Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 87 (8946 total)
25 online now:
caffeine, PaulK, Pressie (3 members, 22 visitors)
Newest Member: ski zawaski
Post Volume: Total: 865,933 Year: 20,969/19,786 Month: 1,366/2,023 Week: 317/557 Day: 10/47 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Physical Laws ....What if they were different before?
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 6851
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.2


(1)
Message 151 of 309 (664158)
05-29-2012 2:25 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by godsriddle
05-29-2012 2:14 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
I wrote a response but it is lengthy so I posted it on my blog here

http://www.godsriddle.info/2012/05/sn-1987a.html

Either post here or do not bother debating here. No one wants to go to your blog to read your response. Why would we want to give you traffic?

Admin- Is this spam?


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by godsriddle, posted 05-29-2012 2:14 PM godsriddle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by NoNukes, posted 05-29-2012 2:48 PM Theodoric has not yet responded
 Message 155 by godsriddle, posted 05-29-2012 3:48 PM Theodoric has not yet responded

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 152 of 309 (664162)
05-29-2012 2:48 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by Theodoric
05-29-2012 2:25 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
No one wants to go to your blog to read your response.

FWIW, I did follow the link.

The link leads to more of exactly the same stuff about atoms shining with a different light, galaxies connected with rivers of hydrogen crap that you can read over and over again in the Riddler's posts here.

Please don't encourage him to paste that tripe into yet another EvC post.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison


This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Theodoric, posted 05-29-2012 2:25 PM Theodoric has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8172
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.2


(2)
Message 153 of 309 (664166)
05-29-2012 3:30 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by foreveryoung
05-27-2012 8:46 PM


Re: copied from RAZD's dendrochronology thread
The bible says all the original animals were created whole and did not come from prior animals. It specifically says they were created in a 2 day period. That does not allow for darwinian evolution. We do know that evolution has occurred and is occurring right now. Darwinian evolution requires millions of years to work. Darwinian evolution is in direct contradiction to the creation of animals in a 2 day period.

What is interesting is that you never stop to ask what the evidence says.

Created animals that came off the ark with environmentally cued evolution preprogrammed into their genes does not require millions of years to work. 1 million years is sufficient time to get todays diversity from a couple thousand of originally created animals. The 1 million year figure comes from the absurdity of expanding 20 generations in a genealogy to several million generations of humans who are not even mentioned in passing. It also comes from the necessity of providing an explanation for the fossil record and observed evolution that does not contradict the clear wording of scripture regarding the creation of animals.

And even worse, all of the above is asserted sans evidence.

You have pretty much confirmed what we already knew. The reason that creationists assert that the laws of physics were different in the past is because their beliefs require it, evidence be damned. The fact of the matter is that if the physical laws were different in the past we would see those changes in distant starlight. Those changes are not there. The evidence clearly indicates consistent physical laws. The reaction of creationists? Denial. No evidence. No logic. Just Denial.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by foreveryoung, posted 05-27-2012 8:46 PM foreveryoung has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by foreveryoung, posted 05-31-2012 1:58 AM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8172
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.2


(1)
Message 154 of 309 (664167)
05-29-2012 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by godsriddle
05-29-2012 2:14 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
I wrote a response but it is lengthy so I posted it on my blog here

Here is what you say on your blog:

quote:
Scientists assume that days and years are linear when they estimate that the nova occurred 168,000 years ago.

That is false. If time were moving along differently then the observations would be different. RAZD explained this in his post. The delay between the burst of the supernova and the lighting of the rings would have been much longer than observed if time moved differently in the past than now. Also, we would not observe the same nuclear decay rates of spectra if time was different.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by godsriddle, posted 05-29-2012 2:14 PM godsriddle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by godsriddle, posted 05-29-2012 4:09 PM Taq has responded

  
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2632 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 155 of 309 (664168)
05-29-2012 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by Theodoric
05-29-2012 2:25 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
Either post here or do not bother debating here

Ok - no problem.
Evolutionists confirm a biblical prediction when they make astronomical “age of the universe” claims. 2 Peter 3:3-5 predicts that mockers will actively ignore the evidence that the ouranoi (plural heavens) esan ekpalai. Ek, in ekpalai, means to come out from a point of origin. Palai has to do with vibrations, repetitive events, orbits. Peter explained that the mockers will actively choose or prefer (thelo) to ignore the evidence that the plural heavens came out long ago because they think all things remain the same (panta houtos diamenei).

