@af_newbie I think the first thing we need to do is establish that the Earth indeed has an electric field that measures 100 Volts per meter and extends out perpendicular to the ground. The globalists don't deny this field exists but nor do they ever bring it up with rare exceptions like Feynman and his lectures that only a few physics enthusiasts attend. The globalist explanation for this field is induction from the Sun (in Feynman's case he claims thunderstorms) and that the charge spreads out to cover the entire surface. Unfortunately for the globalists these theories fail when one looks at the magnetic fields that would be produced by the current flows, the compass needle would be going nuts. On a flat Earth with an electrically polarized dome with the dome surface being the positive (+) plate and the ground the negative (-) plate creating a giant capacitor the Earth's electric field is easily and neatly explained.  Now the thing you need to understand regarding density and why the denser an object is, the heavier it gets is the electric field line density at the surface of an object is greater with objects that are more dense; more particles require more lines to "feed" them thus the net force which acts via these lines is greater on the denser objects. Air pressure, the force it exerts on an object is via the electric field lines; electromagnetism is fluid dynamics with the primary fluid being an aether that itself is best described as being a gaseous crystal. Now the reason the air an object has displaced is pushing that object in any particular direction is the electric field (between the dome and the ground) is creating an asymmetry in the lines on the objects surface; the pressure is not uniform. Few issues/questions with your description: 1. Electric Field intensity observed in nature varies based on the atmospheric conditions such as fog, lightning or after sunrise. It can vary widely from 20 V/m to 1200+ V/m at the Earth surface. This would impact the "weight" of objects in your model. In nature we observe that the weight of the objects does not vary due to the atmospheric conditions. 2. Not sure what you mean by "more particles require more lines to feed them", electric field flux would be constant for a given object surface provided the electric field intensity is uniform and does not fluctuate due to the atmospheric conditions, I'm not sure how you think it relates to the weight of the object. 3. What do you mean by the pressure is not uniform? It is measurable, is it not? Wouldn't the air pressure be the same around a wood block and a gold brick placed next to each other? 1. Perhaps small variations might be measured but for the most part the force on an object is based on the ratio of displaced atmosphere to the density of the material displacing it. 2. All particles have field lines irrespective of any externally generated fields. More field lines means more net force, each additional line gives a little more for the atmosphere to push on. 3. The atmosphere is pushing on objects, the force is at the interface between the object and the atmosphere, however since the force acts via the field lines it's transmitted to each individual particle via the line. Taking a pressure reading of the atmosphere surrounding an object can't say anything about the displacement the object causes. You're just wasting my time until you can understand this. An anology would be connecting a voltmeter to one pole of a battery and expecting to get a reading with an open circuit. Look at how a helium balloon is pushed up, understand how air pressure is acting on it. For dense objects it's the same only the push is in the opposite direction. There's a saying that in the land of the blind the man with one eye is king. Density and buoyancy explain why objects fall and I can't explain any more than I already have as my understanding is not complete. My ability to accurately articulate something i don't fully understand myself to a retarded child is limited. 1. The electric field intensity can be 10+ times larger or 5 times smaller, if you think your "air pressure gradient" is due to the electric field flux going though the object's surface, objects should be weighing 10 times more during lightning and 5 times less during sunrise. You are in denial of your own theory. 2. Neutrally charged particles do not generate electric field, the electric field in your model is generated by positively charged dome and negatively charged Earth. The density would have no effect on the outside electric field coming to the object surface. 3. Even if you assume that your "air pressure gradient" exist and is affected by the atmospheric electric field, by measuring the air pressure around the object you would be measuring the scalar value of that "air pressure vector". You are in complete denial of observable reality and your own dome theory. You deny that atmospheric conditions have significant, measurable effect on the atmospheric electric field.
You deny that air pressure is the same around objects of different densities.
