Jump to content
Tobes

General Politics Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

Yikes. Imagine how much of a loser you have to be knowing you’re hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt and shaming other poor people LOL

Deplatforming and direct action works.

 

God bless the Aussies that gave him that security bill.

 

If that cunt wants to put peoples lives in danger, what goes around comes around.

Share this post


Link to post

 

 

If you want green energy then you have to choose nuclear fission. It's billions of orders of magnitude more energy dense than combustion. It operates non-stop night and day. Fuel is more abundant than fossil fuels. Pound for pound it's the best on the planet. There are some drawbacks of course but they aren't worse than fossil fuels, wind, or solar. Hydro is pretty good but it ain't green, you have to destroy a LOT of ecosystem to build and maintain dams. Germany, the icon of wind and solar power, is building a lot of coal plants to keep their country running. The technology just isn't there for those energy types in order to take a significant amount of fossil fuels out of use. In less than first world countries, they need fossil fuels because they are so cheap relative to anything else. That's their best path to becoming developed nations. Everything else is out of their price range. That's the unfortunate downside of monkey-see monkey-do with 7 billion people on the planet.

 

This is literally false and fake news. German dependency on coal has never been lower and nuclear energy is being phased out.

 

Germany is building ZERO new coal plants.

 

 

There is plans to EXTEND an ALREADY EXISTING coal fired power plant in the ancient Hambach forest which is currently being militantly opposed by greenpeace, anarchists and other anti-capitalist activists against the cops.

 

 

The reason why they are expanding is because it isn't financially viable anymore. Dozens of plants are shutting down.

 

Third World countries aren't copying developed nations out of 'monkey see monkey do' logic.

That statement is incredibly false in its premise and conclusion.

 

These countries are jumping straight to the latest technologies because they can and because it's actually viable.

 

 

Stop posting bullshit please.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel_phase-out#Germany

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hambach_surface_mine

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/oct/16/world-going-slow-coal-misinformation-distorting-facts

Share this post


Link to post

Republicans are evil. 
 
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/05/us/wisconsin-power-republicans.html
 

MADISON, Wis. — After a rancorous, sleepless night of debate, Republican lawmakers early Wednesday pushed through a sweeping set of bills that will limit the power of Wisconsin’s newly elected Democrats, including the incoming governor and attorney general.

The legislation, which Democrats vehemently opposed and protesters chanted their anger over, passed through the Republican-held State Legislature after hours of closed-door meetings and some amendments. The votes fell largely along party lines; no Democrats supported the measures.

“That’s what this is about: power-hungry politicians using their grubby hands in their last-ditch effort to desperately cling to power,” said State Representative Katrina Shankland, a Democrat, before the vote Wednesday morning. “All we’ve seen demonstrated today and over the past few days is a contempt for the public.”

The fight over power in Madison came after Republicans, who have controlled the state for the last eight years, lost the offices of governor and attorney general during the midterm elections. Tony Evers, a Democrat, defeated Scott Walker, a two-term governor who drew national attention with a brief run for president.

Republicans explained the moves to limit the authority of the governor as part of a long-needed change in the balance of power, which they said had become tilted in favor of the executive branch. Robin Vos, the speaker of the Assembly, accused Democrats of fanning hysteria and overstating the effects of the bills.

“You are so grossly exaggerating the words of this bill it makes me sick,” Mr. Vos said.

Democrats scoffed at that explanation, noting that Republicans had seemed perfectly satisfied with the balance of power when Mr. Walker held the role. Hundreds of protesters streamed to the Capitol as the debate went on over several days. Some carried signs with messages like “G.O.P. Grinch Stealing Democracy” and chanted “Shame! Shame! Shame!” during one hearing.

Mr. Evers, the governor-elect, issued a statement on Wednesday expressing outrage, and accusing the Republicans of grabbing power against the wishes of the voters.

“Wisconsin has never seen anything like this,” Mr. Evers said, adding at another point, “Wisconsin values of decency, kindness, and finding common ground were pushed aside so a handful of people could desperately usurp and cling to power while hidden away from the very people they represent.”

