Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Science, Math, and Philosophy Discussions regarding science, math, and/or philosophy.

View Poll Results: How would you want to go if the world had to end?
Zombie apocalypse 19 17.43%
Meteor collides into the earth 30 27.52%
Alien invasion 57 52.29%
Nuclear disaster, either from war or accident 3 2.75%
Voters: 109. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-18-2010, 05:07 AM   #101
plaaynde
Poker Historian
 
plaaynde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Rebel of Eden
Posts: 18,781
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by always_sunni_ View Post
My question is,

What is the first thing that you would do if all man-made objects disappeared this instant? (Lemme know if you need further clarification....)
And...of course...I would try to determine if Im dreaming, which I think would be the most probable alternative if I experienced the quoted thing.

Followed in falling order of probability by me being insane and hallucinating and then followed by nothing and then by nothing and then...interesting...maybe by nothing...

Last edited by plaaynde; 04-18-2010 at 05:15 AM.
plaaynde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2010, 08:53 AM   #102
DDNK
veteran
 
DDNK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: ~Vietnam
Posts: 2,591
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Fringe theory: you're dreaming right now. Prove otherwise.
DDNK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2010, 09:49 AM   #103
plaaynde
Poker Historian
 
plaaynde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Rebel of Eden
Posts: 18,781
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by DDNK View Post
Fringe theory: you're dreaming right now. Prove otherwise.
I hope for your sake Im not dreaming. If Im dreaming, it would lead to that your quoted post is dreamed up by me and you hadnt written it. How do you feel about that?
plaaynde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2010, 03:54 PM   #104
DDNK
veteran
 
DDNK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: ~Vietnam
Posts: 2,591
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by plaaynde View Post
I hope for your sake Im not dreaming. If Im dreaming, it would lead to that your quoted post is dreamed up by me and you hadnt written it. How do you feel about that?
Being a figment of your imagination, I'm cool with that, of course.
DDNK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2010, 06:39 PM   #105
donniccolo
Pooh-Bah
 
donniccolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Columbus
Posts: 5,955
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by plaaynde View Post
Donniccolo? Did we send these out... or...?
humans =/= robots

although i think its laughable that the president now wants to sent humans to mars. the US and every other nation on earth has failed to send a human >400 miles from earth since 1972 (or ever if you're in my camp) and now obama wants to send someone a zillion miles away.

enjoy.

simple question with respect: how many years will have to pass before you do doubt the 1969-72 "landings" ? ? do you think in 2069 when it has been 100 years the avg person will still buy this if we're still in low earth orbit? honest answers only, please leave smartarse criticism behind.

thanks.
donniccolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2010, 07:05 PM   #106
river_tilt
old hand
 
river_tilt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Swimming with sharks
Posts: 1,431
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by donniccolo View Post
humans =/= robots

Surely there's some chance the Mars landings were faked also? (Maybe the bodged British effort was a genuine attempt, and that's why it went wrong...)
river_tilt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-18-2010, 08:15 PM   #107
atakdog
addicted
 
atakdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: vṛkṣāsana
Posts: 50,136
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by donniccolo View Post
simple question with respect: how many years will have to pass before you do doubt the 1969-72 "landings" ? ? do you think in 2069 when it has been 100 years the avg person will still buy this if we're still in low earth orbit? honest answers only, please leave smartarse criticism behind.
Yes, in 2069 I would still believe it, unless here's reason to believe that are good reasons to go back yet we still haven't. See, that's the thing you seem continually to miss: we went in the 60s and 70s to prove that we could, basically. Now that we have, we need a good reason to spend the enormous amount of money it would take to go back. We already know what's there, pretty much, many of the things we could do there are just as easily and far more cheaply done from orbit, and there's no reason to believe that any mining or such could be commercially viable. Until one of those things changes, I don't infer anything from our failure to do it again.
atakdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2010, 12:26 AM   #108
daveT
S.A.G.E. Master
 
daveT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: La La Land
Posts: 23,586
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Tomorrow I'll post the ultimate conspiracy moon landing you ever read. The imagination of it is amazing.
daveT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2010, 10:27 AM   #109
plaaynde
Poker Historian
 
plaaynde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Rebel of Eden
Posts: 18,781
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by river_tilt View Post
Surely there's some chance the Mars landings were faked also? (Maybe the bodged British effort was a genuine attempt, and that's why it went wrong...)
Yea, just think about it. What is government trying to plant into our heads?
plaaynde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2010, 03:42 PM   #110
daveT
S.A.G.E. Master
 
daveT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: La La Land
Posts: 23,586
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

this is awesome.

