Log In
Sign Up
Home
7:43 pm
March 31, 2012
Offline
stupid stoner shit, ya gotta be stoned as fuck for this…
so I know this is a touchy subject, and I Don’t know I can’t decide… To me all the Evidence points to the shit being fake… what ya’ll think?
right now I’m leaning towards No American has ever been to the Moon… ( Not saying No Human has ever been To the Moon, just that America hasn’t been there, ’cause I don’t buy into patriotic bullshit, I remember before I even knew about any Moon landing hoax conspiracies I Always thought it was weird that the Flag was flying in the wind when they planted it, why was the Flag waving when there’s no wind on the moon?
so there was a Race to the moon between America and Russia, and we went there… why didn’t Russia ever have their cosmonauts go there and walk on the moon and take pictures and footage?
Let’s just assume That USA did land on the moon and actually walked on the moon, so what, we got their first… you would Think Russia would at least want to be the Second country to walk on the moon, if Americans walked on the Moon that’s fine and dandy but The So-called space race was on and poppin right? then why wouldn’t Russia just eventually put their dudes on the Moon and Claim second for a goddamn amazing human achievement?
I hate believing in this shit… ’cause just like everyone else it’s supposed to be a proud achievement of human kind, but it’s Totally possible that they faked everything in a fucking Studio… I mean It gave us the advantage of the Nuclear Arms race, if we could make other countries believe we landed on the moon, that would give us the ultimate advantage with the Higher Ground ready send nukes out to muthaphuckkas, but that was ’69 – ’72 … that was fucking years ago… why haven’t Americans been back to the moon? why hasn’t Russia been to the Moon if they were so concerned about getting there? to this day, shit is weird.
I believe in ancient civilizations, and if we did go to the Moon, maybe they saw some shit from an Ancient civilization…??? and tried to cover it up sayin USA were there first? …. I don’t know but I do believe that crazy shit can happen, so maybe They did go to the moon and walked on the moon, but I really don’t trust a goddamn thing the government tells me.
and If you really take a look at the ancient Mayan glyphs there appears to be dudes with Astronaut type helmets on, could they just be head-dresses?, yeah… definitely, but every ancient culture claims their gods came from the sky, see it’s weird man
and No one can explain the Face on Mars, and the connections of Cydonia to Avebury in England.
I’m gonna post a few videos that I believe are credible
a funny thing happened on the way to the moon
why would the 3 astronauts from Apollo 11 hold a press conference and not be excited about what they achieved?
if it was Me I would be celebrating getting back from the Moon like I just won the Super Bowl!, but that’s just me
\Dude asks the astronauts about going to the Moon and they all have different accounts about certain subjects that you would think would be critical information that would align with each others answers based on basic scientific evisdence proof. If you’re leaving Earth to travel to the fucking moon I would think you would remember every single little detail because walking on the fucking moon is a big fucking deal.
8:40 pm
March 31, 2012
Offline
ive been watchin some conspiracy theory vids.. the numerical murders/sacrifices & shit are crazy af..
9:05 pm
April 4, 2012
Offline
Whoop Whoop Carnivalkilla44 :
Karacalla2:06 pm
March 30, 2013
Offline
We landed on the moon.
Whoop Whoop Old Mr Dangerous :
Neverthrive, MASTERWEEDO6:37 am
May 13, 2013
Offline
I love when people try to insist we never went and it was filmed by Stanley Kubrick.
I mean, Kubrick did film it, but he insisted on doing it on the actual moon.
We had some dude come into SuperMensa trying to convince people that moon itself was what was fake.
11:58 am
September 1, 2014
Offline
MASTERWEEDO said
I love when people try to insist we never went and it was filmed by Stanley Kubrick.
I mean, Kubrick did film it, but he insisted on doing it on the actual moon.
We had some dude come into SuperMensa trying to convince people that moon itself was what was fake.
Hollow moon theory:
1) Ancient text described a time when the moon was not there and say it was towed in to orbit.
2) Scientists can not come up with an definitive answer as to how it formed. If it was indeed a planet smashing into earth that created it, why no traces of earth compounds in the samples collected from it over the years? Actually synthetic metal compounds are found in rocks samples.
3) The size of the moon in relation to the earth has never been observed by science on any other planet in the known universe. The ratio does not make sense.
