type of racism or bullying being portrayed throughout these threads with mainly one perpetrator pulling the strings just for having a varied outlook on life.
Oh by the way them photos look disputable. Im not laughing at you Stan Im laughing at the childish wiffle waffle. HeHe
| | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Captain | 829 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Nov 2015 | 9 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2016 | May 2016 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Ferocious Aardvark="Ferocious Aardvark"'"
Please take a photography course your gullibility levels are raging. just keep digging yourself deeper, You are so indoctrinated that you don't even trust your own God given senses. Copernicus made all of his observations with the naked eye and constructed his heliocentric model that all Academia received as Gospel truth for at least 200 years. Yes before Hot air Balloons and 400 years before planes were invented so that we could see the landscape we live on. On top of that he didn't even have a telescope, why because they weren't invented then. Just like the Hubble Telescope doesn't exist nor does the International space station. Oh but don't take time to do any of your own research just start a argument because you believe something exists. Congratulations you have won the Parrot of the year award.  | | | |
|
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| Oct 2023 | Aug 2021 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote whothefeckisalice="whothefeckisalice"Ive been a silent viewer of these boards for many years. I was tickled into joining this particular forum as certain topics besides my beloved Leigh Centurions Thread tickled my fancy. I was obviously drawn to the Nuclear thread where I have a strong family interest within that field, but as I read through most of the off topic threads Its damn right clear as snow that theres a massive sway of anti Stanley screeches. The stick hes swallowed is absolutely diabolical. Theres an outright type of racism or bullying being portrayed throughout these threads with mainly one perpetrator pulling the strings just for having a varied outlook on life.
Oh by the way them photos look disputable. Im not laughing at you Stan Im laughing at the childish wiffle waffle. HeHe'"
I'm not sure what your definition of racism is, but having never met Stanley and never discussed race, mention race, or say anything remotely connected to it at any point (Both him and me) or seen anyone else do so no matter how much they've argued. I'm struggling to think that you have a flair for the dramatic or a different definition.
As for bullying, well, I'm pretty sure Stanley can hold his own and has never, that I've seen, taken offence to the point of it causing mental harm. What actually happens is that Stanley and others become heated over a topic, idea, or point and passionately argue the finer points. If having your idea or beliefs mocked, questioned, or doubted offends you then it means your ideas and beliefs struggle to stand up to scrutiny. If people can't question an idea it leads to a rocky road where we all don't want to go down.
That's not bullying, it's common sense.
If you post something in a public forum then you are inviting discourse on that subject. If you don't like that then maybe a public forum isn't the place for you. | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 28357 | Bradford Bulls |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2024 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
|
I invite someone to watch the ISS with their own eyes. They ignore the invitation, instead clinging to denial that it "doesn't exist". As anyone can see it, this really is the debating equivalent of fingers in ears and nah nah nah. hey ho
| | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| International Chairman | 28357 | Bradford Bulls |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Feb 2002 | 23 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2024 | Oct 2019 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote whothefeckisalice="whothefeckisalice"Ive been a silent viewer of these boards for many years. I was tickled into joining this particular forum as certain topics besides my beloved Leigh Centurions Thread tickled my fancy. I was obviously drawn to the Nuclear thread where I have a strong family interest within that field, but as I read through most of the off topic threads Its damn right clear as snow that theres a massive sway of anti Stanley screeches. The stick hes swallowed is absolutely diabolical. Theres an outright type of racism or bullying being portrayed throughout these threads with mainly one perpetrator pulling the strings just for having a varied outlook on life.
Oh by the way them photos look disputable. Im not laughing at you Stan Im laughing at the childish wiffle waffle. HeHe'"
Anti-Stanley? That is a bit ridiculous. I am anti the idiotic nonsense he either believes or trolls, but obviously respond to the points that he chooses to make. If he's not trolling, he's deluded, and if so it does him no favours to pretend he isn't delusional. It's not a "varied outlook on life", it's just fruitbat drivel. But that blunt message apart, I address the issues, in quite a bit of detail, and not Stanley, whom I wouldn't know from Adam.