Robin Vos, the Republican speaker of the Assembly, has accused Democrats of exaggerating the effects of the bills.

The package of bills, which now awaits Mr. Walker’s signature, would limit early voting and, for the coming months, give lawmakers, not the governor, the majority of appointments on an economic development board. They also prevent Mr. Evers from banning guns in the Wisconsin Capitol without permission from legislators.

The bills would also require Mr. Evers to get permission from lawmakers to seek adjustments on programs run jointly by federal and state governments, such as public benefit programs.

And they would bar Mr. Evers from installing any political appointee whose confirmation is rejected by the Senate. (Current law allows a governor to renominate such appointees or allow them to serve as a provisional appointment.) The measures also include a provision requiring the corrections department, at lawmakers’ request, to publish online the names of prisoners pardoned by the governor or released before finishing their sentences.

“It provides more opportunity for oversight for a coequal branch of government,” Romaine Quinn, a Republican state representative, said of the measures.

Protesters at the State Capitol on Tuesday. Lawmakers debated the measures through the night, before passing the legislation on Wednesday morning.

But Gordon Hintz, the Democratic leader in the Assembly, said the legislation undermined the power of democratically elected officials. “We’re here because you don’t trust Tony Evers and you don’t want to give up power,” he said. “You’re sore losers.”

On state legal matters, the package of bills shifts more authority to lawmakers that would ordinarily be held by the state attorney general. A Democrat, Josh Kaul, was elected attorney general in November to replace the outgoing Republican.

Under the newly passed measures, the attorney general would need lawmakers’ approval to settle certain suits. Also, the measures would allow legislative leaders to intervene and hire their own lawyers — in addition to the attorney general — if the constitutionality of a law were being challenged. Under the new bills, the attorney general could no longer appoint a solicitor general to represent the state in major lawsuits, and would be restricted in how he spent settlement money, which lawmakers would now oversee.

As the debate went on in recent days, some measures were softened or removed by amendments, such as a proposal that lawmakers be able to completely remove the attorney general from some lawsuits.

On Tuesday, senators confirmed dozens of Mr. Walker’s political appointees despite protests by Mr. Evers, who called the last-minute installations an “example of putting politics before people.”

Share this post


Link to post

Germany is building ZERO new coal plants.

 

Oh cool, here's one currently under construction (tower 4):

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kraftwerk_Datteln#Neubau_Datteln_4_ab_2007

 

And here's one stuck in the pre-permitting stage:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stade#Kohlekraftwerksprojekt_von_Dow_Chemical

 

 

I shouldn't have said "a lot" because that isn't accurate, but still...

Stop being such a fucking prick about everything.

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Oh cool, here's one currently under construction (tower 4):

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kraftwerk_Datteln#Neubau_Datteln_4_ab_2007

 

And here's one stuck in the pre-permitting stage:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stade#Kohlekraftwerksprojekt_von_Dow_Chemical

 

 

I shouldn't have said "a lot" because that isn't accurate, but still...

Stop being such a fucking prick about everything.

You are citing already existing power plants that are expanding their units which have a limited shelf life. There are ZERO new plants being built because it isn't cost effective.

 

Oh cool, here's one currently under construction (tower 4):

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kraftwerk_Datteln#Neubau_Datteln_4_ab_2007

 

And here's one stuck in the pre-permitting stage:

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stade#Kohlekraftwerksprojekt_von_Dow_Chemical

 

 

I shouldn't have said "a lot" because that isn't accurate, but still...

Stop being such a fucking prick about everything.

The first ones construction has been halted on legal and efficiency grounds.

It is one of 4 in which 3 of the units have been decommissioned.

 

And the second one will not be constructed because there are ZERO investors who will even touch that toxic shit because they know it will eventually shut down as well.

 

Just admit you're wrong bro, there are no new coal fired power stations being built in Germany. 

 

Get that billionaire dick out of your ass.

Share this post


Link to post

Niku is basically the liberal version of Milo. Both equally as fkn annoying and both with the same exact know-it-all persona.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

You are citing already existing power plants that are expanding their units which have a limited shelf life. There are ZERO new plants being built because it isn't cost effective.