4) The fact that it is perfectly fixed at the correct distance to elipse the sun is almost too perfect and the odds are unfathomable this occurred naturally.
5) Experiments where conducted on it by dropping objects to its surface and it basically rang like a bell and reverberated, concluding its hollow.
6) Every crater has the same depth, logic says the larger the impact crater the greater the depth, nope, not on the moon. Leading some o think it has a Shell or hull just below its surface.
7) Possibly a Ship or observatory of some kind.
So, what the fuck is that thing in the night sky y’all?
3:47 pm
August 10, 2017
Offline
Cheese
Whoop Whoop Drunkalo :
SPOOKYtheFUNGI, MASTERWEEDOYeah bitches, im that short gentleman mentioned in that youtube video.
And the very nice, level headed guy from that other youtube video.
5:58 pm
Members
August 6, 2013
Offline
Karacalla said
Hollow moon theory:
1) Ancient text described a time when the moon was not there and say it was towed in to orbit.
2) Scientists can not come up with an definitive answer as to how it formed. If it was indeed a planet smashing into earth that created it, why no traces of earth compounds in the samples collected from it over the years? Actually synthetic metal compounds are found in rocks samples.
3) The size of the moon in relation to the earth has never been observed by science on any other planet in the known universe. The ratio does not make sense.
4) The fact that it is perfectly fixed at the correct distance to elipse the sun is almost too perfect and the odds are unfathomable this occurred naturally.
5) Experiments where conducted on it by dropping objects to its surface and it basically rang like a bell and reverberated, concluding its hollow.
6) Every crater has the same depth, logic says the larger the impact crater the greater the depth, nope, not on the moon. Leading some o think it has a Shell or hull just below its surface.
7) Possibly a Ship or observatory of some kind.
So, what the fuck is that thing in the night sky y’all?
1. Ancient texts describe all sorts of goofy shit that never happened. Why should we believe this one?
2. Which metals are those? Also, just because we don’t know HOW something was formed doesn’t mean aliens did it.
3. Perhaps this anomaly is part of the reason there’s life on Earth whereas no other place thus far can sustain life. There are over 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars I the known universe. There’s no possible way to check the planet to moon size ratio for the planets in the know universe. It MAY actually be unique in the universe, but once again that doesn’t = aliens.
4. The moon is actually moving away from the Earth little by little. It used to be closer.
5 The moon has less moisture than Earth, meaning that seismic vibrations will continue longer which is much more reasonable explanation.
6. They aren’t the same depth.
Whoop Whoop Pigg :
SPOOKYtheFUNGI6:08 pm
Moderators
February 15, 2014
Offline
Karacalla said
Hollow moon theory:
I am not a fan of that theory. While I have read some papers and articles about it, none of them were scientific, peer reviewed articles.
1) Ancient text described a time when the moon was not there and say it was towed in to orbit.
Yes. Democretus, Anaxagoras, Aristotle, Apollonios, and Plutarch all write of a time before the moon. There are no writings from a time before the moon. All the information we have is from people who supposedly lived many thousands of years after the moon came into existence. All these writings we have are from a time when the moon existed but talk about an ancient time before it existed.
2) Scientists can not come up with an definitive answer as to how it formed. If it was indeed a planet smashing into earth that created it, why no traces of earth compounds in the samples collected from it over the years? Actually synthetic metal compounds are found in rocks samples.
I am unsure of this. All the scientific articles I could find say that samples of lunar rock and soil revealed that the Moon is almost chemically identical to the Earth. The rocks also showed that the Moon formed about 29 million years later than other similar-sized objects in the solar system.
3) The size of the moon in relation to the earth has never been observed by science on any other planet in the known universe. The ratio does not make sense.
You are correct. The current theory is that the moon is not the result of the solar accretion period and therefore will not fit the model of any other object that resulted from the accretion period. This has led to the cataclysmic collision theory or the gravitation capture theory.
4) The fact that it is perfectly fixed at the correct distance to eclipse the sun is almost too perfect and the odds are unfathomable this occurred naturally.
From our current measurements, the moon is moving away slowly at 3.8 centimeters per year. The perfect distance is not quite right either which is why we have annular solar eclipses. The range of distance currently (due to the eccentricity of orbit) is between 356,749 km and 406,282 km.
5) Experiments where conducted on it by dropping objects to its surface and it basically rang like a bell and reverberated, concluding its hollow.
