round vs. flat II: the recknoning

  • 119 Replies
  • 51450 Views
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #60 on: November 08, 2007, 02:55:11 PM »
oh boy...I can't believe these morons are still pulling people into arguing their flat earth bullshit.

Let me put it this way...arguing with these people is like playing in the special olympics..even if you win, you're still retarded.   The best way to deal with these world class idiots is to not play their game.  That is the true motivation of people like this.  The argument doesn't matter...that they can get you to buy into the argument is what these leeches feed off of.  Trolls, one and all!!!

Definitely a nice layout of the facts (and FE non-facts) in the beginning of this thread, though.
am not senDing sublIminal mEssages

?

Loard Z

  • 4680
  • +0/-0
  • Insert witty intellectual phrase here...
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #61 on: November 08, 2007, 03:29:54 PM »
oh boy...I can't believe these morons are still pulling people into arguing their flat earth bullshit.

Let me put it this way...arguing with these people is like playing in the special olympics..even if you win, you're still retarded.   The best way to deal with these world class idiots is to not play their game.  That is the true motivation of people like this.  The argument doesn't matter...that they can get you to buy into the argument is what these leeches feed off of.  Trolls, one and all!!!

Definitely a nice layout of the facts (and FE non-facts) in the beginning of this thread, though.

quoted for irony, troll.
if i remember, austria is an old, dis-used name for what is now Germany.
See My Greatness

Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #62 on: November 08, 2007, 04:02:55 PM »
quoted for irony, troll.

Wow, are you dumb.   Go back and re-read my post SLOWLY.   Note how I did not place any argument whatsoever.  Now go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll and read that SLOWLY.   I have not tried to instigate any arguments.   I am simply pointing out that the FE'ers are complete and total morons.   On the bright side, you have elevated yourself to the top of that particular group.
am not senDing sublIminal mEssages

?

Loard Z

  • 4680
  • +0/-0
  • Insert witty intellectual phrase here...
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #63 on: November 08, 2007, 04:05:18 PM »
quoted for irony, troll.

Wow, are you dumb.   Go back and re-read my post SLOWLY.   Note how I did not place any argument whatsoever.  Now go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll and read that SLOWLY.   I have not tried to instigate any arguments.   I am simply pointing out that the FE'ers are complete and total morons.   On the bright side, you have elevated yourself to the top of that particular group.

"An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who intentionally posts controversial or contrary messages in an on-line community such as an on-line discussion forum or group with the intention of baiting users into an argumentative response.[1] A similar individual is an Internet Thug."

Your insults to our community are troll-like comments, intentionally made to bait people into argue, or insult back.

Remind me how you're not a troll?
if i remember, austria is an old, dis-used name for what is now Germany.
See My Greatness

Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #64 on: November 08, 2007, 04:15:21 PM »
"An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who intentionally posts controversial or contrary messages in an on-line community such as an on-line discussion forum or group with the intention of baiting users into an argumentative response.[1] A similar individual is an Internet Thug."

Your insults to our community are troll-like comments, intentionally made to bait people into argue, or insult back.

Remind me how you're not a troll?

This site seeks to instigate an argument...not discussion like the FE'ers like to constantly say.  You people feed on a reaction that you know people will have when you tell them that you think the earth is flat...lets just call it the "WTF???" factor.   This site uses that factor to bring people in and get them arguing with all of the blatant bullshit that you post here.   While I do call the FEers idiots and morons, I'm not just calling names here.   If you go and look up the definitions of those words, that is exactly how I classify the FEers.   

So, actually, I am just stating my opinion that you and yours are complete morons and I refuse to argue your FE crap because I just don't see the point in arguing with someone who thinks the earth is flat.
am not senDing sublIminal mEssages

?

Loard Z

  • 4680
  • +0/-0
  • Insert witty intellectual phrase here...
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #65 on: November 08, 2007, 04:25:32 PM »
"An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who intentionally posts controversial or contrary messages in an on-line community such as an on-line discussion forum or group with the intention of baiting users into an argumentative response.[1] A similar individual is an Internet Thug."

