Marc Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 The folks who realize that the "election" was rigged are not ant-elections. Does anti vax even make sense as a term since its not even a vaccine, it's a jab. I think that these folks who are being called anti vaxxers or whatever should be called anti not going to let something be put into my body that I dont know what it is, instead, although that's pretty long 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmj Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 Obviously anecdotal, but the last week in July we went on a family trip to Nashville. Eleven in the group of which seven were vaxxed. We shared a house and went maskless( along with the overwhelming majority of the people in the city) to all manner of restaurants, honky tonks and the Backstage Tour of the Grand Ole Opry. By hook or by crook we made it . Half of this group flew to Vegas in October of 2001. Anecdotally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 23 hours ago, Peter said: I place the individual over the collective in my hierarchy of valued things. And right you are, Peter. It is also valuable to view this scientifically, from the epidemiologists' perspective fixated upon the masses and disease control. They see us humans collectively, as a mass of disease transmitters. All fine in itself, that's their area of expertise, but I think they have been allowed too much public and moral authority outside of that. I maintain that the strategy taken by the mainstream epidemiologists/virologists (contrary to some, who were highly aware of the comprehensive picture of life and humanity, involving all other disciplines - like medicine, psychology. mental health and economics) was unscientific, narrow, short-sighted and wrong, from start to finish. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted August 30, 2021 Author Share Posted August 30, 2021 2 hours ago, anthony said: It is also valuable to view this scientifically, from the epidemiologists' perspective fixated upon the masses and disease control. Roger Bissell (REB) once posted this: The Seven Warning Signs of Bogus Science From: PaleoObjectivist To: atlantis Subject: ATL: Allie Oops--Bogus Science? Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 11:59:54 EST. Dear List Members: Considering some of the rather striking (not to say outlandish) claims about the "fundamental nature of reality" made on this list recently, it thought would be interesting to consider the following material from a recent issue of The Chronicle of Higher Education. Two questions: 1. Are the criteria of "bogus science" valid, or are they overgeneralizations and risky to apply consistently? 2. Do they apply to recent claims by Everett Allie about the basic constituents of nature? all 4 now, REB The Chronicle of Higher Education, 3.1.31 http://chronicle.com/weekly/v49/i21/21b02001.htm By ROBERT L. PARK The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is investing close to a million dollars in an obscure Russian scientist's antigravity machine, although it has failed every test and would violate the most fundamental laws of nature. The Patent and Trademark Office recently issued Patent 6,362,718 for a physically impossible motionless electromagnetic generator, which is supposed to snatch free energy from a vacuum. And major power companies have sunk tens of millions of dollars into a scheme to produce energy by putting hydrogen atoms into a state below their ground state, a feat equivalent to mounting an expedition to explore the region south of the South Pole. There is, alas, no scientific claim so preposterous that a scientist cannot be found to vouch for it. And many such claims end up in a court of law after they have cost some gullible person or corporation a lot of money. How are juries to evaluate them? Before 1993, court cases that hinged on the validity of scientific claims were usually decided simply by which expert witness the jury found more credible. Expert testimony often consisted of tortured theoretical speculation with little or no supporting evidence. Jurors were bamboozled by technical gibberish they could not hope to follow, delivered by experts whose credentials they could not evaluate. In 1993, however, with the Supreme Court's landmark decision in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. the situation began to change. The case involved Bendectin, the only morning-sickness medication ever approved by the Food and Drug Administration. It had been used by millions of women, and more than 30 published studies had found no evidence that it caused birth defects. Yet eight so-called experts were willing to testify, in exchange for a fee from the Daubert family, that Bendectin might indeed cause birth defects. In ruling that such testimony was not credible because of lack of supporting evidence, the court instructed federal judges to serve as "gatekeepers," screening juries from testimony based on scientific nonsense. Recognizing that judges are not scientists, the court invited judges to experiment with ways to fulfill their gatekeeper responsibility. Justice Stephen G. Breyer encouraged trial judges to appoint independent experts to help them. He noted that courts can turn to scientific organizations, like the National Academy of Sciences and the American Association for the Advancement of Science, to identify neutral experts who could preview questionable scientific testimony and advise a judge on whether a jury should be exposed to it. Judges are still concerned about meeting their responsibilities under the Daubert decision, and a group of them asked me how to recognize questionable scientific claims. What are the warning signs? I have identified seven indicators that a scientific claim lies well outside the bounds of rational scientific discourse. Of course, they are only warning signs -- even a claim with several of the signs could be legitimate. 