Yes, Nasa said that the installed seismographs installed during the Apollo missions recorded moon-quakes that “rang like a bell”. They go on to say that the earth does the same thing too but to a lesser degree. The “ringing” is what physicists expect from a solid object of that size with no liquid to dampen vibrations.
6) Every crater has the same depth, logic says the larger the impact crater the greater the depth, nope, not on the moon. Leading some o think it has a Shell or hull just below its surface.
From three well known craters: Tycho crater (about 53 miles across) is 15,700 feet deep, Copernicus (58 miles) is 12,500 feet deep, and Aristarchus (25 miles in diameter) is 9,800 feet deep. The depth varies much more for smaller craters with craters smaller than about 9 to 12.5 miles in diameter have much higher depth-to-diameter ratios. Not sure where the idea of same depth craters comes from.
7) Possibly a Ship or observatory of some kind.
It is possible.
Whoop Whoop Psyral :
Pigg, SPOOKYtheFUNGI, Karacalla, MASTERWEEDO
6:10 pm
Members
August 6, 2013
Offline
Psyral Infection said
Karacalla said
Hollow moon theory:
I am not a fan of that theory. While I have read some papers and articles about it, none of them were scientific, peer reviewed articles.
1) Ancient text described a time when the moon was not there and say it was towed in to orbit.
Yes. Democretus, Anaxagoras, Aristotle, Apollonios, and Plutarch all write of a time before the moon. There are no writings from a time before the moon. All the information we have is from people who supposedly lived many thousands of years after the moon came into existence. All these writings we have are from a time when the moon existed but talk about an ancient time before it existed.
2) Scientists can not come up with an definitive answer as to how it formed. If it was indeed a planet smashing into earth that created it, why no traces of earth compounds in the samples collected from it over the years? Actually synthetic metal compounds are found in rocks samples.
I am unsure of this. All the scientific articles I could find say that samples of lunar rock and soil revealed that the Moon is almost chemically identical to the Earth. The rocks also showed that the Moon formed about 29 million years later than other similar-sized objects in the solar system.
3) The size of the moon in relation to the earth has never been observed by science on any other planet in the known universe. The ratio does not make sense.
You are correct. The current theory is that the moon is not the result of the solar accretion period and therefore will not fit the model of any other object that resulted from the accretion period. This has led to the cataclysmic collision theory or the gravitation capture theory.
4) The fact that it is perfectly fixed at the correct distance to eclipse the sun is almost too perfect and the odds are unfathomable this occurred naturally.
From our current measurements, the moon is moving away slowly at 3.8 centimeters per year. The perfect distance is not quite right either which is why we have annular solar eclipses. The range of distance currently (due to the eccentricity of orbit) is between 356,749 km and 406,282 km.
5) Experiments where conducted on it by dropping objects to its surface and it basically rang like a bell and reverberated, concluding its hollow.
Yes, Nasa said that the installed seismographs installed during the Apollo missions recorded moon-quakes that “rang like a bell”. They go on to say that the earth does the same thing too but to a lesser degree. The “ringing” is what physicists expect from a solid object of that size with no liquid to dampen vibrations.
6) Every crater has the same depth, logic says the larger the impact crater the greater the depth, nope, not on the moon. Leading some o think it has a Shell or hull just below its surface.
From three well known craters: Tycho crater (about 53 miles across) is 15,700 feet deep, Copernicus (58 miles) is 12,500 feet deep, and Aristarchus (25 miles in diameter) is 9,800 feet deep. The depth varies much more for smaller craters with craters smaller than about 9 to 12.5 miles in diameter have much higher depth-to-diameter ratios. Not sure where the idea of same depth craters comes from.
7) Possibly a Ship or observatory of some kind.
It is possible.
Psryal coming through with the much more thought out and scientific version on my response!
Whoop Whoop Pigg :
SPOOKYtheFUNGI7:09 pm
April 18, 2017
Offline
Karacalla said
3) The size of the moon in relation to the earth has never been observed by science on any other planet in the known universe. The ratio does not make sense.
4) The fact that it is perfectly fixed at the correct distance to elipse the sun is almost too perfect and the odds are unfathomable this occurred naturally.