Your insults to our community are troll-like comments, intentionally made to bait people into argue, or insult back.

Remind me how you're not a troll?

This site seeks to instigate an argument...not discussion like the FE'ers like to constantly say.  You people feed on a reaction that you know people will have when you tell them that you think the earth is flat...lets just call it the "WTF???" factor.   This site uses that factor to bring people in and get them arguing with all of the blatant bullshit that you post here.   While I do call the FEers idiots and morons, I'm not just calling names here.   If you go and look up the definitions of those words, that is exactly how I classify the FEers.   

So, actually, I am just stating my opinion that you and yours are complete morons and I refuse to argue your FE crap because I just don't see the point in arguing with someone who thinks the earth is flat.

And yet, here you are, arguing with someone you believe thinks the earth is flat...

Kind of ironic, really.
No one asked you to register. No one asked you to be abusive. You did these things, thus you are a troll.
if i remember, austria is an old, dis-used name for what is now Germany.
See My Greatness

Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #66 on: November 08, 2007, 04:33:04 PM »
And yet, here you are, arguing with someone you believe thinks the earth is flat...

Kind of ironic, really.
No one asked you to register. No one asked you to be abusive. You did these things, thus you are a troll.

Wrong again.  I am not arguing any point here.  If me saying that I think anyone who wants to argue the FE theory is an idiot or a moron offends of the FEers, I would say lets do a poll outside of this forum and see just how many of the normal people out there also think that the FEers are just plain dumb.  I am very willing to just let the majority speak here.   I'm pretty sure it would be about 98% of the whole fucking world that would be calling the FEers dumb at that point.   

I am not arguing here.  I am perfectly secure with my own knowledge of things are, but I will say when I think something or someone is just plain stupid.
am not senDing sublIminal mEssages

?

Loard Z

  • 4680
  • +0/-0
  • Insert witty intellectual phrase here...
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #67 on: November 08, 2007, 04:37:12 PM »
And yet, here you are, arguing with someone you believe thinks the earth is flat...

Kind of ironic, really.
No one asked you to register. No one asked you to be abusive. You did these things, thus you are a troll.

Wrong again.  I am not arguing any point here.  If me saying that I think anyone who wants to argue the FE theory is an idiot or a moron offends of the FEers, I would say lets do a poll outside of this forum and see just how many of the normal people out there also think that the FEers are just plain dumb.  I am very willing to just let the majority speak here.   I'm pretty sure it would be about 98% of the whole fucking world that would be calling the FEers dumb at that point.   

I am not arguing here.  I am perfectly secure with my own knowledge of things are, but I will say when I think something or someone is just plain stupid.

Yet you are still a troll. You're deliberately trying to incite a response from me.

So here it is....

How many people on this forum do you think actually believe in the FE theory? We spend most of our time laughing at people like you who missed the point.
if i remember, austria is an old, dis-used name for what is now Germany.
See My Greatness

Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #68 on: November 08, 2007, 04:44:19 PM »
Yet you are still a troll. You're deliberately trying to incite a response from me.

So here it is....

How many people on this forum do you think actually believe in the FE theory? We spend most of our time laughing at people like you who missed the point.
HAHAHA...yes, as a matter of fact I know that most of the FEers don't actually believe the theory that they are arguing.   It just makes it that much more pathetic and amusing to me.   Now, if you please, I don't want to miss the rest of the parade, so stop bothering me.
am not senDing sublIminal mEssages

?

Loard Z

  • 4680
  • +0/-0
  • Insert witty intellectual phrase here...
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #69 on: November 08, 2007, 04:47:32 PM »
Yet you are still a troll. You're deliberately trying to incite a response from me.

So here it is....