On February 23, 1987 an astronomer in Chile noticed an exploding star in the Large Magellanic Cloud. At 0736 UT that day, three underground experiments recorded 25 neutrino events within 13 seconds. Evidently that was when the first light from SN-1987a arrived. The light from the explosion faded but eighty days later it began to brighten to a double peak at 240 and 400 days. We now know that the exploding star is surrounded by gas rings, evidently ejected by previous explosions. The inner ring has an approximate diameter of 0.808 arc seconds (0.00022444 degrees). The front half of the ring glowed with reflected light by day 240 and the reflection from the far side arrived by day 400. A high school student can calculate that the light was in transit for 240 / tan (0.00022444 degrees): over 6,000,000,000 modern days. Scientists assume that days and years are linear when they estimate that the nova occurred 168,000 years ago. Their calculations presume that the properties of all things are fixed as Peter predicted.

The Bible records genealogies that add up to ~ 4,000 pre New Testament years. If we accept the text literally, in its cultural and grammatical context, those could not be linear years. Elohim continued to form the Sun, Moon and stars and continued to place them in the spreading place (raqiya) half way through the creation week according to the creation account. Orbits that spread apart - accelerate. Jacob claimed that his days and years were shorter and worse than the days and years of the fathers (Genesis 47:9). The Greek words for eon, eons and eonian occur almost 200 times in the New Testament. Christ came at the end of the plural eons to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself. Job mentioned several geological markers for the few days of his life in chapter 14. One of his age markers was the dried sea (Hebrew west). Drill cores show that the deep Mediterranean dried as evidenced by thick layers of salt, gypsum and stromatolite sandwiched between marine oozes. Scientists estimate the last Mediterranean drying occurred five million years ago. The biblical Job lived about 4,000 years ago during the age of dinosaurs (see Job 40 & 41). Job also mentioned how their faces changed, doubled, before they died. We find the skulls of the ancients with thick brows and we measure how our brows slowly grow as we age. If we lived for geological ages our faces would grow Neanderthal. The Neanderthal children did not have the thick brows of their grandparents, evidence that the grandparents lived for eons like the ancient poets and the Bible mentioned. Where is the evidence for linear days and years?

1. Every atomic clock in billions of galaxies clocks a different frequency than modern atoms, and the differences usually correlate with distance. NASA sent calibrated clocks out of the solar system on Pioneer 10 and 11. Their transmitted clock signals slowed, when compared to NASA’s hydrogen maser clocks. The ratio of frequency slowing to distance was the Hubble ratio scientists use to estimate galactic distances by comparing ancient light clocks with modern atoms.

2. We see strings of blue globs in equally spaced chains around the redder cores of many early galaxies. We observe, at many ranges, how these globs took up more space and changed their clock frequencies as they moved outward in orbits that did not close. Billions of galaxies visibly grew into local growth spirals without evidence of accretion or growth by collisions.

3. If the same laws are operating in the solar system as we observe in galaxies, (see Job 38:33), then the solar sy stem must have been much smaller when atoms ticked at tiny fractions of the frequencies of modern clocks. Ancient astronomers optically measured a decreasing solar parallax over the centuries, which has continued even after radar established the canonical distance to the Sun using atomic clocks. The earliest astronomical record of Venus could only be valid if the solar system was contracted. Have you ever wondered why the ancients, including the biblical authors, mentioned the crushing of a nearby planet a few millennia ago? The volcanic and sedimentary rocks on angularly shaped asteroids and comets support the four references to this planet shattering in the Bible.

4. A river of cold hydrogen links the Magellanic galaxies with the southern end of the Milky way. This is simple evidence that these galaxies were ejected from the Milky Way. The Biblical God says He calls the stars to come out in unbroken continuity and none go missing (Isaiah 40:26). The several rings around the SN-1987a progenitor star suggest that previous explosions did not destroy the star. The material from the latest ejection is oblong, instead of spherical.