Yes, Stan does try to bully people, but that's his way, and his rudeness and bluster is an irrelevance really, he only does it to get out of responding to things he can't answer.
That said, I started this thread, dealing with the technology of flight tracking. It was Stanley who jumped in with his theories, not the other way around. I've just responded to them. Wasn't my idea to get into his stuff, but I don't have any obligation to let it pass unchallenged.
As for "racism" ... WTF? 
PS - snow's not clear. It's pretty opaque. But it is made of ice, which is clear. I blame NASA for this hoax. | | | |
| Rank | Posts | Team |
| Club Captain | 829 | No
Team
Selected |
| Joined | Service | Reputation |
| Nov 2015 | 9 years | |
| Online | Last Post | Last Page |
| May 2016 | May 2016 | LINK |
| Milestone Posts |
|
| Milestone Years |
|
|
| Location |
|
| Signature |
|
TO BE FIXED |
|
| Quote Ferocious Aardvark="Ferocious Aardvark"[iAnti-Stanley? That is a bit ridiculous. =#FF0000I am anti the idiotic nonsense he either believes or trolls, but obviously respond to the points that he chooses to make. =#FF0040If he's not trolling, he's deluded=#BF0000, and if so it does him no favours to pretend he isn't delusional. It's not a "varied outlook on life", =#FF0000it's just fruitbat drivel. But that blunt message apart, I address the issues, in quite a bit of detail, and not Stanley, whom I wouldn't know from Adam.[/i.'"
Firstly with the above abuse, you've just proven to everyone what a great example to the term immaturity.
Quote Ferocious Aardvark="Ferocious Aardvark"=#FF0000[iYes, Stan does try to bully people,[/i but that's his way, =#FF0000[iand his rudeness and bluster is an irrelevance really,[/i he only does it to get out of responding to things he can't answer. .'"
Again more personal insult.and twisted angst. Bully hahaha i've never bullied anyone in my life, the above posts illustrate you're the aggressor. As for trolling i certainly expose the lies is that trolling. No..
Quote Ferocious AardvarkFerocious Aardvark Wrote That said, I started this thread, dealing with the technology of flight tracking. =#BF0000It was Stanley who jumped in with his theories, not the other way around. I've just responded to them. Wasn't my idea to get into his stuff, but I don't have any obligation to let it pass unchallenged.'"
I challenged and proved to you about Flight tracking data, then you got on your high horse about Satellites which again i proved are hoaxed, then you bring up Tim Peake, then you added fake google composites to the thread, The Butcher apologetically derailed the thread not me, so it's you who's getting muddled up with your tongue twisted copy and paste not me, i'm just pointing out your flawed reasoning.
Quote Ferocious AardvarkFerocious Aardvark Wrote As for "racism" ... WTF?
'"
Reading the hatred vitriol above and also other threads you've proven and continued a discriminative dialogue throughout our exchanges. I'm the one who's risen to just laugh off your childish sticks and stones. So there you go, your hole just keeps getting bigger with the tirades of vitriol abuse proving how weak your argument really is. | | | |
| |
All views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the RLFANS.COM or its subsites.
Whilst every effort is made to ensure that news stories, articles and images are correct, we cannot be held responsible for errors. However, if you feel any material on this website is copyrighted or incorrect in any way please contact us using the link at the top of the page so we can remove it or negotiate copyright permission.
RLFANS.COM, the owners of this website, is not responsible for the content of its sub-sites or posts, please email the author of this sub-site or post if you feel you find an article offensive or of a choice nature that you disagree with.
Copyright 1999 - 2025 RLFANS.COM
You must be 18+ to gamble, for more information and for help with gambling issues see https://www.begambleaware.org/.
2025-04-15 23:42:57 LOAD:3.0693359375
|
|