These 2 are the ones that are entirely impossible to explain with any amount of technology to me. For the first one, we have been able to semi-accurately observe the relationship of the moons to 4 planets, is it? 5? Out of a possible how many? That’s such a ridiculously overreaching generalization that it’s hard to believe it’s taken for scientific fact. They can add the buzzwords “in the known universe” to make that sound more significant, but that’s really meaning “yea, we acknowledge the whole universe, and we’re basing this on 5 planets.” In my opinion.
Ok, now the other one. Gravity is a constant as observed throughout physics. It’s also well known that it drastically varies depending on the chemical composition of any given mass, distance from the center of that mass, and just general movement. And then all things within that gravitational field must follow these rules. Ok. So we know that the sun has a hell of a lot more of a gravitational pull to Earth, even enough to keep Neptune around it which is far away as shit and significantly larger and heavier than Earth (again with these fuckin numbers, though. They’ve never been near it. How can they possibly know what Neptune weighs?) Aaaaanyway, it doesn’t make sense the Sun couldn’t supersede any other gravitational effect on the moon, especially when it’s closer to it than Earth is at times, and slowly but surely remove it from Earth’s orbit.
Wow, that didn’t come out coherent at all. Oh well. 5+9
Whoop Whoop Bonesaw Wizardstick :
SPOOKYtheFUNGI, Karacalla8:47 pm
January 28, 2016
Offline
Bonesaw Wizardstick said
.Wow, that didn’t come out coherent at all. Oh well. 5+9
12:16 am
September 1, 2014
Offline
Bonesaw Wizardstick said
Karacalla said
3) The size of the moon in relation to the earth has never been observed by science on any other planet in the known universe. The ratio does not make sense.
4) The fact that it is perfectly fixed at the correct distance to elipse the sun is almost too perfect and the odds are unfathomable this occurred naturally.These 2 are the ones that are entirely impossible to explain with any amount of technology to me. For the first one, we have been able to semi-accurately observe the relationship of the moons to 4 planets, is it? 5? Out of a possible how many? That’s such a ridiculously overreaching generalization that it’s hard to believe it’s taken for scientific fact. They can add the buzzwords “in the known universe” to make that sound more significant, but that’s really meaning “yea, we acknowledge the whole universe, and we’re basing this on 5 planets.” In my opinion.
Ok, now the other one. Gravity is a constant as observed throughout physics. It’s also well known that it drastically varies depending on the chemical composition of any given mass, distance from the center of that mass, and just general movement. And then all things within that gravitational field must follow these rules. Ok. So we know that the sun has a hell of a lot more of a gravitational pull to Earth, even enough to keep Neptune around it which is far away as shit and significantly larger and heavier than Earth (again with these fuckin numbers, though. They’ve never been near it. How can they possibly know what Neptune weighs?) Aaaaanyway, it doesn’t make sense the Sun couldn’t supersede any other gravitational effect on the moon, especially when it’s closer to it than Earth is at times, and slowly but surely remove it from Earth’s orbit.
Wow, that didn’t come out coherent at all. Oh well. 5+9
I totally get your rundown and am in awe of Psyrals complete, and quite detailed, answers to some of the points attempted with this theory, but what you are saying is when we scour the universe looking for life we should look for the Goldie locks zone, liquid water and a moon similar in size to ours because it balances out the planet perfectly giving life a high probability?
Those three things to me would fall under the “to good to be natural” concept and would make me think that a helping hand played a roll in life’s development here. Yes, when they say “Known Universe” it’s a very tiny slice that we have been able to study, but, even that small portion contains billions of stars with multiple planets each and still, no moon similar to ours. So out of all of these insane theories, I tend to give this one a small amount of merit based on this.
Recently, they think we have either a companion star (Red Dwarf) or a long lost planet because of the gravitational forces jostling asteroids around in our outer belt, I forget the name. The theory goes that every major extinction level event on earth happened within the same amount of years and what ever is coming out of this strange orbit around the sun causes it, any thoughts?
1:05 am
Members
August 6, 2013
Offline
Karacalla said
I totally get your rundown and am in awe of Psyrals complete, and quite detailed, answers to some of the points attempted with this theory, but what you are saying is when we scour the universe looking for life we should look for the Goldie locks zone, liquid water and a moon similar in size to ours because it balances out the planet perfectly giving life a high probability?