How many people on this forum do you think actually believe in the FE theory? We spend most of our time laughing at people like you who missed the point.
HAHAHA...yes, as a matter of fact I know that most of the FEers don't actually believe the theory that they are arguing.   It just makes it that much more pathetic and amusing to me.   Now, if you please, I don't want to miss the rest of the parade, so stop bothering me.

It amuses me that you willingly go to a website that you think is stupid.

Stupid is as stupid does, I suppose...
if i remember, austria is an old, dis-used name for what is now Germany.
See My Greatness

Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #70 on: November 08, 2007, 04:51:16 PM »
It amuses me that you willingly go to a website that you think is stupid.

Stupid is as stupid does, I suppose...

I was just amusing myself for a while until it was time to leave work...which it is now.

Goodbye, freaks!

See ya later, normal people.
am not senDing sublIminal mEssages

?

Loard Z

  • 4680
  • +0/-0
  • Insert witty intellectual phrase here...
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #71 on: November 08, 2007, 04:53:30 PM »
pshh, whatever.
if i remember, austria is an old, dis-used name for what is now Germany.
See My Greatness

*

Colonel Gaydafi

  • Spam Moderator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 65234
  • +17/-47
  • Queen of the gays!
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #72 on: November 08, 2007, 04:53:43 PM »
Hmm which am I? Freak or normal?
Quote from: WardoggKC130FE
If Gayer doesn't remember you, you might as well do yourself a favor and become an hero.
Quote from: Raa
there is a difference between touching a muff and putting your hand into it isn't there?

*

TheEngineer

  • Planar Moderator
  • 15483
  • +0/-0
  • GPS does not require satellites.
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #73 on: November 08, 2007, 05:27:57 PM »
So, actually, I am just stating my opinion that you and yours are complete morons and I refuse to argue your FE crap because I just don't see the point in arguing with someone who thinks the earth is flat.
Good, then you won't mind being banned.


"I haven't been wrong since 1961, when I thought I made a mistake."
        -- Bob Hudson

*

Colonel Gaydafi

  • Spam Moderator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 65234
  • +17/-47
  • Queen of the gays!
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #74 on: November 08, 2007, 05:29:25 PM »
So, actually, I am just stating my opinion that you and yours are complete morons and I refuse to argue your FE crap because I just don't see the point in arguing with someone who thinks the earth is flat.
Good, then you won't mind being banned.

Huzzah! Banning stick put to good use!
Quote from: WardoggKC130FE
If Gayer doesn't remember you, you might as well do yourself a favor and become an hero.
Quote from: Raa
there is a difference between touching a muff and putting your hand into it isn't there?

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #75 on: November 08, 2007, 05:30:18 PM »
Hmm which am I? Freak or normal?

If you have to ask the answer should be obvious.
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Colonel Gaydafi

  • Spam Moderator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 65234
  • +17/-47
  • Queen of the gays!
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #76 on: November 08, 2007, 05:31:53 PM »
Hmm which am I? Freak or normal?

If you have to ask the answer should be obvious.

There wasn't an option for supercool
Quote from: WardoggKC130FE
If Gayer doesn't remember you, you might as well do yourself a favor and become an hero.
Quote from: Raa
there is a difference between touching a muff and putting your hand into it isn't there?

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #77 on: November 08, 2007, 05:44:45 PM »
Hmm which am I? Freak or normal?

If you have to ask the answer should be obvious.

There wasn't an option for supercool

lol, more like superfreak;D
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Colonel Gaydafi

  • Spam Moderator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 65234
  • +17/-47
  • Queen of the gays!
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #78 on: November 08, 2007, 05:47:16 PM »
superfreakycool?
Quote from: WardoggKC130FE
If Gayer doesn't remember you, you might as well do yourself a favor and become an hero.
Quote from: Raa
there is a difference between touching a muff and putting your hand into it isn't there?