You deny that the atmospheric electric field measured around objects with different densities stays the same. On top of that, you claim that the arrangement of atoms in the object generates electric field outside of the object. There is no need to discuss this further. It is obvious to me that you are suffer from cognitive dissonance. BTW, we have a name for your dome, it is called ionosphere. You have twisted what is observed by adding the concept that object density is increasing electric field intensity by some unknown force and that air pressure is acting in the direction of the atmospheric electric field. I have shown you where your model breaks. Take it or stay in the dark. |
|
|
|
I think the reason for America to be strong because of the two things that is military and economic, they colonize other countries with their economic policy, and if there is a disobedient country they will mobilize the military so that the country becomes obedient to America, but in the next 20 years the position of America will be replace by china  Any country that allows free market capitalism to run uninhibited will be successful as this natural process will encourage innovation, savings and investment. Unfortunately since Nixon, America has been in decline. The process accelerated in the 80s and 90s when American companies reinvested their capital abroad. American politicians failed to react and now we see the end result. Countries that produce more quality goods become more powerful over time. America lost that status to China a long time ago. It will take 40 years of strong, pro American government to restore the balance. |
|
|
|
A National Geographic article accurately describes the state of our planet through outlining the major issues present every Earth Day since 1970. Environmental issues began with pesticides causing death in bald eagles and soot darkening our atmosphere. This year, it’s not just the awareness of plastic use imperiling the earth that is brought up. Today’s worsening environmental issues are apparently, a culmination of all the groundwork humanity has laid over the past two hundred years.
Habitat loss and climate change are the most pressing issues we are facing today, and one can’t help but fear the seemingly inevitable destruction of our planet.
I believe we have every right to question humanity’s emotional connection to the natural world.
I don't think Earth is any danger. It will be ok with or without life on it. Humanity faces an existential threat due to the exponential population growth. |
|
|
|
What can you say about this picture? Can you Imagine this beautiful creature was slaughtered for a Bone (Ivory) Which Asians grind up to make a so called Aphrodisiac to make their tiny peckers hard?
This is what the Human Race does. We are Raping the planet.
I still don't understand why the East Asians want to use these sort of aphrodisiacs. Viagra is available in the market and 10-tablet pack of generic Sildenafil can be purchased for as low as $4.00. And I bet it is much more effective than rhino horn and elephant ivory. Or eat healthy and exercise to raise your testosterone levels naturally. Humans are the most dangerous, destructive animals on the planet. We kill members of our own specie for some abstract reasons or no reason at all. I would ask those poachers to eat that animal. All of it, all the way to the bones. |
|
|
|
I'm an atheist and I don't "hate" religious people, but I do practice "conversational intolerance" when religious people say something in a conversation that doesn't make sense. If someone told me that they believed that Jimmy Hoffa is secretly the President of the United States, I could openly disagree and no one would blink an eye. But if I disagree with someone's assertion that a particular god exists, or that Jesus died for my sins, or that _____ is wrong because of their religious beliefs, I get labelled a "militant atheist." But I do it anyway sometimes because it is important to remind religious believers that there isn't a difference between belief in a god and a belief in less-popular supernatural things like unicorns and fairies. I'm not a dick about it, I don't say "you're an idiot for believing that!" I just disagree.
Why do I do this?
Because we live in a world with nuclear weapons, and we can't afford to have a global society where some people live their lives thinking that this life is irrelevant because the real prize is the afterlife.
All it takes is one suicidal religious zealot with a nuclear bomb, and a lot of innocent people are going to die. As a species, we needed to stop coddling religious belief when the atom bomb was invented. The stakes are too high now, and we can't afford the sort of nonsense that gets passed off as "religious wisdom" anymore.
+1 I agree. Humanity has much bigger problems to deal with. We don't need to argue if Earth is flat, or is 6000 years old, if a 6th century moral code or a Bronze Age moral code is the correct code to follow, or that some undefined entity exists or does not exist in this or other universes and controls everything we do and is interested which holes he stick our you know what. There is no proof it does exist so let's move on. There is not much to argue about these religious statements, but to say it is nonsense, let's move on. Earth is a globe, and is much older than 6000 years. Universe was not created as some intricate design but was created as a massive explosion. We came about as a result of evolution, not were made out of dirt by some sky daddy. These things should be obvious to anyone who can follow scientific discoveries, can read and follow basic logic. Humanity should focus on how to survive the next millennium not dwell on what people 5000 years ago thought is the right punishment for adultery, homosexuality, what to eat and what not to eat. I wish humanity just snaps out of it. Majority of people on Earth seem to be in some sort of ancient cult (aka religion). It is truly unbelievable. |
|
|
|
Atheism makes no sense. If you want to call yourself an atheist because you don't believe there's a god, that's fine. But to try to claim that there can't be a god is just utterly insane.