Those three things to me would fall under the “to good to be natural” concept and would make me think that a helping hand played a roll in life’s development here. Yes, when they say “Known Universe” it’s a very tiny slice that we have been able to study, but, even that small portion contains billions of stars with multiple planets each and still, no moon similar to ours. So out of all of these insane theories, I tend to give this one a small amount of merit based on this.
Recently, they think we have either a companion star (Red Dwarf) or a long lost planet because of the gravitational forces jostling asteroids around in our outer belt, I forget the name. The theory goes that every major extinction level event on earth happened within the same amount of years and what ever is coming out of this strange orbit around the sun causes it, any thoughts?
NASA claims a possibility of a 9th planet with a hella slow orbit.
https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2017-259
When it comes to the know universe, it is MUCH easier for scientists to locate stars than it is for them to locate plabets. The biggest reason being that stars are significantly larger and actually produce light that we can detect.
Here is a link to some information about the Kepler mission and how astronomers detect exoplanets using the trabsit method. Basically they have to point a camera at a star and wait for a tiny spec to move across it.
I’m not as scientifically savvy as Psyral, but this is still pretty neat stuff.
Whoop Whoop Pigg :
SPOOKYtheFUNGI, Karacalla1:05 am
February 16, 2018
Offline
So I just got done feeding my gremlins and I was thinking about the saying “Winners wright history” only thing is there was no winner of the cold war. I’m sure there was some denial of the moon landing by the soviet union but it sure died quick and it wasn’t said persistently. If it didn’t happen they would have said so immediately and kept saying and we would know that it was a hoax now because they would have proof that it was false, but there was no proof from them, the only “evidence” that the moon landing was false came about recently.
I didn’t really read what arguments are being made on the forum, I just wanted to pitch that in, if it was provably a hoax the enemies of the U.S. would have done it a long time ago. I don’t wanna hurt my head with another argument, I get REAAALLY into arguments.
Whoop Whoop Iris The Tranny juggalette :
SPOOKYtheFUNGII see no difference between a corpse and a sex toy
1:09 am
Members
August 6, 2013
Offline
Oops, forgot the link:
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/kepler/overview/index.html
7:42 am
Moderators
February 15, 2014
Offline
Karacalla said
I totally get your rundown and am in awe of Psyrals complete, and quite detailed, answers to some of the points attempted with this theory, but what you are saying is when we scour the universe looking for life we should look for the Goldie locks zone, liquid water and a moon similar in size to ours because it balances out the planet perfectly giving life a high probability?
Those three things to me would fall under the “to good to be natural” concept and would make me think that a helping hand played a roll in life’s development here. Yes, when they say “Known Universe” it’s a very tiny slice that we have been able to study, but, even that small portion contains billions of stars with multiple planets each and still, no moon similar to ours. So out of all of these insane theories, I tend to give this one a small amount of merit based on this.
Recently, they think we have either a companion star (Red Dwarf) or a long lost planet because of the gravitational forces jostling asteroids around in our outer belt, I forget the name. The theory goes that every major extinction level event on earth happened within the same amount of years and what ever is coming out of this strange orbit around the sun causes it, any thoughts?
I agree with the Goldielocks zone issue. We are only looking for life within a narrow range of possibilities. Star Trek had some interesting ideas with silicon based life forms. They both have 4 electrons in the outer electron cloud. (Germanium does too but it is not as common as silicon and carbon in the “known” universe). They all have similar valence bonds.
And just because we need liquid water for life does not mean all life requires that. What about liquid methane (Titan)? How about liquid ammonia (Enceladus)? Here is an article on Hypothetical types of biochemistry. I know that’s Wikipedia but it is still an interesting idea.
The gravitation jostling from either a companion star or lost planet is a common theory and computational models show it has merit and may have led to Kuiper belt or Ort cloud objects being directed towards the inner solar system. The Jupiter-Sun gravitation pump action is also thrown around in scientific circles for asteroid belt orbit expels. The lost companion star idea is further supplemented by recent observations that way over half (close to 4/5) of all star systems are binary systems.
…
I do not subscribe to the moon landing being faked. It is possible, though. The political climate at the time may have necessitated such a staging for optics of space dominance. And with revelations that our government may not have been as honest with the American public as people once thought, it give credence to that theory.
Whoop Whoop Psyral :
SPOOKYtheFUNGI, Old Mr Dangerous, Karacalla, Pigg10:09 am
April 4, 2012
Offline
Karacalla said
Hollow moon theory:
1) Ancient text described a time when the moon was not there and say it was towed in to orbit.