5. What could cause solar system orbits to accelerate outwards? We know that the "gravitational effect" does NOT propagate at infinite speed. This should produce a different gravitational “pull” on the trailing side of the Earth than on the leading side. Indeed, paraconical pendula change their precession rate depending on the relative positions of the Sun, Moon and apparently even the planets. This imbalance must accelerate days and years equally. The same gravitational affects would also accelerate the planet orbits so that the whole solar system should expand.

6. We measure local orbits and they are clock like, screams the scientist. Only when you compare orbits to clocks, instead of angles. But we measure gravity and it does not change! No one has ever isolated any gravity and your measuring system was contrived with the idea that Peter predicted. You assumed that atoms are perpetual motion engines and have built a great structure of mathematical empiricism based on a blind creed. No perpetual motion atoms gleam from billions of ancient galaxies. We visually correlate how atoms keep changing their clock rates along with emerging star stream orbits as spiral galaxies grew into huge growth spirals. Despite the fact that no physical constants are visible in the whole universe, scientists keep on claiming to empirically measure how many years ago an event occurred.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Theodoric, posted 05-29-2012 2:25 PM Theodoric has not yet responded

  
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2632 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 156 of 309 (664172)
05-29-2012 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 154 by Taq
05-29-2012 3:44 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
If time were moving along differently then the observations would be different. RAZD explained this in his post. The delay between the burst of the supernova and the lighting of the rings would have been much longer than observed if time moved differently in the past than now. Also, we would not observe the same nuclear decay rates of spectra if time was different.

The Bible clearly states that time (Hebrew olam) is in our minds (Ecc 3:11).

No one has ever detected any time or observed any of its properties. Time is a synthetic idea. We know it is a synthetic idea because if we deny that it exists, nothing in the whole universe changes except for the magic. Scientists have filled the universe up with magical, invisible things like space time that stretches light and stretches the vacuum. These are unneeded if we accept Solomon as an authority instead of Einstein.

What we observe is that all clocks are accelerating, inertial and atomic. (Biological clocks are synched to the Sun) so if orbits are accelerating - as the Bible so plainly states, we would continue to tune ourselves to the cycles of the heavens.

Nuclear decay rates are compared to a CONCEPT of time. Radioactive samples measured and stored, when their decay products were analyzed years later, they did not fit the assigned mathematical decay rate.

Time has no existence.

Scientists have contrived an entire structure of empirical measuring based on the notion that time exists and it is linear. The primary measuring unit in science is the second of time from which thousands of other measuring units are derived - such as meters, velocities and the laws of physics. Atomic time is denied by the light evidence that ancient atomic clocks ticked at different rates from modern clocks and the most distant atoms ticked the slowest. Spectra ticking at 1/11th the rate of modern atoms are visible.

I am arguing with the historical first principle of modern science, the idea the Bible predicted for the false teachers of the last day. This idea came about when the medieval friars invented the notion that the essence of substance is changeless - in their efforts to adapt Aristotle's system to the Bible. All attempts to tailor the Bible to fit philosophy fail, including those from modern creation scientists.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by Taq, posted 05-29-2012 3:44 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by ringo, posted 05-29-2012 4:27 PM godsriddle has responded
 Message 158 by RAZD, posted 05-29-2012 4:38 PM godsriddle has responded
 Message 159 by Coragyps, posted 05-29-2012 4:41 PM godsriddle has not yet responded
 Message 160 by Taq, posted 05-29-2012 4:58 PM godsriddle has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 17573
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 3.2


(2)
Message 157 of 309 (664175)
05-29-2012 4:27 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by godsriddle
05-29-2012 4:09 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
godsriddle writes:

The Bible clearly states that time (Hebrew olam) is in our minds (Ecc 3:11).


On the contrary, Ecclesiates 3 clearly states that time is reality-based:
quote:
To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven: A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted....


This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by godsriddle, posted 05-29-2012 4:09 PM godsriddle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by godsriddle, posted 05-30-2012 2:53 AM ringo has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 20271
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.9


(2)
Message 158 of 309 (664176)
05-29-2012 4:38 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by godsriddle
05-29-2012 4:09 PM


... and more questions unanswered ...
godsriddle

So are you going to continue to babble or actually confront the evidence?

... not that I expect any reply to SN1987A -- part 2: correlations with the speed of light (Message 109) from you to actually deal with the issues it raises ...

quote:
In other words, either the variable speed of light is falsified, or additional things need to be changed in consort with the speed of light in a carefully managed manner.