In order of logic, from sane to insane:
Agnosticism: "There might be a moose in these woods."
Theism: "There is a moose in these woods, but I have no evidence."
Atheism: "There can't possibly, under any circumstance or at any point in time, be a moose in these woods, but I have no proof."
Moose exist (we have a direct physical evidence). Try unicorn. Agnosticism: "There might be a unicorn in these woods." Theism: "There is a unicorn in these woods, but I have no evidence." Atheism: "There can't possibly, under any circumstance or at any point in time, be a unicorn in these woods, but I have no proof." |
|
|
|
Is that an admission that you lost?
Is that what you really think? If you think that this is about winning and losing, you not only stepped out of the discussion long ago, but by doing so, you have agreed that you don't understand the things that you are talking about.  We are talking about free will, you were not able to respond to: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1054513.msg37655246#msg37655246You claim we have ''faith'' when we are in the womb, absolutely 0 evidence for this. You claim ''Everything else in your life is directed completely by God. He directs these things righteously, according to the amount of faith you have in Him.'' Which makes no sense because the amount of faith you have in Him is directly affected by any other event that is supposed to be directed by god so god himself is the one that can give you more or less faith which means you don't really have free will and he is responsible for everything. Why should I response to something you say again, since I have responded over and over in other posts, but you simply ignore my response? There is absolutely 0 evidence that we do not have faith in the womb. When do we start to have faith in things? You don't know that you will make it to work this morning, because you don't know for a fact that some terrorist bomber won't suicide himself within 3 feet from you. Some of the reason you go to work anyway is that you have faith and hope that nothing bad will happen to you. When did your faith first start? Did it first start yesterday? The day before? When you were 5-y-o? When you were 3? When you were 1 minute old? Possibly before you were conceived? You don't make any sense. Your faith was always in existence, at least since you were conceived. Nobody has any evidence to oppose this. And the fact that you have faith now, shows that you have had faith ever since before you started to think about it. When did it start for you? God directs the things that happen to you according to your faith in Him, and His plan for you. That's why you don't even have full control over your faith, not because God makes your faith what it is. If your faith in Him grows weaker, it is because you directed God to weaken it, by not having strong faith in Him in the first place, or maybe by direct faith request that God do so. I never had faith in anything. I hoped things would work out, knowing the probabilities. I guess God planned for me to be an Atheist, LOL. You and your God are funny critters. |
|
|
|
Is he coming back in flesh or in spirit? After rising from the dead after 3 days did he live again and come to life? We don't even see him in flesh.
because jesus Christ is a spirit we cannot see it but we can feel it . And according to Bible God kingdom will come all base from prophecy that is happened and happening so Jesus will come back here. Do you have an ETA? |
|
|
|
What do you think about ability of getting children from in vitro?
Let's imagine that it's possible. Will you ever use this technology or not and why do you think so?
And what do you think how will society react to development of such kind of technology?
I think women will jump on this bang wagon in a heartbeat. Just like they did with C-sections. Religious folks will jump and scream as usual; they will proclaim this technology to be evil and not to be trusted, etc. Like it or not, human incubators are coming. Such technology will be adopted once it becomes affordable. I imagine in the future, you will be able to order your custom baby like you order a custom car today. Select your 'gene packages', pick a delivery date and off you go. |
|
|
|
Let me start by making it clear that I am an atheist.
The problem I have with the atheist agenda is that is stops at 'the non existence of God' - the same logic is not applied consistently to the whole of the human condition.
If I examine my life and use this same 'spaghetti monster' logic, I am drawn to the same conclusions about all my actions and activities - they are all as equally pointless and irrational as worshiping God.
If I rationally examine my sense of self I realize that it is just a genetic innovation - it encourages self preservation - genetic selfishness creates a genetically induced illusion of self worth.
My desire to survive is itself as delusional as a belief in God - pain and my fear of pain are a genetically induced survival mechanism I am in thrall to.
If I believe in God and survive then it is no different to not believing in God and surviving - nature will select for survival.
But my actual survival is meaningless whether I believe in God or otherwise.
This is the only conclusion that can be logically formed from a real examination of life.