 

The first ones construction has been halted on legal and efficiency grounds.

It is one of 4 in which 3 of the units have been decommissioned.

 

And the second one will not be constructed because there are ZERO investors who will even touch that toxic shit because they know it will eventually shut down as well.

 

Just admit you're wrong bro, there are no new coal fired power stations being built in Germany. 

 

Get that billionaire dick out of your ass.

 

I already admitted I was wrong, get over yourself about it and stop being a child.

Share this post


Link to post

As for your analysis of CO2, it's wrong. You can do experimentation that in every aspect if an atomosphere has more CO2 it will be a warmer. Venus has an atmospheric content of 96% CO2, heat has a very hard time leaving there. Of course you can't exactly have another earth model and test and see what x amount of CO2 would do to the atmosphere lol, but we do know that if in a closed envoirnment scale getting as close as possible to the same properties as earths climate that if you add more CO2 the temps rise, and the more CO2 you add the higher the temps get.

 

The earth isn't a closed system and neither is a box that you add sunlight and CO2 into. Would you be willing to talk more about adding CO2 to things? I was interested in what kind of systems you know about so I could examine the accuracy of the conclusion that temps just always increase. If you have the time. Thanks.

 

You're pretending like volcanoes and clouds and the sun and shit aren't quantifiable. They are actually. Just because you're personally too stupid to understand how shit works doesn't mean it can't be 'modeled'.

 

I am not even fallaciously appealing to authorities. Your scripted 'NPC' responses that are prerecorded by Republican lobbyists, I have responded to all of them with facts and logic .

 

Renewables aren't good because it isn't always windy and it isn't always sunny? You're also citing more Koch fuelled propaganda regarding the costs and externalities of both energy options.

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/environment/renewable-energy-germany-six-months-year-solar-power-wind-farms-a8427356.html

 

Germany produces enough renewable energy in six months to power country's households for an entire year

 

'Renewables are bad because The WInD doEsNt Blow AlL tHe TiMe'

 

You look like a fucking moron. Quit getting your facts from billionaire Mercer funded Breitbart.

 

Volcanoes, clouds, and the sun all have features that aren't able to be modeled. They are stochastic features. If you could model them accurately, you could predict every future eruption, cloud formation, and solar flare until the end of time as well as all their magnitudes and time of occurrence. We can't do that because those things are stochastic. You don't seem to understand that word or the implications it has for modeling phenomena.

 

I cited other reasons for green energy being a poor solution besides wind and sun not being constant, but those are still two very good reasons as they are still giant hurdles to every scientist and engineer who is developing those technologies. Does this mean throw them out? No. We keep improving them. As it stands right now, I don't believe they can save the world from fossil fuel emissions. Maybe some time in the future after some breakthroughs.

 

The rest of your post is your typical politicization of an "opponent's" response. Please grow a pair and talk science with me. We can do politics some other time. I'm trying to be patient with me but you're too dedicated to your troll game instead of having a real conversation. I don't give a shit about billionaires' opinions (besides Elon Musk and that's about it) or conservative news sites and no words you possess will change that. If that's the only angle you have then you're wasting your time trying to pigeonhole me as a right-wing shill. It's pretty telling that nobody is defending you in this conversation, maybe grab a moment or two of self-reflection and talk to me like a man when you're ready.

Share this post


Link to post

The earth isn't a closed system.

Randomly jumped in here for shits and giggles (Whew what a ride), but scientifically, the Earth is considered a closed system with many open systems inhabiting it, such as us. Something something, there is a limit to how much matter can be exchanged, scientific jargon. 

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Randomly jumped in here for shits and giggles (Whew what a ride), but scientifically, the Earth is considered a closed system with many open systems inhabiting it, such as us. Something something, there is a limit to how much matter can be exchanged, scientific jargon. 

 

It's only done that way because it's useful, not because it's true. We receive energy and matter from space all the time, as well as lose matter and energy to space all the time. This is nitpicky for sure due to the amount of matter being exchanged but thank you for pointing out what you did.

Share this post


Link to post

It's only done that way because it's useful, not because it's true. We receive energy and matter from space all the time, as well as lose matter and energy to space all the time.

