But older cars are better than todays cars, NOT

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by ALS, Jun 30, 2017.

  1. EdwinTheMagnificent

    EdwinTheMagnificent Legend In His Mind

    Charles Manson was selling crazy , and he found customers for THAT.
    phoebeisis likes this.
  2. EdwinTheMagnificent

    EdwinTheMagnificent Legend In His Mind

    Charlie , I seem to recall that you were a chemical engineer in a former life. Is that right ?
    phoebeisis likes this.
  3. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Well-Known Member

    Edwin close
    No-Chemistry major-medical school -MD mostly retired sub teach now -gets me out of the house since wife passed away 2014
    Rockrohars post video was-is-interesting
    but the last minute with the very unclear explanation-seems to imply there are problems "making or owning "Lithium Hydride"
    The video was perfectly clear until it went sideways with the Particle accelerator BS
    My guess is easiest way to make the 6 atomic mass Lithium combined with atomic mass 2 H
    is to separate out Lithium 6 (7% of lithium isotopes)
    then separate out Hydrogen 2 (using water)
    Then hydrolyse this heavy water-deuterium oxide I guess-
    Then combine light lithium with mid heavy H
    Not sure HOW- but certainly a particle accelerator isn't needed
    Iranians-and USA in 1944- use high speed gas centrifuges -turn uranium into uranium hexafluoride-
    guessing it has to be pretty freakin hot to be a gas-but that is a guess
    spin the heck out of it--continuously cream off the lighter U235 gas-repeat Thousands of times-eventually you get it enriched to 85-90% enough for A-BOMB
    I think gas diffusion is also used-lighter gas diffuses faster so..-repeat zillion times
    anyway there aren't any onerous regulations in respect to owning LiH-you can buy it online-and it will contain tiny tiny amounts of the nuclear fuel isotopes
    so I'm puzzled why it went all GOV CONSPIRACY at the end-after being completely reasonable until then??
    It isn't practical-home hydrolysis plant-solar arrays-
    duh why hydrolyze-just use the electricity for a PIP or pure electric car??
    Too expensive too dangerous(making H2 at home big quantities-in CLOSE proximity to O2- gee what could go wrong with that) DUH BOOM-but the O2 in the air would be enough
    PIP and variations of it-smarter cheaper safer-home production of hydrogen?? when you have already made useful electrical power?? WHY?
    Ok-increased range is the answer-but that is what the internal combustion engine in the PIP is for!

    The video was perfectly clear until the last minute when it seemed to go GOV conspiracy-and I'm guessing the fellow was joking about the particle acclelerator
    And I have no good idea WHY he had a radiation warning on his hydrolysis plant???
    Scare people off?? Chemical reactions-don't produce X Rays
    and no way did it require voltages high enough to produce X Rays

    Well I tend to run paranoid in the am-so I can't suggest rockrohar is any worse than I am-(I blame Arty-dog-and the 3.5 cats for pestering me- to be fed-makes me off in am)
    Last edited: Jul 19, 2017
    08EscapeHybrid likes this.
  4. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    Your reasonings funny, since you say it's "clear" then say it's "unclear" about what form of a component your thesis is based on! Instead of trying to argue here, wait till you can talk to the gentleman to verify what and how before trying to discredit his work! Of coarse this is if you really want to know! By trying to build a case against it before hand you pit yourself against being wrong! Maybe now you really don't want to know.
    Unbeknown to popular opinion, though a large portion of people live in cities, due to a higher amount of promiscuous teen pregnancies, a large portion of the population is not incorporated with local ordinances. Too bad you missed out follow the crowd and live in the hood!
    What you call "bomb fuel" is only a component, but is NOT a "bomb fuel" on it's own, which was made very clear in the video. Additionally, there was no conspiracy about this, since the laws does not make it illegal to make your own, similarly to avoiding paying unnecessary taxes using legal deductions. If you want to pay more, go for it!
    While I like the social aspect of life helping others, I don't believe in becoming dependent on others for my life. If you like commune living, then you put convenience above practicalities yourself, besides loss of economy to your own disadvantage, which creates others to expect you to contribute to others who don't want to do for themselves who don't care about creating any personal value. Living in a subjective world, there's no way to be objective because you cut your nose off the spite your face and now have to live with it. Makes me think of Hank Williams song, "Son, why do you drink, why do you smoke, why do you live out all the songs that you wrote? It's a family tradition." more of a mental condition! For this reason, I haven't seen any new technology suggestions for "clean mpg" concepts here, except only what politically controlled manufactures are now producing, the electric car, only to discard historically what we know works.
    Since we fundamentally disagree about this, then we are on two different mental wave lengths, we can't agree on anything, including any viable alternatives you purposely discard. As long as you follow the community's traditions, you are stuck with your own limited horizon. Isn't that what the whole economy is already based on? Lack of real value, only debt?
    phoebeisis likes this.
  5. EdwinTheMagnificent