Atheism is merely another tribal display - a peacock's tail trying to attract a mate through a verbal display of intelligence.
I respect your opinion and principle sir, you view the world differently in your own perspective, Believing into something we cant see is obviously impossible for you to put your faith into something like that. The point is, you have your own angle of truth, the same with people who believe in "God". They have their own version of truth. Maybe your right or maybe your wrong at all. Im not sure. No one can prove anything because both have loopholes. I believe there's a creator/god. But i respect yours sir. There is no physical evidence in any of the 5000+ gods humanity invented over the years. Like they say, truth will set you free. It is very liberating. |
|
|
|
Prophets are high valued people used by religions around the world, like Jesus, Mohammed, Bhuda, high respected personalities like Japanese Emperors, Ethiopian Emperors and other minor characters. Do you think it's right to mock Jesus the way people do? Or to use him as a character, souvenir or picture to be used anyway you want? Do you also think it's okay when people kill a lot because they felt offended seeing their prophet?
When someone was a pedophile and a warlord there should be no harm in stating the facts. If people have issue with the facts it is not your problem it is their problem. |
|
|
|
...
Why did your God decide to pass his message to humanity though 40+ authors over the course of 2500 years? It seems a very ineffective way to get your message across, especially for someone to 'designed' ever expanding universe. Does this not bother you at all?
God talked to Adam and Eve face to face. But they didn't believe Him enough to keep from sinning. Then there were others He talked to with words from Heaven, like Cain. But Cain disobeyed, as well. And, of course, there is you, who won't even believe Him though He has given many writers to tell you. Just be glad that God is patient with you enough that He allows you to live, with the hope that you will obey Him from now on... rather than striking you down for not believing all His witnesses. So I guessing the answer is no. How about this? You said that the Bible is true because it is a witness account of what happened. And as such it is reliable. My question is: "Adam and Eve were the first man and woman. When God talked to them in the Garden of Eden, who was the witness to write about it? Some hunched Jew hiding in the bushes?" Same goes for the Quran, "Who was the witness when Muhammad (a blind man) went from Mecca to Jerusalem, alone at night, and then flew to heaven, nobody saw it, yet someone wrote about it? Who was the secret witness?" The writers of these texts had a vivid imagination (talking snakes, winged horses), today, their work would put them in the same genre as Harry Potter books. |
|
|
|
I am a Chinese and I am an atheist.
I have to say that from the perspective of mysticism,
I can NOT understand some of the points.
Please forgive my disrespect.
Let me break down his points in more readable form. CoinCube believes that because there are truths and infinities in Mathematics that cannot be proven there must be an external infinite entity that exists but cannot be proven to exist. He also claims that such truth (about existence of such infinite entity aka God) predicates all our system of logic and is required for that system to work truthfully. He also claims that this infinite entity interacts with the physical world, is the source of the moral code that we should follow. He claims that any other moral code that is not dictated by this external supernatural infinite entity is doomed to fail and leads to atrocities and disintegration of societies. |
|
|
|
What's the matter? You can't come up with anything logical, so you start to badmouth and criticize Coincube, right? Sounds like you have been on too much medication. Oh well at least he is somewhat funny. I must admit his little imaginary back and forth made me laugh. Ultimately the inability or unwillingness of many atheists to even attempt an articulation of an integrated and coherent system of belief leads me to the conclusion that they are often hypocrites possessed by incomplete ideas and unwilling to explore the logical conclusions and assumptions of their own positions. I have been watching Jordan Peterson videos recently as he is coming to my town next week and I have tickets to his presentation. I found this video on hypocrites particularly enlightening. Nietzsche on how to spot Hypocrites - Jordan Petersonhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taF8yk7MRV8Problem is that you guys refuse to use science to analyze the possibility of God existence. Science is clear on the subject. Instead you use the metaphysics and philosophy to validate your condition. That is all you can do these days, I guess. We cannot agree because we are talking about different things. Physics and metaphysics do not mix. You think I am arrogant and I dismiss your psychological claims to God existence. Problem is that we don't define "existence" to mean the same thing. If you want to argue about God existence first you have to define what 'God' is, then define what it means 'to exist'. From where I stand, all religious conditions are psychological and in severe cases mental disorders. Fundamentalist religious freaks should be removed from society and locked up because they pose risk to