We only lose and gain energy, not matter, barring occasional meteorites, and our atmosphere prevents matter from naturally escaping. And that alone is enough to consider Earth a closed system to an open one. Scientifically is how it is.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

We only lose and gain energy, not matter, barring occasional meteorites, and our atmosphere prevents matter from naturally escaping. And that alone is enough to consider Earth a closed system to an open one. Scientifically is how it is.

 

Our atmosphere itself escapes into space due to a variety of meachanisms (Jeans escape, charge exchange, polar wind) enabling gaseous ions to reach escape velocity.

http://faculty.washington.edu/dcatling/Catling2009_SciAm.pdf

 

We lose about 90 Mg of atmosphere per day.

https://phys.org/news/2016-07-curious-case-earth-leaking-atmosphere.html

 

Be careful with lower division scientific education, approximations are the standard and don't match what is used in scientific fields. Upper division classes debunk or modify a lot of what the lowers teach because lowers are just foundational, as I learned in chemistry and physics.

Share this post


Link to post

Our atmosphere itself escapes into space due to a variety of meachanisms (Jeans escape, charge exchange, polar wind) enabling gaseous ions to reach escape velocity.

http://faculty.washington.edu/dcatling/Catling2009_SciAm.pdf

 

We lose about 90 Mg of atmosphere per day.

https://phys.org/news/2016-07-curious-case-earth-leaking-atmosphere.html

 

Be careful with lower division education, approximations are the standard and don't match what is used in scientific fields. Upper division classes debunk or modify a lot of what the lowers teach, as I learned in chemistry and physics.

The latter kinda proves the point I'm making bar the generalizations. Thousands of tonnes "lost" to the quadrillions of tonnes the atmosphere weighs. What I referred to was the fact the amount we lose isn't really enough to say "open system" in the fashion we generally mean it as. Especially given the exchange of matter is almost zero, and it's going to have no impact on Earth or it's systems. It's still scientifically defined as, or more commonly referred to as a closed (Or, being generous, nearly/essentially closed) system, even with these technicalities. The amount we lose/gain amounts to literally less than 1% of our planet's makeup. Saying negligible would be an overstatement of the century. Our body is an open system, for obvious reasons, the Earth may as well not be, up until the point we get KT'ed into oblivion. Definitely not black and white, come to think of it, but it's is still so much closer to closed than it is open. 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

The latter kinda proves the point I'm making bar the generalizations. Thousands of tonnes "lost" to the quadrillions of tonnes the atmosphere weighs. What I referred to was the fact the amount we lose isn't really enough to say "open system" in the fashion we generally mean it as. Especially given the exchange of matter is almost zero, and it's going to have no impact on Earth or it's systems. It's still scientifically defined as, or more commonly referred to as a closed (Or, being generous, nearly/essentially closed) system, even with these technicalities. The amount we lose/gain amounts to literally less than 1% of our planet's makeup. Saying negligible would be an overstatement of the century. Our body is an open system, for obvious reasons, the Earth may as well not be, up until the point we get KT'ed into oblivion. Definitely not black and white, come to think of it, but it's is still so much closer to closed than it is open. 

 

Certainly the amount is insignificant, but the point is that some scientific fields, like in the article on that ESA paper I linked you, couldn't operate if the closed system model was applied to the earth. You keep using "scientifically defined" for this but that really just means that most earth science doesn't need to account for atmospheric escape because it doesn't have a noticeable effect by many orders of magnitude, so it's overwhelmingly correct to use "closed system" but there are always caveats to everything (even scientific laws like Newton's break down, as velocities increase greatly you begin to make bad predictions). It's a real pain to get used to but once you're there it absolutely helps you approach scientific inquiry with a more open mind.

Share this post


Link to post

The earth isn't a closed system and neither is a box that you add sunlight and CO2 into. Would you be willing to talk more about adding CO2 to things? I was interested in what kind of systems you know about so I could examine the accuracy of the conclusion that temps just always increase. If you have the time. Thanks.