    EdwinTheMagnificent Legend In His Mind

    Sssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhh. They might be listening.
  6. Jocko

    Jocko Active Member

    I first got into cars with my dad's 1939 Hillman Minx. I passed my test in a 1956 Vauxhall Wyvern (0-50 mph in 32 seconds - "Autocar" road test). I slid a 1956 Ford Consul into a telegraph pole while racing against a mate. The only dimension it wasn't bent in was time. I collided head on with a 7 ton truck at 30 mph in a 1956 Ford Prefect. In both cases I walked away. Old cars are like your first sex. The memory is better than the actual reality was. Compared with modern cars old cars were crap. Recently I have often driven 400 miles in a day. The Minx needed the prop shaft Hardy Spicer joints greased every 350 miles! Carbs needed regular cleaning and tuning and a cold morning was like flying a helicopter as you juggled the throttle, choke and clutch. Now you turn it on and drive off. Are new cars as much fun. probably not. Are they more practical. Yes. More reliable. Yes. More comfortable. Definitely. I have been driving, legally, for 50 years. I was a bus driver for a spell. I still occasionally drive a van as a delivery courier. I have driven trucks and bikes. I have even driven single seaters. I think I am qualified to say that old cars were/are not as good as we thought and that the new crop of vehicle win hands down. But then, that's just my opinion.

    PaleMelanesian likes this.
  7. 08EscapeHybrid

    08EscapeHybrid Moderator

    Almost had me there...
  8. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    OK lil brother.
  9. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Well-Known Member

    Go to 7:54
    He says "the whole problem to it is the material- in the hydride one of the components in it is classified as a weapon material-"

    at 8:56 the narrator says "the biggest thing that stands in the way is just getting that material inside the tank-that hydride-but you can't get that because because it is a weapon material"

    Ok they were clear-sorta' strongly implying that you can't buy Lithium hydride because there is always a tiny amount of the Fusion bomb fuel
    Lithium 6 isotope combined with H (2 atomic mass) isotope in Lithium Hydride

    But you can buy Lithium Hydride-I checked online-posted it-reagent grade-very pure $400 per 500 grams-less pure grades are much less I guess

    So the gist of the video-the the Government is preventing the developement of this technology by restricting access to LiH- is wrong!

    I made it as clear as possible-listen 7:54 to about 9:30 they discuss WHY this technology isn't in use-their explanation is you can't get access to LiH
    But that is WRONG- almost certainly was wrong back then-this was made after 2003 Iraq war-can't tell what year the -camero?? is
    Anyway it ends up blaming the GOV for denying access to LiH-
    He made it
    You have to start with LiH in the tank-not Li-and pure guess I don't know it he literally has finely powdered LiH in there-it would compact over time
    Guessing it is bound to some honeycomb material to "keep" the Lithium bound in place when it "loses" its H-but that is a guess

    Listen to your video-7:54 on-it is clear enough-but it is WRONG from there on-blaming GOV restriction for not being able to readily get LiH
    (the main actor-obviously very adept science wise) implies he had to make his LiH-but I can just buy it-
    so I have no idea why they make this claim
    Unless perhaps between then(then is sometime after 2003 Iraq war)-and now-regulations changed??