1. The discoverer pitches the claim directly to the media. The integrity of science rests on the willingness of scientists to expose new ideas and findings to the scrutiny of other scientists. Thus, scientists expect their colleagues to reveal new findings to them initially. An attempt to bypass peer review by taking a new result directly to the media, and thence to the public, suggests that the work is unlikely to stand up to close examination by other scientists. One notorious example is the claim made in 1989 by two chemists from the University of Utah, B. Stanley Pons and Martin Fleischmann, that they had discovered cold fusion – a way to produce nuclear fusion without expensive equipment. Scientists did not learn of the claim until they read reports of a news conference. Moreover, the announcement dealt largely with the economic potential of the discovery and was devoid of the sort of details that might have enabled other scientists to judge the strength of the claim or to repeat the experiment. (Ian Wilmut's announcement that he had successfully cloned a sheep was just as public as Pons and Fleischmann's claim, but in the case of cloning, abundant scientific details allowed scientists to judge the work's validity.) Some scientific claims avoid even the scrutiny of reporters by appearing in paid commercial advertisements. A health-food company marketed a dietary supplement called Vitamin O in full-page newspaper ads. Vitamin O turned out to be ordinary saltwater. 2. The discoverer says that a powerful establishment is trying to suppress his or her work. The idea is that the establishment will presumably stop at nothing to suppress discoveries that might shift the balance of wealth and power in society. Often, the discoverer describes mainstream science as part of a larger conspiracy that includes industry and government. Claims that the oil companies are frustrating the invention of an automobile that runs on water, for instance, are a sure sign that the idea of such a car is baloney. In the case of cold fusion, Pons and Fleischmann blamed their cold reception on physicists who were protecting their own research in hot fusion. 3. The scientific effect involved is always at the very limit of detection. Alas, there is never a clear photograph of a flying saucer, or the Loch Ness monster. All scientific measurements must contend with some level of background noise or statistical fluctuation. But if the signal-to-noise ratio cannot be improved, even in principle, the effect is probably not real and the work is not science. Thousands of published papers in para-psychology, for example, claim to report verified instances of telepathy, psychokinesis, or precognition. But those effects show up only in tortured analyses of statistics. The researchers can find no way to boost the signal, which suggests that it isn't really there. 4. Evidence for a discovery is anecdotal. If modern science has learned anything in the past century, it is to distrust anecdotal evidence. Because anecdotes have a very strong emotional impact, they serve to keep superstitious beliefs alive in an age of science. The most important discovery of modern medicine is not vaccines or antibiotics, it is the randomized double-blind test, by means of which we know what works and what doesn't. Contrary to the saying, "data" is not the plural of "anecdote." 5. The discoverer says a belief is credible because it has endured for centuries. There is a persistent myth that hundreds or even thousands of years ago, long before anyone knew that blood circulates throughout the body, or that germs cause disease, our ancestors possessed miraculous remedies that modern science cannot understand. Much of what is termed "alternative medicine" is part of that myth. Ancient folk wisdom, rediscovered or repackaged, is unlikely to match the output of modern scientific laboratories. 6. The discoverer has worked in isolation. The image of a lone genius who struggles in secrecy in an attic laboratory and ends up making a revolutionary breakthrough is a staple of Hollywood's science-fiction films, but it is hard to find examples in real life. Scientific breakthroughs nowadays are almost always syntheses of the work of many scientists. 7. The discoverer must propose new laws of nature to explain an observation. A new law of nature, invoked to explain some extraordinary result, must not conflict with what is already known. If we must change existing laws of nature or propose new laws to account for an observation, it is almost certainly wrong. I began this list of warning signs to help federal judges detect scientific nonsense. But as I finished the list, I realized that in our increasingly technological society, spotting voodoo science is a skill that every citizen should develop. Robert L. Park is a professor of physics at the University of Maryland at College Park and the director of public information for the American Physical Society. He is the author of Voodoo Science: The Road From Foolishness to Fraud (Oxford University Press, 2002). 