 

 

Volcanoes, clouds, and the sun all have features that aren't able to be modeled. They are stochastic features. If you could model them accurately, you could predict every future eruption, cloud formation, and solar flare until the end of time as well as all their magnitudes and time of occurrence. We can't do that because those things are stochastic. You don't seem to understand that word or the implications it has for modeling phenomena.

 

I cited other reasons for green energy being a poor solution besides wind and sun not being constant, but those are still two very good reasons as they are still giant hurdles to every scientist and engineer who is developing those technologies. Does this mean throw them out? No. We keep improving them. As it stands right now, I don't believe they can save the world from fossil fuel emissions. Maybe some time in the future after some breakthroughs.

 

The rest of your post is your typical politicization of an "opponent's" response. Please grow a pair and talk science with me. We can do politics some other time. I'm trying to be patient with me but you're too dedicated to your troll game instead of having a real conversation. I don't give a shit about billionaires' opinions (besides Elon Musk and that's about it) or conservative news sites and no words you possess will change that. If that's the only angle you have then you're wasting your time trying to pigeonhole me as a right-wing shill. It's pretty telling that nobody is defending you in this conversation, maybe grab a moment or two of self-reflection and talk to me like a man when you're ready.

Yeah scientists actually do model volcanoes, and the sun. Stochastic? lol, volcanic activity is negligible and the sun is cooling. You're repeating falsehoods I have already disproved.

 

Yeah renewables can save the world. To cite Germany again, they can run on renewables alone.

 

I don't care what your politics are. Only that you have unknowingly repeated right wing billionaire talking points and falsehoods. I have discussed the science with you.

 

Trust me dude. The scientists have accounted for volcanoes and the sun lmao.

Share this post


Link to post

. It's a real pain to get used to but once you're there it absolutely helps you approach scientific inquiry with a more open mind.

Such an open mind that your brain falls out. 

 

'Renewables don't work because the sun don't shine all the time'.

'It don't wind all the time'.

 

You kidding bro? Monopolized coal fired power station are owned by individual companies who are plagued by inefficient shut downs, and DELIBERATELY close power stations to manipulate prices to gouge customers. It is antithetical to any free market model.

 

While renewables can be online 100% of the time, it is dynamic, decentralized, and grids can direct energy to areas that have less wind and sun in certain times.

 

Also anyone can produce power. It is libertarian to the core. Which is why energy company hates it and fabricates bullshit theories for you to parrot.

 

And it's also cheaper.

 

And no one is investing in coal because it is cheaper.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah scientists actually do model volcanoes, and the sun. Stochastic? lol, volcanic activity is negligible and the sun is cooling. You're repeating falsehoods I have already disproved.

 

Yeah renewables can save the world. To cite Germany again, they can run on renewables alone.

 

I don't care what your politics are. Only that you have unknowingly repeated right wing billionaire talking points and falsehoods. I have discussed the science with you.

 

Trust me dude. The scientists have accounted for volcanoes and the sun lmao.

 

Again, and please listen this time, yes scientists model the sun and volcanoes. Obviously they do and I've never claimed they don't. What I've told you multiple times is that those models cannot account for stochastic behavior because stochastic variables cannot be modeled by definition. Solar flares and volcanic eruptions cannot have their magnitudes or time of occurrence predicted by modeling. It's not possible yet, if ever. The same goes for ocean current fluctuations. They can all only be approximated based on past averages. This is good enough for most work, but there are times when the implications can be huge, such as when a solar cycle goes missing like at the end of the 16th century (Maunder minimum).

 

Germany doesn't run on renewables alone. They're at around 40% right now with a long way to go.

Power generation in Germany - assessment of 2017 by the Fraunhofer Institute, page 11:

https://www.ise.fraunhofer.de/content/dam/ise/en/documents/publications/studies/Stromerzeugung_2017_e.pdf

 

You'll also have to cut about 13% off of that because hydro and biomass aren't green energy sources. Hydro destroys ecosystems and biomass produces CO2. So, Germany is roughly 1/4 reliant on green energy right now.