    And all because there will be tiny amounts of the Fusion fuel LiH in any LiH produced
    Now he must have been kidding about needing a "particle accelerator" to "make the fusion isotopes LiH)
    You would just START with L6 lithium-separated out by some method using its light weight
    And H(2 isotope) separating it out(as water-heavy water) same story-it is heavier to it would diffuse more slowly)

    The whole point of the video-is the GOV is inhibiting this technology by restricting access to LiH
    Which is WRONG-since I posted site to buy it
    08EscapeHybrid likes this.
  10. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Well-Known Member

    I carefully listened to his video
    It is clear-except he appears to be deadpan joking about the particle accelerator
    7:54 to 9:30 they discuss why this method-the LiH storage of H isn't being used
    There answer is some vague GOV restriction based on the tiny quantities of fusion fuel LiH that is always in LiH
    I searched-couldn't find anything that suggested the FEDs every restricted LiH?

    Now I did find another explanation-wikipedia that suggests it is the High temperature required to decompose it-that is the problem-now 700 centigrade close to 1250F is pretty hot-but I'm not convinced-as the wikipedia poster suggests-that that is a deal breaking temp. to work with
    Probably some other problem-making H2 on a large scale-transporting it setting up H2 "gas stations"
    and he says "takes all night" to refuel car-that is a problem

    So my guess is LiH- hydrogen fueled cars-the problem -as always-GASOLINE is cheap-
    and the folks at the top of the USA GOV "don't believe" CO2 in the atmosphere is a problem(they are wrong) they are liars or are just so intent on pushing their own economic interests-(KOCH bros etc)that they are perhaps SCREWING the future of the planet
    Yeah GREED- same thing that brought us slavery our Civil war-Greed "Love of $$ root of all evil"
    Pure biblical stuff-super rich manipulating the rest of us-and probably putting humans at risk
    On the other hand-some reason to think Global warming could benefit "some people"
    More CO2 and warmer temps-increase crop yields
    But if rainfall patterns-in our midwest bread basket change-drought etc or even become too heavy-famine could set in
    No good way to predict exactly how rainfall patterns will change
    Warmer temps-mean more H2O in the air-but getting it to fall where you want it to-is a problem
    Anyway-the below is wiki explanation of why no LiH storage cars-I'm not convinced-my guess is gasoline too cheap-no real interest in NO CO2 production green energy

    With a hydrogen content three times that of NaH, LiH has the highest hydrogen content of any hydride. LiH is periodically of interest for hydrogen storage, but applications have been thwarted by its stability to decomposition. Thus removal of H2 requires temperatures above the 700 °C used for its synthesis, such temperatures are expensive to create and maintain. The compound was once tested as a fuel component in a model rocket.[7][8]
    08EscapeHybrid likes this.
  11. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

  12. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    it's easy to speculate trying to decipher and interpret what was said by others who are presenting information with my or your own idea or preconceived notions.
    I've left message to talk with the man who built what he sells. I would appreciate you do likewise, since we can collect information and then compare what he said, to further develop the viability of his claims as hogwash or useful.
    When studying anything, establishing the context the information's intended purpose is the first line of attack to developing the definition and the relationship with other subject matter. Without doing this, we lack understanding and discernment to put the knowledge to work for us and all we are left with is a knee jerk opinion. When this happens, it's better to say nothing, though it can be hard not to!
    In this case, the narrator is making remarks and asking questions, playing the role, as a ignorant person with opinions for the purpose that the scientist can explain his development. How effective the information is disseminated may not be as good as it could have been. What's better is to ask directly ourselves before drawing conclusions.
    If we ever expect to make a real difference, we need to be trying to help each other find the truth, rather think my thoughts are better than anyone else. Everyone here has great value! It's real easy for anyone to destroy value, without anyone else help.
    I love knowledge cause it with understanding and discernment, there's not only power to do what we could not do before, but we build our love for it and everything else since all the other hidden qualities we an develop in ourselves becomes our strength, especially working as a team.
  13. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member


    I appreciate your research! While 700 degrees would not be hard to achieve using a solar lens, utilizing the hydrogen extracted from 120-250 degree H2O, as a steam seems more plausible. An example:

    From what I understood that it took 8 hours to fill the tanks at night on solar. Certainly, without the sun, this would deplete the battery's charge! I'll be asking him about this and your questions raised.
    While I'm not sure, I also gathered this system was not intended to be set up mass consumption, but for personal use. So hauling it in large quantities was probably not intended for distribution. While this might serve my wishes, so someone else can profit like Mr. Pickens wants to control all the water supply for profit, something more than just greed is here. More like playing "god" over dependent subjects to be used at their whim!
    From what I remember in science class, the Ozone layer not only protects the earth from most flying debris (meteors) entering the earth's atmosphere, but also has a varying size hole where CO2, hydrogen, etc. escapes. Seeing hydrogen is the lightest gases, related to helium, it finds it's way out through this hole as other pollutants do.
    Al Gore, who is no scientist or businessman is a globalist operative who started global warming to create a way for leaders to tax and make global citizen's co-dependent. They think they have debunked the idea of there being a Creator in the minds of the following generations who now want government to care for them. The principle truth of "cause and effect", proves that creation was no accident, as any design must have a designer, who is in charge. For man to sell the idea they are in control, is laughable!
    I agree with you about the idea that the oil corporations think gas is too cheap. Using wall street speculators selling derivatives to push gas prices higher, is the only reason gas prices went above the $25 a barrel. Currently unbeknown to most the public, a lot of large companies with commercial loans are on the verge of bankruptcy, which threatens the whole economy. Pushing oil higher right now would totally destroy the house of cards.
    Allowing a controlled demolition of these old behemoth corporations to collapse, investors are buying puts with a 6-9 month time decay to cash in on their demise. Most if not all globalist are trying to destroy the US constitutional sovereignty, because personal protective god given rights has no place for selling the greater good of socialism to the following generations.
  14. phoebeisis

    phoebeisis Well-Known Member

    Oil NG are so cheap that alternatives-low CO2 producing alternatives like wind solar nukes just can't compete
    They need some sort of edge-either GOV regs-or customers choosing them because they want low CO2 energy

    Gasoline-oil-is about the same price it was -adjusted for inflation-and for what folks make
    in the 1960's- 25 or 30 cents per gallon-is about $2-$2.50 in today's $$
    Cars get much better mpg on average but people drive a LOT more now I think
    I would guess gasoline is about the same percentage of paycheck as it was in the 1960's

    In any case-his method-he isn't the first to use Lithium Hydride for H2 storage-probably works OK-but as you say this is fine for him-seems to live in a rural area-no one objecting to his home production of H2
    and my guess is his LiH storage method-works OK for him-but I suspect(I don't know-just what I read) is it is tricky-and perhaps over time the storage capacity decreases-as the LiH compacts(if it isn't somehow arranged-bound-to some honeycombed material-like a CAT CON)

    The steam production of useful gas from wood or charcoal-gee I had never heard of it
    But apparently it is old-late 1800's-and was pretty commonly used to produce "wood gas" during wars(when actual oil based liquid fuel was harder to get)
    I had no idea-
    From what I read most methods produce a mix of several gases H2 methane CO "other stuff"-obviously the carbon monoxide is toxic-but they are all flammable-so careful handling would be built into production

    Guessing they are making the gas-from charcoal-on the vehicle-since putting it into a tank-under 300 atm-
    would be dangerous-same reason he uses LiH to store H2 instead of a very very high pressure tank to store it as gas
    Crash= nearly a bomb- ME car bombs frequently have propane tanks in them-along with the actual high explosive-to make them more destructive
    sorta 3rd world fuel air explosives

    His LiH probably works fine for someone who can maintain it-keep an eye on any decrease in H2 storing capacity
    But the home electrolysis of H20 good for rural areas-not cities suburbia(as you said)

    Gasoline oil NG is so cheap-it is killing interest in other energy sources(it-NG- is what killed coal-so clean plants are cheaper to run-no crap going out stacks-or potentially poisonous ash(heavy metals carcinogens in tiny concentrations))

    Now oil has never really been NOT MANIPULATED-
    The Saudis are intentionally over producing(in respect to profit-they would make as much or more profit by cutting production-)
    1)to screw Russians-lower price of oil-screw their economy
    2) screw Iranians-same story-screw economy
    3)Screw us-their "ally" -USA- kill off our home based oil ng production-cause wells to be shut in/down-so come the next shortage-it would take us years to remp up production-our technology -fracking-has made wells-marginal wells by old production methods-productive
    but once you close them down-put people out of work-you lose lots of skilled workers-you can't just flip a switch and return to full production-

    The Saudis are doing the above because of Russia and Syria's backing of Syria- Syria-run by Al Asad family(alawites-a Shia sect)
    Iran=Shia so they back their co-religionist
    Russia has backed Al Asad's for 40-50 years or so- port facility I guess for their ships in Med.