Quote:
I believe that the Apollo footage that has been released by NASA seems to be a hoax. I have uncovered various pictures and transcripts of astronaut conversations from the Apollo missions that relate to encounters with UFOs, and perhaps this is one reason why NASA would release fake footage to the general public.
......
Many people feel we have not been told the complete truth regarding NASA's space program, in particular the Apollo Missions of the late 60's and early 70's. Recent research has shown that conditions on the Moon could be very different from the 'official-line' which NASA would lead us to believe. Dr Farouk El Baz, one of NASA's foremost scientists, confirmed public suspicions when he stated 'not every discovery has been announced to the public'. Is this the understatement of the millennium?
The basic idea is that the apollo missions did happen, but the photos were faked because the astronauts found a ton of ufo stuff on the moon. Not surprisingly, much of this is on the Dark Side of the Moon.

[special note] There are photos that are apparently taken by Neil Armstrong.

Quote:
Armstrong & Aldrin: Those are giant things. No, no, no - this is not an optical illusion. No one is going to believe this!

Houston (Christopher Craft): What ... what ... what? What the hell is happening? What's wrong with you?

Armstrong & Aldrin: They're here under the surface.

Houston: What's there? (muffled noise) Emission interrupted; interference control calling 'Apollo 11'.

Armstrong & Aldrin: We saw some visitors. They were here for a while, observing the instruments.
and the icing on the cake.

Quote:
[Professor: What REALLY happened out there with Apollo 11?

Armstrong: It was incredible, of course we had always known there was a possibility - the fact is, we were warned off! There was never any question then of a space station or a moon city.

Professor: How do you mean "warned off"?

Armstrong: I can't go into details, except to say that their ships were far superior to ours both in size and technology - Boy, were they big!...and menacing! No, there is no question of a space station.

Professor: But NASA had other missions after Apollo 11?

Armstrong: Naturally - NASA was committed at that time, and couldn't risk panic on Earth. But it really was a quick scoop and back again.
daveT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2010, 05:30 PM   #111
ganstaman
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ganstaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: nj
Posts: 9,620
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by donniccolo View Post
humans =/= robots

although i think its laughable that the president now wants to sent humans to mars. the US and every other nation on earth has failed to send a human >400 miles from earth since 1972 (or ever if you're in my camp) and now obama wants to send someone a zillion miles away.

enjoy.
Failed? It's not like we've really been trying so hard recently.

And why didn't you respond to my past post? Don't you see how ridiculous and lacking logic your line of reasoning here is?
ganstaman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2010, 08:24 AM   #112
donniccolo
Pooh-Bah
 
donniccolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Columbus
Posts: 5,955
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by atakdog View Post
Yes, in 2069 I would still believe it, unless here's reason to believe that are good reasons to go back yet we still haven't. See, that's the thing you seem continually to miss: we went in the 60s and 70s to prove that we could, basically. Now that we have, we need a good reason to spend the enormous amount of money it would take to go back. We already know what's there, pretty much, many of the things we could do there are just as easily and far more cheaply done from orbit, and there's no reason to believe that any mining or such could be commercially viable. Until one of those things changes, I don't infer anything from our failure to do it again.
"to prove that we could" - so the usa was able to achieve manned moon landings (6) before russia, even though russia had beat the us in virtually every other part of the space race? and russia still never has gotten to the moon btw. and this seems ok/normal to you? also - why go 7 times if after the 1st mission would've determined what you are concluding? heck, at least the 2nd or 3rd would've---but 7?!?? and then to abruptly cancel the entire Apollo program with 3 missions still being planned? this seems normal to you?

also your logic is flawed considering the usa has had plans and canceled plans to return to the moon. if it were a complete, unnecessary waste why even plan to return?

your logic is also flawed when you use the money argument. the usa spends trillions more than it has anyway - to say that they don't have the money for anything is laughable. they have an endless bankroll brah.

(also - in 2069 if man has never left low-earth orbit "again" will you still believe that they did in 1969?)