*

Roundy the Truthinessist

  • Flat Earth TheFLAMETHROWER!
  • The Elder Ones
  • 26966
  • +0/-0
  • I'm the boss.
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #79 on: November 08, 2007, 05:51:53 PM »
Sure, whatever.  ::)











;D
Where did you educate the biology, in toulet?

*

Colonel Gaydafi

  • Spam Moderator
  • Planar Moderator
  • 65234
  • +17/-47
  • Queen of the gays!
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #80 on: November 09, 2007, 12:14:08 AM »
 >:(
Quote from: WardoggKC130FE
If Gayer doesn't remember you, you might as well do yourself a favor and become an hero.
Quote from: Raa
there is a difference between touching a muff and putting your hand into it isn't there?

?

Chewbaccas Anus

  • 14
  • +0/-0
  • rrrrroar!!!
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #81 on: November 09, 2007, 03:13:49 PM »
ok, if you believe the earth is flat then get a graduation(or whatever) in subjects that help you to become an astronaut, become an astronaut, go into space, and check out what you can see.
If there is a problem in life, you either deal with it or you move on.

*

Gabe

  • 485
  • +0/-0
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #82 on: November 09, 2007, 08:21:58 PM »
Quoted to get a response. (actually to smear in FE'ers faces)

after my brief time here, and beyond that via lurking, and reading the faq, i've noticed some real problems with fe that people like bishop pretend don't exist. i know other people have done this too, and for re'ers it won't be much of a lesson. but this is different. first, it's my own (slightly) unique observations. second, it's table rather than faq style. third, i think it is a decent concentration of fe problems.

where possible (in most cases), i've used actual quotes and paraphrases from fe'ers. when you look at it this way, how could anyone possibly believe the fe model? it boggles the mind.

any particularly outrageous fe explanation came from actual quotes; i can't make this shit up. my own interpretations of fe theory are very conservative and unremarkable.

phenomenon

round earth

flat earth

sun

an ordinary star powered by fusion; earth and other planets orbit in a non-geocentric universe

a sphere or a disk, either way a "spotlight", 32 miles diameter, orbiting a common barycenter with moon; power for light unknown; mechanism keeping it aloft above surface of earth unknown

sunrise/set

earth rotation makes it visibly rise from and set below horizon without changing size, just as observed

sun shrinks into distance until it disappears, or some other undefined optical illusion; furthermore shrinking into distance is not consistent with observation

solar eclipse

moon passes in front of sun as predicted in advance by well-established orbital mechanics; only happens during new moon

undefined mystery object moves in front of sun; could happen during any moon phase; cannot be predicted by fe celestial mechanics

lunar eclipse

earth aligns between moon and sun as predicted in advance by orbital mechanics; only happens during full moon

undefined mystery object moves in front of moon; could happen during any moon phase; cannot be predicted by fe celestial mechanics

shape of earth

spherical, slightly oblate due to rotation, finite mass and gravity

variously flat or slightly curved; infinite plane or finite disk; finite mass, infinite mass, or massless; fe cannot agree on even the most basic, fundamental properties - even within the range of zero to infinity

shape of sun/moon/planets

spherical

can't agree on spherical or flat

other stars

similar to sun, of varying size and mass, scattered throughout the milky way in various non-random densities

tiny motes of chemical energy the size of dust grains, floating in a layer above the earth, all rotating a common barycenter in perfectly circular orbits, violating laws of physics as all motes at all radii from center make one orbit every 24 hours

other galaxies

similar to the galaxy in which we reside, the milky way; scattered throughout the known universe; formations of stars, gas, and dust; having various sizes, shapes, and aggregate masses; complies with observational evidence

tiny swirling light shows, floating in a layer above the earth, all rotating a common barycenter in perfectly circular orbits along with the dust motes of stars, violating laws of physics as all swirling light shows at all radii from center make one orbit every 24 hours

formation of earth and solar system

condensed out of gas and dust, orbits and rotations preserving original overall angular momentum