    They-Saudis-screw us-USA- because they want to screw our home based oil NG production-so we will continue to protect them
    The 1st Iraq war was to prevent Saddam from invading Saudi Arabia-yeah our blood
    They Saudis-have the same fears in respect to their traditional enemies-the Persians-
    Arabs and Persians have fought one another for 2600 years
    Babylonians(semites arabs) were defeated by Cyrus(Persian) waaaay back perhaps 2600 BC-
    that is when Cyrus freed the Israelites(also semites arabs) from captivity in Babylon-I think it is a Jewish Holiday-even now
    Long long memories in that part of the world-

    The Lithium Hydride storage tank-probably fine-but gasoline is so cheap-
    and no CO2 energy sources are being pushed aside by folks who think
    human production of CO2 increasing global temperatures is a CONSPIRACY to "control the world"
    but actually much simpler-Big Fossil energy folks have BIG $$ so they just trick-propaganda-folks into thinking it is a conspiracy
    Real Joseph Goebbels(sic) stuff
    but really all about $$$$ which is power(usually-it doesn't make you bullet proof-but it allows you to buy lots of guards)
  15. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    phoebesis is right about NG. It's not only a clean burning fuel, due to complete combustion, it's so plentiful more than oil, the oil companies used to burn it off to get to the oil. There used to be complaints in the 1970's, that I would read about and hear on the radio periodically, 'that such and such oil company had let enough NG gas escape in the atmosphere, enough fuel to heat Chicago for 100 years, as well other compared events with other populated cities! Outside of major cities and camp grounds, I remember seeing propane on sale for.05 cents a gallon, while gas was .25 cents a gallon. Today the price is about the same, shows that the market controlled by corporations who fund politicians do manipulate any market, that normally would be limited in a free entrepreneur market. Because of the big price discrepancies with NG to gas prices, it's mainly the retailers hold the prices higher. A couple years ago one business was selling it for .79 cents a gallon, said the other surrounding businesses selling it for $3 per gallon were mad at him, not just because he was getting all their customers, but it showed how much they were price gouging.
    Trying to use inflationary math to adjust to today's prices is a deceptive means to find a fair price evaluation. One example of this is the price of a car. Back in the 1960's federal regulations for auto manufactures only profited when a manufacture was fined for not being in compliance. Today, before any fines are charges, the federal regulatory agencies have a 40% extra charge built into the price of every car sold in the US. EPA recently requires 50 mpg and zero emissions or a $5000. fine is passed on the the consumer. The value of the dollar has nothing to do with the fines passed on to consumers.

    Knowing any business competes for a market share, also means it conspires against any other competing business, is the very nature to hold a market position, whether it's an entrepreneur or large corporation, even between countries! Without corporations greed is controlled and confined to a locality rather than the global market. Corporations killed small businesses, so the only option was these entrepreneurs worked for them! First by undercutting prices, then raising prices beyond previous highs! In sales, a good salesman always asks for a higher price to see what the market can bear! You can always come down in price never back up!

    It should not come as a surprise big corporations monopolizing their industry want to hold their market control, such as the Rockefeller, the bankers Rothschild in control of the central banks, etc. that it's in their best interests to push for global government, which why they have publicly promoted, as many politicians in the US, like Bush, Clinton and foreigners like Soros are part of the (CFR) Counsel for Foreign Relations and the Trilateral Commission
    They see the US as the main corporate competitor that needs to be eliminated. This is only practical for their business economically if their business is to hold market position and survive! Since the US is also a corporation, besides a Republic, most people buy into the political corporation propaganda, even falsely thinking the President can change the economy, when he has nothing to do with that. It's the central banks who issue credit to corporations with the highest market cap who controls the economy!