themselves and others. Being fascinated by the Bible is one thing, but to act out what the Bible recommends is criminal in most Western countries. I hope we can agree on that. BTW, I don't know why Peterson is so fascinated with Dostoyevsky, I read Crime and Punishment, good book, I must say, but to say that there is something there to Rosolnikov's character and question of God, is a bit stretch. We go through our moral dilemmas based one what we believe. He would not kill the old lady if he used a simple principle: "Would my actions cause harm to others or myself?". The problem is that you and many others won't take the time to critically analyze Cause and effect, entropy, and complexity... and the way they work together in this universe. Entropy shows us that there was a beginning. If there wasn't a beginning, long ago everything would have dispersed, dissipated, and diffused into a gigantic mass of equilibrium, rather than the orderly mass of complexity that we have today. Stabs at suggesting that entropy is simply localized, and therefore not universal, are stabs that are contradicted by stellar observations all over the place. Everything operates by C&E. This means that everything that happens has been set in place to happen that way, from the Beginning (entropy shows that there was a beginning). There are countless numbers of C&E actions, with nothing known to have happened without C&E. Everything is programming, nothing more. Even free will is artificial and programmed into us. Complexity is so extremely great that we have artificial free will. And we barely realize it until we look at how C&E pervades everything. Put these together, and you get God. How? Like this. The existence of the Beginning shows that something (or some non-thing) set the Beginning in place. C&E shows that it was very powerful to have set up something that would last as long as the universe by C&E action. Complexity is the key. Complexity of the universe, life, the human brain and mind, thought, the artificial free will, and everything else, shows that the Creator was intelligent beyond understanding, simply because our much lower intelligence exists via C&E, from the beginning. Toss out your preconceived ideas of what the word "God" entails. Use the dictionary definition, but use the complete definition. Then consider all the vastness of our universe from the standpoint of the three major qualities that operate within it: C&E, entropy, and complexity. The Creator of the universe is God way beyond God in any way we can conceive of God. When we honor Him even by simply realizing that He exists, He maintains our health in greater ways than normal, as a special gift to us for honoring Him. First of all C&E only can be applied in temporal domain, i.e. when the cause predicates the effect. The time and space were created when the Big Bang happened. There was no time before the Big Bang so you cannot talk about the cause because there is no time for the cause to exist in.Universe was not designed because it started as an explosion, it is still exploding in parts of the universe. The shear volume of space and time tells you that it was not designed. You do not design a system to have such positive feedback loops. It was an accident, not a design.How do you go from complexity to God beats me? Nature is a violent set of events, a wild river that destroys its banks as it forms new shape and delivers new, slightly evolved species. Science helps us understand how nature actually works.
Religion explains nature without understanding it.Those two will never be able to reconcile. No matter how hard you try. God exists in that small space behind and between your eyes, nowhere else. You can talk all you want about the metaphysical God, but it will be always that. Your own thoughts and feelings. Nothing else. |
|
|
|
...
Religion is about the worst thing that ever happened to humankind but it was unavoidable and inevitable. It is a system of management.
At our origins perhaps we were all slaves of aliens or some superior creatures who indoctrinated us with religion to make it easy to control us.
There is a good book on the subject https://www.amazon.ca/Sapiens-Humankind-Yuval-Noah-Harari/dp/0771038518/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1524892988&sr=8-2&keywords=Brief+history+ofcommon belief systems helped build trust with strangers, allowing formation of larger groups. Cooperation is what allowed us to leave Africa and conquer the world. Religions provided that instant trust. Jews trusted Jews, Christians trusted Christians and so on. |
|
|
|
Flat Earthers - What to do with them? Same as with atheists: surgery, radiation, and chemo. Is that what Leviticus says? If not, you should ask the church elders to add that in. |
|
|
|
There's no way to convince them this is not true. People believe whatever they want regardless of the facts.
Amen to that! Pass the talking snake!! Hallelujah!! Praise the 'Lord'. Flat Earthers are bored people searching for some excitement. Same with religious folks or UFO enthusiasts. |
|
|
|
Just like how some Christians criticize Atheists for not believing in God, they do the same to us. I am Catholic myself, but I think it's God's choice on to choose a person's religion. Some Atheists just don't believe in religion, but don't criticize others for believing, but then get tired of the believers who try to change them so much. I've seen that happen to a friend of mine multiple times.