Each of these will result in other aspects of reality that need to be changed.

At this point, with absolutely no mechanism for these additional changes, on top of the absence of any mechanism to alter the speed of light -- other than god/s -- the creationist have a problem: either come up with the mechanisms that explain all these aspects, play the god-did-it card, or admit that the concept is highly unlikely to be valid.

Playing the god-did-it card also means acknowledging that god/s have faked the evidence, that all is a hoax, an illusion, and that anyone's concept of reality is as valid as the next. That way lies delusion.

If we follow the evidence then the logical conclusion is that the speed of light has not changed significantly in the last 168,000 years.

As such I can continue to ignore the rest of your posts until you can support your assertions with evidence.


... so it would be nice to know that you at least attempted to read it.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by godsriddle, posted 05-29-2012 4:09 PM godsriddle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by godsriddle, posted 06-05-2012 12:44 AM RAZD has responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5410
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 5.9


(3)
Message 159 of 309 (664178)
05-29-2012 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by godsriddle
05-29-2012 4:09 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
The Bible clearly states.....

Oddly enough, I don't give a red rat's ass what the Bible, the Iliad, the Bhagavad-Gita, or any other ancient set of fables states if it is in obvious conflict with readily observed reality.

Radioactive samples measured and stored, when their decay products were analyzed years later, they did not fit the assigned mathematical decay rate.

I'm calling bullshit. Reference the scientific paper(s) where that is documented, or withdraw the claim.


"The Christian church, in its attitude toward science, shows the mind of a more or less enlightened man of the Thirteenth Century. It no longer believes that the earth is flat, but it is still convinced that prayer can cure after medicine fails." H L Mencken

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by godsriddle, posted 05-29-2012 4:09 PM godsriddle has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8172
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 4.2


(3)
Message 160 of 309 (664179)
05-29-2012 4:58 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by godsriddle
05-29-2012 4:09 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
No one has ever detected any time or observed any of its properties.

I will have to agree that you have to deny the existence of reality in order for creationism to work.

The fact of the matter is that time is a measurement. It is as quantitative as anything there is.

Scientists have filled the universe up with magical, invisible things like space time that stretches light and stretches the vacuum. These are unneeded if we accept Solomon as an authority instead of Einstein.

If we have reality as our authority then there is space and time, and space is stretching. If the only way you have of defending a young earth is to deny the existence of a watch and ruler, then creationism really is dead.

Nuclear decay rates are compared to a CONCEPT of time. Radioactive samples measured and stored, when their decay products were analyzed years later, they did not fit the assigned mathematical decay rate.

Citation please.

I am arguing with the historical first principle of modern science, the idea the Bible predicted for the false teachers of the last day.

The only false teachings I see here is the teachings that time and space do not exist, all in an effort to avoid reality.

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by godsriddle, posted 05-29-2012 4:09 PM godsriddle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by godsriddle, posted 05-29-2012 7:10 PM Taq has responded

  
godsriddle
Member (Idle past 2632 days)
Posts: 51
From: USA
Joined: 12-20-2007


Message 161 of 309 (664194)
05-29-2012 7:10 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by Taq
05-29-2012 4:58 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
The fact of the matter is that time is a measurement. It is as quantitative as anything there is.

This is the problem with the empiricist's mindset.
1. You cannot measure something without defining what it is and assigning units to the measuring scheme.
2. Operational definitions are a way of getting around the reality of nature. Scientists DEFINED time as what clocks measure. Yet no one has ever detected any time. Then they extend their definition circularly by inventing other undetectable things like mass and energy.
3. The primary unit of measuring in science is - by international agreements - the second of time. If time has no existence, then very little of what scientists measure and mathematicate has reality.
4. We can see that past and directly compare the rate of past atomic clocks with modern ones at many ranges. The Pioneer clocks are not the only ones we calibrated on Earth that changed their clock frequencies as they distanced themselves from Earth. Galileo and Ulysses also did the same. They also were spin stabilized rather than using inertial wheels to point the craft.
5. Despite the fact that every clock in the universe is clocking a different speed than modern atoms and the most distant one clocked the slowest, scientists scale their notion of atomic perpetual motion into an empirical structure.
6. The precision empirical system has produced the greatest system of mythology ever invented by man. Allegedly a tiny bit of vacuum exploded and created everything out of nothing. Allegedly the vacuum of spacetime is expanding, dragging the frequencies of passing light as the vacuum expands. Spacetime pushes distant galaxies away, as they supposedly are standing still relative to local vacuums. Even the Earth allegedly rides rails bent into the local vacuum as it circles the Sun. Invisible holes and invisible matter liter the scientific universe. Scientists even admit that their universe is 99% invisible. Why all the magic? Because they empirically defined atoms as markers of time and used atomic perpetual motion to define thousands of other forms of measuring.