    History shows many wars and murderous crimes were committed over money, just as we see in many divorces. Is this a "conspiracy theory" or a known conspiracy fact to get control over wealth? Is this a "theory"? Similarly, evolution is still a theory, but by creating doubt about principle truth of "cause and effect" as proof of a Creator, the following generation now accepts evolution to be a fact! Thinking in man made laws and rules take away reasoning in principle truths that diminish freedoms. We see the same thing with the word freedom, which some would like to interpret this as a reason to over indulge and throw away all morality. When in fact, freedom means an individual right to use principle truth to work what is good. By introducing man made corporate maritime laws used among pirate thieves docking in a foreign land, possession being 90% of the law ownership, common law is diminished. This was why "we, by, for the people", came to this land, as many have followed for centuries afterward, just for this reason alone.
    The best know tactic used on people is the bait and switch scheme that always accompanies misuse of word terms to disarm people, since the consumer is the market, as also were once the entrepreneur's convinced that being workers is better under corporations that offer benefits.
    Understanding historic market control tactics and simple economics reveals the real culprit of why the conspiracy is called a "theory" to make a joke about, so people immediately dismiss the truth among their peers, since people don't want to feel to be an outcast.
    Last edited: Jul 21, 2017
  16. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    Since we agree about NG and there are many industrial and private vehicles using it for clean mpg, have you or anyone else explored this technology, rather than just electric vehicles? I have! Is anyone interested sharing?
    Electric cars have as much history as gas cars! Since the electric car was abandoned several times, electric vehicles certainly IS a better vehicle than the old ones. Yet time and time again, the old gas car has been the manufacture's choice to produce. Whether it's because of the old gas engine's reliability, fuel efficiency capabilities and design simplicity, it's certainly has political factors that have controlled both economy and the product design to serve the their own agenda, not the consumers.
    With no further comments about denying this truth, or of other technologies than just electric cars, there are cleaner alternatives currently being used other than just electric. Sharing this new R&D creates more opportunities and consumer options for everyone, rather than just what we are told is good for us.
    To date, the only (new) vehicle improvements had already been tried and tested on 1950-60's vehicles, (independent suspension, airbags, seat belts, super & turbocharger, radial tires, lightweight body materials, cam and induction technologies, electric, turbojet, NG, diesel, steam, hydrogen, etc.) including computerized ignition and fuel injection. In the late 1970's the air car was developed, as well as many other efficient power sources. Why discount them?
    phoebeisis likes this.
  17. rockrohar

    rockrohar Well-Known Member

    Hydrogen fuel is far from being a dead science for fuel!
  18. basjoos

    basjoos Well-Known Member

    Two features where older cars vastly outperform newer cars are in non-fan assisted fresh air ventilation and in headlight maintenance. Pre-1980's cars used wing vents, kick floor vents, and large air vents at the base of the windshield to deliver a gale of fresh outside air ventilation into the cabin, volumes of air that the max fan setting on newer cars doesn't even come close to matching. Since they didn't have A/C, they had to deliver volumes of outside air to keep interior temperatures tolerable in the summer. But I often wish I had this ventilation feature in newer cars.
    The other place where older cars outperform is with headlight maintenance, since newer cars require you to sand, polish, and seal the polycarbonate headlights every few years to keep them from turning white opaque, something you didn't have to do with the glass headlights found on older cars, which just required dead bugs, dust, and mud to be wiped off as needed. Depending on the car model, it was often easier to change a sealed beam bulb of an older car than it is with modern cars where you have to dig into the crowded engine compartment to reach the back of the headlight to change the bulb without touching the glass surface of the replacement bulb with your skin oils.
  19. Jocko

    Jocko Active Member

    With my Jazz you have to remove a front wheel and dismantle all the shielding under the wheel arch, just to get access for a bulb change.
    phoebeisis likes this.
  20. ALS

    ALS Super Moderator Staff Member

    With the Prius the bulbs themselves are not that bad to change. On the other hand you have to remove the fender first to take the head light assembly out.
    You go to Car-part.com and search Prius headlight assembly almost everyone listed says one broken tab.
    The guys working at the salvage yards are too lazy to pop off the fender to get to that one light assembly screw, thus the broken tab.

    Yep the old seal beam lights were much easier to change out. A couple of trim screws, pop out the light, unplug it, plug in the new bulb place it in the holder, replace the trip piece with three or four Phillips head screws.

    I'll still take the lights today over any sealed beam offered up thirty or more years ago.
    phoebeisis likes this.

Share This Page