Why did God create contradicting religions (5000+ and counting)? Why did God create Atheists? , by listening to people's inner thoughts, and then giving them the religion that would help them turn to Him for salvation the most. That's why people choose and have various religions. It's what they need to find the true religion that provides salvation from death into eternal life. That makes little to no sense badecker but nice try. A god would know exactly what would convince everyone and yet not everyone is convinced, he either failed or he doesn't exist. That's what I said. He knows exactly what is the best religion to convince every person. You simply are forgetting the part about convincing, and are looking at forcing instead. God doesn't want forced robots in the people he created. He made a bunch of those forced robots in the plants and animals. He wants beings that have some free will. Yet He isn't going to give His glory to anyone else. You keep on ignoring the way it works. You will ultimately lose eternal life in glory if you don't change. If he created these religions, either he is mentally retarded or is all together schizophrenic. Guess, what? People created religions. No maker of the universe would bother with Zeus, Mitra or Jesus myths. It was a tricky question. God created the universe. He created the earth. The physics that God created can't even be dislodged by a hydrogen nuclear bomb blast. Your religion that you are expressing is the thing that is mentally retarded. Not God. If I were God, I would create one religion or no religion, not 5000+ and give people reasons to kill each other. I would create one solar system, not billions of solar systems. Most of them devoid of life. If I were God, I would create one universe and one Earth in the same instance, with all animals, plants and people in it. I would not create this universe and then wait 9 billion years to create Earth, then wait another 4+ billion to create man (in my own image LOL). I would not create multiple universes with different physical constants. What is the purpose? Trial and error, see which one works? The way you say he did things seems retarded at best. But then again, the 'Gods' (aka goat herders) that created religions were slight retards to begin with so we cannot expect them to come up with something that makes sense. |
|
|
|
Jordan Peterson is great. He prods people to seek truth and challenges politically correct but false ideas with facts and empirical reality. He is hated because he is so successful in unmasking the false ideologies of his opponents and hated for his resistance to the usual methods used to silence and intimidate people. The result is attacks like the one you witnessed. Pointless name calling illogical mud slinging with the hope that something sticks. If you have not watched it yet Jordan Peterson's interview/inquisition by Cathy Neuman is really something. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54+1 I like him too. He is a straight shooter. What he says actually makes sense. World needs more people like him, freethinkers who can progress humanity. |
|
|
|
You have to redefine what religion is because what you have does not make sense. Flying horses, virgin conceptions, resurrection, spirits, 6000 year old Earth, creating woman from a rib bone, or man from dirt, talking snakes, etc., etc. All utter nonsense.
Keep re-writing it, eventually you'll get to the truth. Life is not unique in this or other universes, humans might not be the surviving lifeform in few thousands/millions of years. Humans are not special animals, we are like all other monkeys, we are just smarter and can talk.
I define religion as anything an individual structures their life around either consciously or unconsciously. I talked about this more here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1373864.msg35126317#msg35126317I have seen arguments like your before af_newbie. They are often followed by statements like Life is without objective meaning, purpose, or intrinsic value. There is no inherent morality, accepted moral values are abstractly contrived. The universe and everything in it is entirely random. Ultimately there is no real point to life. I am familiar with this "religion" this this type of faith if you will. I find it unpersuasive to say the least. Many religious texts make a lot more sense then you are giving them credit for. I have found Jordan Peterson's lecture series on that topic to be particularily insightful as he goes through one of them line by line. Biblical Series I: Introduction to the Idea of Godhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-wWBGo6a2wThe purpose of life is to survive and procreate. It is a common purpose in all life forms, including humans. You are over analyzing it. It is pretty simple. People fear death and develop self coping mechanism to deal with that fear. Have you noticed that poor and uneducated people are more religious than educated and independently wealthy. Why is that? Poor and uneducated have more to fear and need some hope (any myth will do) to help them cope with their problems and questions. Saying that some bronze stone texts have any insights is like saying that Pinocchio fairy tale is a good source of engineering knowledge. People are killing and mistreating people in the name of those religious texts. Even today. How can you say that slavery is a good thing? You know it causes harm. People who wrote these texts were psychopaths. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