Yet when we look at the universe with sight, in all parts of the spectrum, we can see how the galaxies spread out as the atomic clocks concurrently accelerated. According to the Bible, Elohim first created the plural heavens and the earth. At that stage the Earth was without form, unextended. Then Elohim commanded light to be and physical reality began. Latter He continued to form the stars and to continued to place them in the spreading place - exactly as we confirm in visible galactic history. Galaxies cannot grow from tiny naked globs as the stars continued to form and spread out unless the properties of matter are emerging in the very manner Paul described in Romans 8.

How great will be the triumph of the Bible over the scientific empirical system.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by Taq, posted 05-29-2012 4:58 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by RAZD, posted 05-29-2012 8:09 PM godsriddle has not yet responded
 Message 163 by Panda, posted 05-29-2012 8:12 PM godsriddle has not yet responded
 Message 165 by vimesey, posted 05-30-2012 1:09 AM godsriddle has not yet responded
 Message 167 by Taq, posted 05-30-2012 11:33 AM godsriddle has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 20271
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 162 of 309 (664200)
05-29-2012 8:09 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by godsriddle
05-29-2012 7:10 PM


... and more questions unanswered ...
Hi again godsriddle,

Again (see Message 158) you have not yet answered SN1987A -- part 2: correlations with the speed of light (Message 109) ...

... perhaps because you can't?

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by godsriddle, posted 05-29-2012 7:10 PM godsriddle has not yet responded

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 2034 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


(4)
Message 163 of 309 (664201)
05-29-2012 8:12 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by godsriddle
05-29-2012 7:10 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
godsriddle writes:

Then they extend their definition circularly by inventing other undetectable things like mass and energy.


Correct.
Energy from the sun is completely undetectable. We don't even know that the sun is there.
And due to undetectable mass, my car does 0 to 100mph instantly.

godsriddle writes:

The primary unit of measuring in science is - by international agreements - the second of time.


Correct.
An elephant weighs ~1000 seconds.
The distance from Ireland to Germany is ~20,000 seconds.
The average temperature of the sun is ~400 seconds (if we could detect it).

godsriddle writes:

very little of what scientists measure and mathematicate has reality.


Never a truer word has been made up.

godsriddle writes:

Allegedly a tiny bit of vacuum exploded and created everything out of nothing.


Correct.
That is exactly how the big bang is defined.
It is a verbatim quote of the universally accepted definition of the big bang.
You haven't got even a single element of the definition wrong.
It is perfect.

No....wait.

Edited by Panda, : No reason given.


CRYSTALS!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by godsriddle, posted 05-29-2012 7:10 PM godsriddle has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-29-2012 11:42 PM Panda has acknowledged this reply

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16107
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 7.3


(1)
Message 164 of 309 (664210)
05-29-2012 11:42 PM
Reply to: Message 163 by Panda
05-29-2012 8:12 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
If you're going to do the sarcasm, what am I going to do?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by Panda, posted 05-29-2012 8:12 PM Panda has acknowledged this reply

  
vimesey
Member
Posts: 1013
From: Birmingham, England
Joined: 09-21-2011
Member Rating: 7.2


(1)
Message 165 of 309 (664217)
05-30-2012 1:09 AM
Reply to: Message 161 by godsriddle
05-29-2012 7:10 PM


Re: question unanswered ...
You seem to be looking at time in the old philosophical way. The ancient Greek philosopher Antiphon said:

quote:
"Time is not a reality (hypostasis), but a concept (noêma) or a measure (metron)."

Interestingly, Antiphon was a Sophist, a term which we use these days for someone who uses specious philosophical arguments to deceive.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by godsriddle, posted 05-29-2012 7:10 PM godsriddle has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019