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 I wonder how many deaths by suicide by “flattening the curve” due to economic lockdown/rising unemployment rates as well as prolonged periods of isolation compared to if we just washed our hands/other covid protocols but left people to carry on working/producing… People are now sheeple more than ever. How are we the people going to claw back freedoms that everyone so docile like surrendered… Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 23 minutes ago, Jules Troy said: I wonder how many deaths by suicide by “flattening the curve” due to economic lockdown/rising unemployment rates as well as prolonged periods of isolation compared to if we just washed our hands/other covid protocols but left people to carry on working/producing… People are now sheeple more than ever. How are we the people going to claw back freedoms that everyone so docile like surrendered… The same way that the French did during the French Revolution Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted August 30, 2021 Share Posted August 30, 2021 (edited) A needle inside a pill? Yes, and it could be coming down the pike in the near future ... Drug delivery capsule could replace injections for protein drugsThe new pill can inject large quantities of monoclonal antibodies and other drugs into the lining of the stomach after being swallowed. Quote [...] The new delivery capsule is filled with fluid and also contains an injection needle and a plunger that helps to push the fluid out of the capsule. Both the needle and plunger are held in place by a pellet made of solid sugar. When the capsule enters the stomach, the humid environment causes the pellet to dissolve, pushing the needle into the stomach lining, while the plunger pushes the liquid through the needle. When the capsule is empty, a second plunger pulls the needle back into the capsule so that it can be safely excreted through the digestive tract. Significant levels In tests in pigs, the researchers showed that they could deliver a monoclonal antibody called adalimumab (Humira) at levels similar to those achieved by injection. This drug is used to treat autoimmune disorders such as inflammatory bowel disease and rheumatoid arthritis. They also delivered a type of protein drug known as a GLP-1 receptor agonist, which is used to treat type 2 diabetes. "Delivery of monoclonal antibodies orally is one of the biggest challenges we face in the field of drug delivery science," Traverso says. "From an engineering perspective, the ability to deliver monoclonal antibodies at significant levels really transforms how we start to think about the management of these conditions." [...] -- one of the medicines given to then-President Trump during his COVID-19 illness was a monoclonal antibody (Regeneron), and this is the brand that is being provided by at least two states (Texas and Florida) for people at risk of severe illness. Regeneron is prescribed under an emergency use authorization. Info on the Florida programme: Florida Regeneron monoclonal antibody sites: What to know | Miami Herald Edited August 30, 2021 by william.scherk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted August 31, 2021 Share Posted August 31, 2021 Stats about mortality are hard, one death is one too many when one personally knew who he or she was. Still, for the sake of keeping perspective: In 2019, from all 'normal' causes, there were recorded 7,500 world deaths per 1 million world population. In all 2020 plus so far into 2021, world Covid-19 deaths - alone- stand at: 570 per one million world population. Total, there have been 4.5 million deaths from Covid and 218 million "cases". That is approx: 50 : 1, recovery. I.e. Under 2% fatality rate. Allowing for the large number of untested, unreported positive infections, the ratio will obviously be much higher, the fatality rate lower. (Deaths are accurately recorded, "cases" have been far under-counted). For interest, statistics of some of 155 countries in order of Covid deaths/million pop.. 1. Peru 6, 088 2. Hungary 3,076 14. Italy 2,137 19. UK 1,970 22 USA 1,917 34. Sweden 1,426 35. South Africa 1,374 61. Israel 763 63. Canada 716 125. Australia 39 151. New Zealand 5.29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatGuy Posted August 31, 2021 Share Posted August 31, 2021 This should probably go under "humor", but hey... 21,000% Price Increase on Unvaccinated Sperm — The Sodom Sun SODOMSUN.COM “It’s the new white gold. Forget about BitCoin; the real money is in unvaccinated sperm,” shared Samuel Yankwell of a local sperm bank... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmj Posted August 31, 2021 Share Posted August 31, 2021 Good ole "Lefty" Yankwell, was wondering what happened to him , I didn't know he was still up and around. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatGuy Posted August 31, 2021 Share Posted August 31, 2021 "Beware of your non-mainstream news sources. Ask your doctor..." Well, the problem with this is that your personal doctors are not performing their own independent research/analysis and such; at best, they are the "transmission belts" of information; they're getting their marching orders/instructions from the WHO, CDC, etc, who keep backtracking and dicking around...like this: CDC panel says more evidence needed for booster recommendation WWW.MSN.COM A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advisory panel on Monday indicated it could take a substantially different approach to... CDC panel says more evidence needed for booster recommendation "A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advisory panel on Monday indicated it could take a substantially different approach to booster doses of COVID-19 vaccines than the one proposed by the Biden administration." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatGuy Posted August 31, 2021 Share Posted August 31, 2021 45 minutes ago, ThatGuy said: "Beware of your non-mainstream news sources. Ask your doctor..." Well, the problem with this is that the doctors are not performing their own analysis and such; they're getting their marching orders/instructions from the WHO, CDC, etc, who keep backtracking and dicking around...like this: CDC panel says more evidence needed for booster recommendation WWW.MSN.COM A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advisory panel on Monday indicated it could take a substantially different approach to... CDC panel says more evidence needed for booster recommendation "A Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) advisory panel on Monday indicated it could take a substantially different approach to booster doses of COVID-19 vaccines than the one proposed by the Biden administration." Oh, and again, another example of yesterday's "conspiracy theories", denied by the MSM and "your doctor", once again becoming, in fact, fact:WHO Issues Guidance on Digital COVID Certificates Called ‘Conspiracy Theory’ by Media.https://thenationalpulse.com/news/who-issues-guidance-on-digital-covid-certificates-called-conspiracy-theory-by-media/ "A newly published World Health Organization (WHO) report urges the transition to digital certification of vaccine status, presenting implementation strategies for member states." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 I like Rand Paul when he's feisty. btw - Here's the article. The full headline reads: Harvard Epidemiologist Says the Case for COVID Vaccine Passports Was Just Demolished Harvard Epidemiologist Says the Case for COVID Vaccine Passports Was Just Demolished FEE.ORG A new study on Israel's COVID outbreak found that vaccinated individuals had 27 times higher risk of symptomatic COVID infection than those with natural immunity from prior COVID infection. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jules Troy Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 Your paperz please! Ssoooo do those enforcing vaccine passports get to wear snappy SS uniforms? Will the new vax chambers have wonderful flower beds outside? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted September 1, 2021 Author Share Posted September 1, 2021 1 hour ago, Jules Troy said: Your paperz please! I see Europe is now asking for "papers" for U.S. citizens to travel there, just as we have demanded theirs. Why? Because our Covid rates have climbed. It's no laughing matter. Stay safe, Jules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted September 1, 2021 Author Share Posted September 1, 2021 Oh my god, I say jokingly. We are doomed! Who is at most “at risk to Covid?” objectivists. From REB. Later, in 1962, in her column "Introducing Objectivism," Rand gave "the briefest summary" of her philosophy: 1. Reality exists as an objective absolute--facts are facts, independent of man's feelings, wishes, hopes or fears. 2. Reason (the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man's senses) is man's only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival. 3. Man--every man--is an end in himself, not the means t the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own ~rational~ self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life. 4. The ideal political-economic system is ~laissez-faire~ capitalism. it is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as ~traders~, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit. it is a system where no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force, and ~no man may initiate the use of physical force against others~. The government acts only as a policeman that protects man's rights; it uses physical force ~only~ in retaliation and ~only~ against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders. In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church. Do you agree with this summary? If so, are you then an Objectivist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 More cognitive dissonance in the fact department. Michael 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ThatGuy Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 "Ask your doctor; trust the science. Trust the science; ask your doctor." Wash, rinse, evade, repeat like a broken record... About that...what happens when "ask your friendly family doctor" goes awry? It's been pointed out that we've seen no commercials for any particular vaccine by Pfizer, Moderna, or J&J...why is that? Quote Do you think we’ll be seeing any commercials touting “ask your doctor about getting the Covid vaccine”? Those commercials where they list all of the possible side effects? Remember all those commercials for Gardasil, the wonder vaccine against human papilloma virus? Ever wonder why we don’t see them anymore? 16 Jan 2015 “Judges in India's Supreme Court have demanded answers after children DIED during a controversial cervical cancer vaccine trial. Young tribal girls received shots of pharmaceutical company Merck's Gardasil vaccine and Cervarix, manufactured by GlaxoSmithKline.....the study - FUNDED BY THE BILL & MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION - failed to obtain the informed consent of the children or their parents.” GotMySix on Gab: '' - Gab Social GAB.COM GotMySix on Gab: 'Do you think we’ll be seeing any commercials touting “ask your doctor about getting the Covid vaccine”? Those... Judges demand answers after children die in controversial cancer vaccine trial in India | Daily Mail Online WWW.DAILYMAIL.CO.UK The trials involved young tribal girls who were given shots of Merck's Gardasil vaccine and Cervarix. Campaigners have also asked judges... Judges demand answers after children die in controversial cancer vaccine trial in India -Tribal girls were given shots of cervical cancer vaccines during trial -Children given Merck's Gardasil and Cervarix vaccines -Petitioners also asked judges to investigate trials of new drug Gardasil 9 -Drug has allegedly caused side-effects in children as young as nine -Investigation claims children were used as unwitting human guinea pigs -Supreme Court has given the government one month to provide answers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