 

You worry about talking points and the political party they supposedly come from, but maybe what you should care about is whether or not those points reflect reality. That's all I care about, you know, what's true. If I sound like some kind of parrot for a political party then perhaps one side is doing better at making good arguments, or not, again I don't care about political sides in a scientific discussion. The only thing I'm aware of that I messed up in this conversation is the coal plant construction in germany, which I owned up to, so don't lecture me about falsehoods when you're the one failing repeatedly to understand the scientific side of my arguments.

 

Such an open mind that your brain falls out. 

 

'Renewables don't work because the sun don't shine all the time'.

'It don't wind all the time'.

 

You kidding bro? Monopolized coal fired power station are owned by individual companies who are plagued by inefficient shut downs, and DELIBERATELY close power stations to manipulate prices to gouge customers. It is antithetical to any free market model.

 

While renewables can be online 100% of the time, it is dynamic, decentralized, and grids can direct energy to areas that have less wind and sun in certain times.

 

Also anyone can produce power. It is libertarian to the core. Which is why energy company hates it and fabricates bullshit theories for you to parrot.

 

And it's also cheaper.

 

And no one is investing in coal because it is cheaper.

 

You act like I give a shit about coal. I don't. What I've already told you more than once is that the sun not shining and the wind not blowing 24/7 isn't my only argument that those power sources aren't very good for powering countries. If you want to continue to talk about only those two things then you've already lost the plot. I suppose if you want to have a shot at addressing what I'm saying, you need to know how I see the world when it comes to power generation for the planet. Each power source has allowed us to jump to a better power source. Wood to coal to gas to fission. I would like to see the jump to fusion happen in my lifetime but it's a long ways out. From an energy standpoint, coal is about a factor of two better than wood, gas is about a factor of two better than coal, fission is about 8 orders of magnitude better than gas, and fusion is an order of magnitude better than fission. Fusion is the best bang for the buck if we could figure out how to sustain a fusion reaction. Fusion is what I want. Coal is garbage. Stop acting like I'm a shill for coal when I would shill my balls off for some nuclear power. When you learn where wind and solar fit in that energy tree I'm sure you'll be right beside me begging for fusion.

Share this post


Link to post

Randomly jumped in here for shits and giggles (Whew what a ride), but scientifically, the Earth is considered a closed system with many open systems inhabiting it, such as us. Something something, there is a limit to how much matter can be exchanged, scientific jargon.

 

you sound like a librul snowflake commie who wants to shove your inclusivity agenda down the bore of my guns with the assistence of illegals.
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

you sound like a librul snowflake commie who wants to shove your inclusivity agenda down the bore of my guns with the assistence of illegals.

Yeah, I'm, to quote a genius:

"The typical, entitled, everybody-is-a-winner liberal millennial."

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, I'm, to quote a genius:

don't forget "secret male" as well. Brad was right about that too.

Share this post


Link to post

Trump said that he's not worried about the deficit because "he won't be there" when it comes to a head. 

 

Our President. 

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, I'm, to quote a genius:

It's true. Your favorite Halo games are the ones with the lowest skill gap: Halo 4, Halo 5, and H2A. Everybody is a winner in those games, which is why you love them. You hate the real Halo games that everyone loves because your lack of gunskill is exposed. It's not the H3 BR that sucks. It's you. 

 

don't forget "secret male" as well. Brad was right about that too.

Prove me wrong.

Share this post


Link to post

Trump said that he's not worried about the deficit because "he won't be there" when it comes to a head. 

 

Our President. 

Our God*, I'm afraid you mean, lmao. Yeah, he's something funny. Well, not funny when you realize the fate of the US, and potentially the world may lay in his words and decisions, but still funny. In a morbid "don't end me with nuclear hellfire" sort of way.

 

It's true. Your favorite Halo games are the ones with the lowest skill gap: Halo 4, Halo 5, and H2A. Everybody is a winner in those games, which is why you love them. You hate the real Halo games that everyone loves because your lack of gunskill is exposed. It's not the H3 BR that sucks. It's you. 

Hook, line, and sinker, I caught me a Megalodon.

 

don't forget "secret male" as well. Brad was right about that too.

Couldn't even prove I'm human, man. Assuming male assumes waaay too much, lmao.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.