"from orbit?" please stop comparing 400 miles to 240,000 miles to 34,000,000 miles. these are not fair comparisons to make. if you truly believe they are, ship me $240k on stars and i'll ship you $400 back. after all, they are basically the same thing ;-)


Quote:
Originally Posted by ganstaman View Post
OMG, guiz, so like they say we developed nucular bombs in the 40s! And we used 2 bombs in the span of 3 days, but since then, we've used 0!!!!11!!

I bet Hiroshima and Nagasaki were faked.
this obv doesn't warrant a serious reply brah considering using a nuke causes damage / destruction / kills people. give me a better comparison plz.
donniccolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2010, 08:26 AM   #113
donniccolo
Pooh-Bah
 
donniccolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Columbus
Posts: 5,955
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganstaman View Post
And why didn't you respond to my past post? Don't you see how ridiculous and lacking logic your line of reasoning here is?
replied above.

i believe that truly believing 100% either way is illogical brother - it could go either way but imo it didn't happen. obv we disagree hence this discussion.
donniccolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2010, 09:09 AM   #114
Akileos
old hand
 
Akileos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,337
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by donniccolo View Post
replied above.

i believe that truly believing 100% either way is illogical brother - it could go either way but imo it didn't happen. obv we disagree hence this discussion.
A coin flip can go either way.
The moon landing happened and there is tons of evidence that you choose to ignore.
Akileos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2010, 09:09 AM   #115
greywolf
old hand
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 1,628
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

can we also create an official penis thread?
i mean if this threads purpose is to not derail the rest of the forum..
greywolf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2010, 11:39 AM   #116
ganstaman
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
ganstaman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: nj
Posts: 9,620
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by donniccolo View Post
this obv doesn't warrant a serious reply brah considering using a nuke causes damage / destruction / kills people. give me a better comparison plz.
Ok, so you're saying that we haven't set off another nuke since then because there are negatives to doing so that out-weigh the positives. And this is sensible. That we haven't used a nuke since the 1940s isn't a good enough reason to believe that we didn't actually use any in the 1940s.

Similarly, we haven't returned to the moon since then because there are negatives to doing so that out-weigh the positives. That we haven't returned isn't a good enough reason to believe that we didn't actually go in 1969.

It really is the same idea. We are told that this event happened a long time ago, but hasn't happened since. The lack of repeating this event isn't evidence that it never took place to begin with.
ganstaman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-24-2010, 11:45 PM   #117
donniccolo
Pooh-Bah
 
donniccolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Columbus
Posts: 5,955
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by Akileos View Post
A coin flip can go either way.
The moon landing happened and there is tons of evidence that you choose to ignore.
i'm not ignoring anything. i am questioning everything. you seem to be believing things blindly. you'd have been a good member of the Flat Earth club w/ that attitude.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ganstaman View Post
Ok, so you're saying that we haven't set off another nuke since then because there are negatives to doing so that out-weigh the positives. And this is sensible. That we haven't used a nuke since the 1940s isn't a good enough reason to believe that we didn't actually use any in the 1940s.

Similarly, we haven't returned to the moon since then because there are negatives to doing so that out-weigh the positives. That we haven't returned isn't a good enough reason to believe that we didn't actually go in 1969.

It really is the same idea. We are told that this event happened a long time ago, but hasn't happened since. The lack of repeating this event isn't evidence that it never took place to begin with.
i agree that lack of returning is not "proof" that we didn't go - its just part of the bigger picture imo.

however your argument has flaws too - you are saying that we went and decided that the costs/negatives out weighed the positives. i simply wonder why then did we go, and then go again, and again, and again... and then abruptly cancel 3 missions? it really took 7 trips to determine that it was not worth it?

furthermore - lets say i accept that we went and went again times 7 and then quit because, like you say, the negatives outweigh the positives.

then why ever plan on returning? the US has twice now planned to return to the moon - only to cancel their plans. most recently they hoped to return by 2025. laughable to me that they hoped to return in 20 years after initially getting there in 8 w/ 60s technology. given that in 2005 they had 2 distinct advantages (1- already been there, would have a template to work from 2- better technology in 2005 means <8 years to develop) it seems weird to me that more people don't question this when looking at it this way.
donniccolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2010, 01:43 AM   #118
atakdog
addicted
 
atakdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: vṛkṣāsana
Posts: 50,136
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by donniccolo View Post
"to prove that we could" - so the usa was able to achieve manned moon landings (6) before russia, even though russia had beat the us in virtually every other part of the space race? and russia still never has gotten to the moon btw. and this seems ok/normal to you? also - why go 7 times if after the 1st mission would've determined what you are concluding? heck, at least the 2nd or 3rd would've---but 7?!?? and then to abruptly cancel the entire Apollo program with 3 missions still being planned? this seems normal to you?
We established a program to land on the moon to prove that we could. Given that it worked, we spent the incremental whatever it was to go a few more times, but eventually decided it wasn't worth it any more.