unknown, maybe god

sinking ship effect

through high magnification, the tops of sails of sailboats appear below surface of even calm water (e.g. toronto pics); due to curvature of earth, partially compensated for by terrestrial refraction

trick of perspective because the sails are white and ships are dark and disappear against water, even though actual modern sailboats are mostly white and stand out against dark sea more than white sails against a light sky

clouds lit by sun from bottom at sunset

at sunset the clouds are angled slightly away from sun due to curvature of earth, furthermore crystal-clear evidence that the sun gets "below" the level of clouds as it sets

unexplained

satellites visible to naked eye crossing the sky at certain times on clear moonless nights

there are man-made satellites in orbiting around the earth; they reflect light from the sun when it is well below observer's horizon, during a range of time between dark, and before the satellites fall behind earth's shadow; usually dim (depending on satellite) but easily visible in motion against background stars with the naked eye

satellites don't exist (contrary to easy naked-eye observation), or they are pseudolites (by current definition ground-based), or the stratellite, requireing sheer conjecture and blind, evidence-free acceptance of conspiracy theory, as the stratellite manufactururer publicly states they are not yet operationaland there is only conjecture to the contrary; either way, the mechanism for which flying psuedolites / stratellites are lit from below is undefined

north celestial pole, every object beyond solar system completes one orbit in one day

an easy-to understand artifact of earth's orbit; requires nothing extra to explain, and no magical physics that every object in the observable universe must obey

a star cluster of tiny chemical dust motes; every one of millions of objects having a perfectly circular orbit in gross defiance of odds; violation of known orbital physics[/red], farthest star completes orbit as fast as nearest, even though nothing else in observable universe behaves this way[/red]

south celestial pole

same as north, but in southern hemisphere; like the north, it's relative location in the sky is the same, at any time, any month, any place in southern hemisphere

like north, also star cluster of tiny chemical motes; location in sky unknown or undefined; different places in sky according to time of night and/or month and/or location

why do we see the same face of the moon

like every major moon in our solar system (and mercury with the sun), our moon is tidally locked with its orbited planet; like the other moons, "locked" is a slight misnomer as there is a slight wobble throughout the course of a lunar month

unexplained; bishop once tried to pass off an animated gif showing lunar libration (month-long wobble) as "this is what it looks like when it passes overhead" (in one night); explained with lies

moon phases

unlit side of the moon as we see (the shadow) from 360 degrees, one night at a time, throughout the moon's orbit of earth

moon is either self-luminous, or lit from the reflection of the sun off of various places of earth; while somehow not changing "phase" over the course of a night; all fe explanations rely on relative positions which in their model change over the course of 24 hours, not 28 days, thus unable to explain moon phase changes consistent from all locations on earth, that take a 28.x day cycle to complete

moon stays the same size as it crosses the sky

basic orbital mechanics predicts this

unexplained

rotation of hurricanes depending on hemisphere

corilois effect as result of a rotating round earth

unexplained or undefined celestial eddies influence

things experimentally weigh less high on mountains

slightly smaller effect of gravitational attraction farther from the majority of earth's mass

chemical dust motes in sky pull in other direction

shape and size of earth determined regularly by global earthquake monitoring stations, and man-made seismic experiment

delays in and directions of primary readings, as well as secondary reflections and refractions, are consistent with a round earth

undefined

nasa photos

hundreds of thousands, if no millions of photos from hundreds of missions, with not a single one demonstrating something other than a consistent picture of round earth orbital mechanics

every single one was faked, including those published in the '60s which were computer-generated or altered (presumably with "vacuum tube photoshop")

strange wanderings of planets over weeks, months, and years

round-earth orbital mechanics, of which earth is part of, worked this out hundreds of years ago, and with highly predictable precision decades ago

unexplained

seasons

easily explained with the tilt of earths axis and it's effect as the earth orbits the sun

spiraling in and back out of sun and moon around a common barycenter, via unexplained physics

tides

gravitational effect readily predictable based on location of sun and moon relative to earth, and earth's rotation

sloshing of the earth back and forth; unpredictable

midnight sun in antactic circle

same explanation as perpetual night/day in antarctic - tilt of earth's axis relative to position in orbit

doesn't exist; all photos and accounts are lies or optical illusions


Quote from: Tom Bishop
There is no evidence for an infinite Earth.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
The Earth is infinite.
Warning, you have just lowered your IQ by reading my sig.