william.scherk Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 On 8/23/2021 at 7:27 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said: Now comes the professional wrestling between the government and mothers of schoolchildren on top of general vaccine passport matches. "Vaccine cErTiFiCaTeS"! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 15 hours ago, Jules Troy said: Your paperz please! Ssoooo do those enforcing vaccine passports get to wear snappy SS uniforms? Will the new vax chambers have wonderful flower beds outside? Expect compulsory arm bands for the un-vaxxed/untermensch. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tmj Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 “One margarita, two margarita, three margarita, shot “ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 9 minutes ago, anthony said: Expect compulsory arm bands for the un-vaxxed/untermensch. Armbands or yellow stars? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anthony Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 15 hours ago, Peter said: Oh my god, I say jokingly. We are doomed! Who is at most “at risk to Covid?” objectivists. From REB. Later, in 1962, in her column "Introducing Objectivism," Rand gave "the briefest summary" of her philosophy: 1. Reality exists as an objective absolute--facts are facts, independent of man's feelings, wishes, hopes or fears. 2. Reason (the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man's senses) is man's only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival. 3. Man--every man--is an end in himself, not the means t the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own ~rational~ self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life. 4. The ideal political-economic system is ~laissez-faire~ capitalism. it is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as ~traders~, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit. it is a system where no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force, and ~no man may initiate the use of physical force against others~. The government acts only as a policeman that protects man's rights; it uses physical force ~only~ in retaliation and ~only~ against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders. In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church. Do you agree with this summary? If so, are you then an Objectivist? "He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself ...nor sacrificing others..." "No man may initiate the use of physical force..." The argument heard in some circles boils down to : You are clearly initiating physical force by transmitting a (potentially fatal, for some) infection. Which means personalizing with intent: 'she' infected 'him'. Etc. In which case, it follows that the Gvt. can and must retaliate against every individual who does so. And - impose any powers to prevent that happening. Irrational nonsense. The whole treatment of this pandemic, from lock downs and masking, up to and including vaccinations, I think has emerged from the vital error of confusing the metaphysical with the man made. Simply because a natural virus makes the human body its host, doesn't make inadvertently passing on the infection - "man-made" (a person's responsibility to all others). So is not physical force. The only free and self-interested response is to be allowed to take care of yourself (i.e. those close also) informed by the facts and by the means you judge best fitting. Period. Not sacrificing yourself to others or others to you, like scapegoating and punishing, general, others. The most hysterical, True Believer vaxxers are the wannabe sacrificers of dissenting others. Their altruistic premises have become clear- you do such and such 'for humanity', for Society, least or not at all, for your selfish motives. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 Short and to the point. Two Senior FDA Officials Resign Over Disagreement with Biden White House on Covid Booster Shots WWW.THEGATEWAYPUNDIT.COM Two senior FDA officials resigned over a disagreement with the Biden White House on Covid booster shots. Marion Gruber, director of the agency’s Office of Vaccines Research and Review, and her deputy... From the article. Quote Gruber and Krause resigned after the Biden Admin decided to approve the Covid booster program without the FDA’s approval. Does that look like science? Or big crony government going for a power grab? (Y'all know what I think. ) Michael 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Stuart Kelly Posted September 1, 2021 Share Posted September 1, 2021 Use your reason when you look at this: Media Melts Down After Joe Rogan Says He Recovered From Covid in 3 Days After Taking Ivermectin, Z-Pak (VIDEO) WWW.THEGATEWAYPUNDIT.COM Highly popular podcast host Joe Rogan on Wednesday announced he had to move his comedy tour schedule around because he came down with Covid on Saturday night. Rogan, 54, said he was “feeling weary”... Shouldn't the media celebrate the recovery of a main media star? But it wants Joe Rogan compliant to the vaccine agenda or dead. Think about that. Is this really about COVID-19? I say it is not. People concerned about COVID-19 for real will be happy Rogan beat it and even recommend others try what he did. I, myself, am glad he beat it so easily. Michael 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now