Now it would cost orders of magnitude more to go, in part because our attitudes about risking the lives of astronauts have changed so we'd insist on it being ridiculously over-engineered, and there's still not a lot we would want to do that can't be done about as well in a much easier way.

And I don't see any problem believing that we beat the Russians getting there. Their technology was on a par, perhaps overall superior in some ways, but not so superior that it is impossible to believe — and perhaps the biggest reason I believe it is that afaik they never, ever tried to debunk it. The USSR had an enormous interest in showing that we didn't get there, and there was never any serious suggestion to that effect. They had their program; they knew what was possible... and they believed it. I consider that strong evidence.


Quote:
also your logic is flawed considering the usa has had plans and canceled plans to return to the moon. if it were a complete, unnecessary waste why even plan to return?
Politics, I suspect. Don't know. I certainly have no difficulty imagining politicians proposing grand plans, and the bureaucrats and scientists who would benefit from implementing those plans going along with it. I also have no problem believing that the money wasn't there, given what I suspect was the missions' proponents failure to demonstrate much benefit that would come therefrom.


Quote:
your logic is also flawed when you use the money argument. the usa spends trillions more than it has anyway - to say that they don't have the money for anything is laughable. they have an endless bankroll brah.
I suspect, and rather hope, that you don't actually believe this.

I we have an endless bankroll I wonder why we are not spending more of it on things that would get incumbent politicians reelected, like free housing and health care for everyone. that's a ridiculous position of course, but so is yours. Marginal dollars matter; marginal hundreds of billions matter quite a bit.


Quote:
(also - in 2069 if man has never left low-earth orbit "again" will you still believe that they did in 1969?)
Yes.

If there is a great reason for doing it, and sufficient wealth that it would seem reasonable, and we don't, then perhaps I'll have my doubts, but there would have to be more evidence than just that.


Quote:
"from orbit?" please stop comparing 400 miles to 240,000 miles to 34,000,000 miles. these are not fair comparisons to make. if you truly believe they are, ship me $240k on stars and i'll ship you $400 back. after all, they are basically the same thing ;-)
Strangely enough, low gravity is pretty much the same 400 miles up, 240,000 miles up, and 34,000,000 miles up. So is freedom from atmospheric influence on instruments. (think Hubble telescope — would it really be so much better if it were on the moon?) There aren't any minerals to mine in orbit, but mining the moon is millennia from being economical.

For most realistic purposes, they are quite comparable.


You continue, also, to ignore the way the world of technology has changed since the sixties. Then, to go to the moon and expect to get anything back or even learn much about it pretty much required that we send humans. Now, computer technology has advanced sufficiently far (many billion-fold, I think) that it's perfectly reasonable to send unmanned probes to do many of our research and technological tasks. Not all, perhaps, but it changes the cost/benefit curve dramatically. Couple that with the cultural changes that have made even a single death a big deal, and what you get is the cessation of manned programs to the moon. If we decided we needed to go back, I suspect we would send robots, not people, so a failure to send people wouldn't imply anything about whether we'd done it in the past.
atakdog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2010, 06:42 AM   #119
DDNK
veteran
 
DDNK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: ~Vietnam
Posts: 2,591
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

pen15 is Zeno's second account.
DDNK is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2010, 08:19 AM   #120
Ryanb9
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Ryanb9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: NEVA!
Posts: 7,241
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by DDNK View Post
pen15 is Zeno's second account.
Ahhhhhhhhh, now it all makes sense.
Ryanb9 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-25-2010, 06:04 PM   #121
donniccolo
Pooh-Bah
 
donniccolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Columbus
Posts: 5,955
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by atakdog View Post
We established a program to land on the moon to prove that we could. Given that it worked, we spent the incremental whatever it was to go a few more times, but eventually decided it wasn't worth it any more.