*

questions

  • 206
  • +0/-0
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #83 on: November 10, 2007, 01:37:20 AM »
The answer is that all pendulums are actually made by the Conspiracy, and thus programmed to give out false results.

Quoted for sheer awesomeness.  :D

*

Gabe

  • 485
  • +0/-0
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #84 on: November 13, 2007, 03:26:09 PM »
Awesomesauce indeed. Bump.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
There is no evidence for an infinite Earth.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
The Earth is infinite.
Warning, you have just lowered your IQ by reading my sig.

*

Gulliver

  • 78
  • +0/-0
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #85 on: November 13, 2007, 03:32:52 PM »
@OP. Most of that list is overly-biased. Many items in that list targetting FE are problems in RE too. And in my time reading the forums, I don't see one item there that FE'ers haven't already explained.

3/10. Nice formatting, did make things easier to read.
I turned my signatures off because they make threads hard to read. I can't even see this when I post, please tell me what I said here.

*

Gabe

  • 485
  • +0/-0
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #86 on: November 13, 2007, 03:52:00 PM »
@OP. Most of that list is overly-biased. Many items in that list targetting FE are problems in RE too. And in my time reading the forums, I don't see one item there that FE'ers haven't already explained.

3/10. Nice formatting, did make things easier to read.

What problems with FE carry over to RE? And I think the list is meant to show how valid the theory is. (credit for this nice work goes to cpt_bthimes)
Quote from: Tom Bishop
There is no evidence for an infinite Earth.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
The Earth is infinite.
Warning, you have just lowered your IQ by reading my sig.

?

WTF

  • 256
  • +0/-0
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #87 on: December 04, 2007, 09:46:04 PM »
@OP. Most of that list is overly-biased. Many items in that list targetting FE are problems in RE too. And in my time reading the forums, I don't see one item there that FE'ers haven't already explained.

3/10. Nice formatting, did make things easier to read.

What problems with FE carry over to RE? And I think the list is meant to show how valid the theory is. (credit for this nice work goes to cpt_bthimes)

Er, are you serious?  The "issues" in this chart are all perfectly understood in conventional science.  However there are enough question marks on the FE side to make a lifetime supply of suits for Matthew Lesko.  Of course it's kind of a waste of time even posting here anymore because most of the FE's are fakers and so not really worth the time to "discuss" this with.

*

Gabe

  • 485
  • +0/-0
Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #88 on: December 05, 2007, 06:49:41 AM »
@OP. Most of that list is overly-biased. Many items in that list targetting FE are problems in RE too. And in my time reading the forums, I don't see one item there that FE'ers haven't already explained.

3/10. Nice formatting, did make things easier to read.

What problems with FE carry over to RE? And I think the list is meant to show how valid the theory is. (credit for this nice work goes to cpt_bthimes)

Er, are you serious?  The "issues" in this chart are all perfectly understood in conventional science.  However there are enough question marks on the FE side to make a lifetime supply of suits for Matthew Lesko.  Of course it's kind of a waste of time even posting here anymore because most of the FE's are fakers and so not really worth the time to "discuss" this with.

I'm an RE'er. I stated that problems with FE don't carry over and diminish the perfect RE model.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
There is no evidence for an infinite Earth.
Quote from: Tom Bishop
The Earth is infinite.
Warning, you have just lowered your IQ by reading my sig.

?

eric bloedow

Re: round vs. flat II: the recknoning
« Reply #89 on: December 14, 2007, 08:15:16 PM »
bump to bring this back to the front!