Just like how not so ancient text described a time when Pluto was part of our solar system? Fuck outta here scientists! Pluto got the bone fo sheezee.
Whoop Whoop Carnivalkilla44 :
Psyral5:49 pm
March 30, 2013
Offline
Life finds a way, as the dude from Jurassic Park said. Common sense, no need for too many details. Even Stephen Hawking theorized that harsh gas giants like Jupiter could have creatures made of gasses and such.
Got a book at the airport gift shop in England on the way back.
More educated theories and evidence. Life is all around us and within us.
Whoop Whoop Old Mr Dangerous :
Psyral, SPOOKYtheFUNGI6:14 pm
April 18, 2017
Offline
Karacalla said
I totally get your rundown and am in awe of Psyrals complete, and quite detailed, answers to some of the points attempted with this theory, but what you are saying is when we scour the universe looking for life we should look for the Goldie locks zone, liquid water and a moon similar in size to ours because it balances out the planet perfectly giving life a high probability?
Those three things to me would fall under the “to good to be natural” concept and would make me think that a helping hand played a roll in life’s development here. Yes, when they say “Known Universe” it’s a very tiny slice that we have been able to study, but, even that small portion contains billions of stars with multiple planets each and still, no moon similar to ours. So out of all of these insane theories, I tend to give this one a small amount of merit based on this.
Recently, they think we have either a companion star (Red Dwarf) or a long lost planet because of the gravitational forces jostling asteroids around in our outer belt, I forget the name. The theory goes that every major extinction level event on earth happened within the same amount of years and what ever is coming out of this strange orbit around the sun causes it, any thoughts?
You’re right that the odds of there being another Moon, Earth, and Sun combo in that exact configuration would be ridiculously steep. But the way I see it, it’s “decent” odds anyway. If it’s a one in a trillion chance, that’s out of probably exponentially greater pool which means if should pop up every now and again if you’re using just generic statistics. To put into perspective how much a trillion really is, 1 trillion sections is almost 32,000 years.
So then you combine that with other stuff that doesn’t make sense based on our understanding of physics. Like just the general rules of how fire works, for example. It shouldn’t be able to exist in a controlled state in a vacuum, but it does in the form of stars. Evidently, what we believe to be the rules can change in space, and we have incredibly limited ability to study that in detail. Just think about this. When we sent the rover to Mars, it takes 14 minutes for the radio signal to get here from there. And that’s extremely close to Earth relative to most other celestial bodies. So even if we were able to physically get to some of these far stretches of the universe to study it, we couldn’t send a radio signal to and from it in a reasonable amount of time based on physics alone.
So using that logic, which is that we physically can’t study it, but we have studied that laws of physics and chemistry can change at will in space, it is not that ridiculous to think the Goldielocks theory is completely irrelevant. It’s like the one in a trillion chance that the conditions exist for that one way for life, but what if we should really be thinking about the other 999.999.999.999 ways that life could be formed and sustained using rules that we’re not aware of?
And as far as a Red Dwarf fucking with gravitational pull, I don’t buy it. If something like that did exist and was able to fuck with things in that weakened state, that goes back to my question about why our Moon and other similar sized objects don’t just stop what we’re doing and magnetize toward the sun.
That kinda shit is what I think about all the time, Morty. It’s blows my fucking mind, Morty. You should watch “Red Dwarf” if you like StarTrek, Morty! 2+12 Morty! It’s fucking 14, Morty!
Whoop Whoop Bonesaw Wizardstick :
Psyral, Karacalla, SPOOKYtheFUNGI
All RSSMost Users Ever Online: 1174
Currently Online:
26 Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Top Posters:
The Warlock: 11727
King Lucem Ferre: 9104
Old Mr Dangerous: 9080
krunk: 8380
OCJ_Brendan: 6148
Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 755
Members: 6280
Moderators: 6
Admins: 2
Forum Stats:
Groups: 5
Forums: 28
Topics: 12376
Posts: 246709
Newest Members:
CarbixTools, charliecl, parchedgam, creatorpixelModerators: GanjaGoblin: 2893, Psyral: 4297, bozodklown: 394, scruffy: 11447, PunkRockJuggalo: 6559, Pigg: 6492
Administrators: admin: 1, ScottieD: 845