Now it would cost orders of magnitude more to go, in part because our attitudes about risking the lives of astronauts have changed so we'd insist on it being ridiculously over-engineered, and there's still not a lot we would want to do that can't be done about as well in a much easier way.

And I don't see any problem believing that we beat the Russians getting there. Their technology was on a par, perhaps overall superior in some ways, but not so superior that it is impossible to believe and perhaps the biggest reason I believe it is that afaik they never, ever tried to debunk it. The USSR had an enormous interest in showing that we didn't get there, and there was never any serious suggestion to that effect. They had their program; they knew what was possible... and they believed it. I consider that strong evidence.


Politics, I suspect. Don't know. I certainly have no difficulty imagining politicians proposing grand plans, and the bureaucrats and scientists who would benefit from implementing those plans going along with it. I also have no problem believing that the money wasn't there, given what I suspect was the missions' proponents failure to demonstrate much benefit that would come therefrom.


I suspect, and rather hope, that you don't actually believe this.

I we have an endless bankroll I wonder why we are not spending more of it on things that would get incumbent politicians reelected, like free housing and health care for everyone. that's a ridiculous position of course, but so is yours. Marginal dollars matter; marginal hundreds of billions matter quite a bit.


Yes.

If there is a great reason for doing it, and sufficient wealth that it would seem reasonable, and we don't, then perhaps I'll have my doubts, but there would have to be more evidence than just that.


Strangely enough, low gravity is pretty much the same 400 miles up, 240,000 miles up, and 34,000,000 miles up. So is freedom from atmospheric influence on instruments. (think Hubble telescope would it really be so much better if it were on the moon?) There aren't any minerals to mine in orbit, but mining the moon is millennia from being economical.

For most realistic purposes, they are quite comparable.


You continue, also, to ignore the way the world of technology has changed since the sixties. Then, to go to the moon and expect to get anything back or even learn much about it pretty much required that we send humans. Now, computer technology has advanced sufficiently far (many billion-fold, I think) that it's perfectly reasonable to send unmanned probes to do many of our research and technological tasks. Not all, perhaps, but it changes the cost/benefit curve dramatically. Couple that with the cultural changes that have made even a single death a big deal, and what you get is the cessation of manned programs to the moon. If we decided we needed to go back, I suspect we would send robots, not people, so a failure to send people wouldn't imply anything about whether we'd done it in the past.
good reply - very well thought out. i like you, even though i don't see eye to eye with you. i certainly can see most if not all of the points you make. i simply believe it could've and did go another way. i think its hard to say that this happened w/ 110% certainty.
donniccolo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2010, 02:22 PM   #122
MelchyBeau
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
MelchyBeau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Denver or Bust
Posts: 6,043
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

I give to you the greatest fringe theory ever made.



Do not open at work: http://www.timecube.com/

Last edited by Zeno; 04-27-2010 at 08:26 PM. Reason: Qualified Link
MelchyBeau is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2010, 03:32 PM   #123
vhawk01
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
vhawk01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: GHoFFANMWYD
Posts: 31,866
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

I dunno, hollow earth with people inside is pretty good
vhawk01 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2010, 08:17 PM   #124
plaaynde
Poker Historian
 
plaaynde's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Rebel of Eden
Posts: 18,781
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Bump.

Maybe we could have some mindblowing discussions here again.

Is Elvis still alive? Did man land on moon? How about the JFK conspiracy? Some new topic to discuss? How about something really accepted where you want to put a question mark? Not so serious suggestions would also be fun. Who knows, maybe it is the one per cent /one promill that is fit for evolution? You know, "It all started at the 2+2 SMP forum"

Last edited by plaaynde; 07-16-2010 at 08:29 PM.
plaaynde is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-16-2010, 08:26 PM   #125
11t
Bo Pelini's #1 Fan
 
11t's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Spewville
Posts: 31,017
Re: Official Fringe Topics Thread

Quote:
Originally Posted by MelchyBeau View Post
I give to you the greatest fringe theory ever made.



Do not open at work: http://www.timecube.com/
i think that website has activated my schizophrenia
11t is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:06 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2008-2017, Two Plus Two Interactive
 
 
Poker Players - Streaming Live Online