canuckamuck Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 How are mysteries solved. By only using facts, or by going over all possibilities and then eliminating the impossible? The less facts you have the more you need conjecture. Whatever happened to the plane, it was something unusual. Just how unusual is undecided and everything needs to be considered if it cannot be eliminated. Was it a criminal act? Was it technical failure? Was it Human error? I think you will find most people lean on the side of criminal act. So if it was a criminal act, it was either a conspiracy, or the pilot acted alone. I am 50/50 at this point. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JacChang Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Yes, theories do not have actual facts supporting behind them. But clues and possibilities is what gets people forward in investigations. You even admit to yourself that the Malaysian government is hiding something and not telling the whole story. Is it not right then, to try to guess what they are hiding? What is wrong with that? The reason I pointed out there are two sides is a fact, and this thread will be the proof. There are Group A who provide theories, which others can either accept or not accept, it's freedom to choose. Most theories provided here are pretty rational with supporting clues, YES NO FACTS, but clues which can pinpoint what may have happened. However Group B, provides no information, no supportive discussion for the MH370 incident. BUT only knows how to criticize ideas or theories for which Group A provides. What's your point here then? Just here to disagree? Atleast when you disagree, give us your ideas to your side of the story. We'll gladly prove how our theory is better than your "nothing" theory. The point is, you need to question everything around you, instead of just taking in the facts like a student. We are all individuals, of course everyone will think differently, that's why we share what we think and discuss. Do be intelligent, and bring food of though to the table and not criticize other's theories. Discuss. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catweazle Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 (edited) Conspiracy is a consistent characteristic of humanity, Despite conspiracies having shaped the modern world, today it is not PC to believe they exist. All governments and powerful organisations today are benevolent and care only about the rule of law and a better future for all mankind. I never said conspiracy theories do not exist. Of course they exist, and of course what we are told to be real is probably not real. Mass hysteria would take over the whole world if we were told what was really going on in it. But my whole point is about theories which are just guesses based on nothing else but what the theorist wants to believe or fits his agenda. If you want me to believe that the moon is a hollow spaceship used by aliens to travel to our planet, or that there is an alien headquarters on the dark side of the moon which is the reason we haven't set foot on it again since the 70's, or that the world we perceive is really a hologram and we are all enslaved like in the Matrix, or that the Queen of England and all leaders of the world are really vampiric shapeshifting lizards, then show me some shred of proof, don't just tell me that it is a fact because you want to believe it or because you read it on the internet. (All real conspiracy theories perpetuated by the same people who are touting the MH370 theories by the way). Same goes with all the MH370 theories. It's totally rational to question authority but back it up with some facts or at least some logic. Of course what the Malaysian government is saying is not really all they know, but if they told you everything they really knew and what really happened then it would make them all look totally incompetent on many levels and there is no way an Asian nation is going to do that. It doesn't therefore mean that because they are lying that the plane disappeared into the new Bermuda triangle of Asia. This is also aimed at all conspiracy theorists, not any person in particular. "I never said conspiracy theories do not exist..." Khun Matt, you are so blinded by your superficiality and ignorance, that in your posts you are not able anymore to differentiate between a conspiracy (what you most likely wanted to say here) and a theory. Mainstream-media brainwashing fell on fertile ground in your case - good for you, makes your life much easier! To call any doubts about the official story, may it be JFK, Pearl Harbour, 9/11 or whatever, a "Conspiracy Theorie" and hammer this into the minds of ignorant mainstream media consuming sheeple (you are one of them) was one of the cleverest moves ever performed by the Elite as this phrase ridicules not only the doubt, but the doubter himself. I hope for your sake and the sake of the countless other sheeple, who are not able to think outside the box, that the people behind the curtain perform a major clusterf#$& that exposes their wrongdoings and conspiracies for all to see - by then, people like you will be claiming that they had doubts all along, just to fit in. You're pathetic! Criticising and ridiculing is easy - you have so far not been able to list one shred of evidence (the word you like almost as much as the word theory) to proof that the official mainstream media story is correct. All you do is twaddle. Edited June 24, 2014 by catweazle 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catweazle Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 I never wrote that the plane was hijacked, I believe it was shot down. Common sense would be to read my posts properly before babbling along. You think in times where spy satellites can read your newspaper in your garden, with NSA listening to every single phone call all over the world and checking everything that is posted on the internet, the advanced level of warfare, etc. a huge airplane like that can simply disappear? You still believe in Santa Claus, don't you? My post may have had you in the quote, but it was directed at the purveyor of any conspiracy theory based on zero proof, like yours is. See, you do exactly what mainstream media is doing - using someone's post to quote someone else to make generalisations, and accuse or ridicule e"all of them" to then twaddle along and create a blur until no one knows anymore what the opponent was talking about, just like one of those mainstream media puppets... At least you learned something by watching mainstream media - however, I am not impressed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45Mustang Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Fact is Malaysia isn't telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. (Arguments about the validity of conspiracy theories, or what actually constitutes a conspiracy theory, or the difference between Asian and Western mindsets are futile.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scott Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Please stay on topic. Discussion of conspiracy theories in general is off-topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David48 Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Why are the Australians leading this and not the Malaysians? Dutch engineers are also working on this what are the Malaysian engineers doing? Mate, as an Aussie, I feel it's our responsibility as it's (could be) of our shores. You know if we lead the charge, it will be done throughly and no hint of a cover-up. Help from the other nations, including Malaysia is appreciated. I think, in the end, we just want the truth. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4UCorsair Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Lots of evidence that it shadowed the Singapore Airliens flight. Plenty of guesses/conspiracy theories indicating that, but 'lots of evidence'?? If so, it would be in conflict with the information provided by Rolls Royce that the engines suffered fuel exhaustion. RR are unequivocal about that, and that has been one of the cornerstones of narrowing the search area to the current zone. As I said in an earlier post, to support any other theory would involve 'buying' Rolls Royce to be complicit in the charade, and I think that's less than likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shirtless Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Malaysia have given up but Abbott will spend any amount of Australian taxpayers money to look good in the worlds eyes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4UCorsair Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Malaysia have given up but Abbott will spend any amount of Australian taxpayers money to look good in the worlds eyes. That's not what it's about. The search area is in Australia's area of responsibility for Search and Rescue. Abbott has already indicated that other countries will be chipping in. You're obviously a labor/greens voter??? Is it a big deal if he spends more money? Labor came to power with $70 billion in the bank and left with $360 Billion in the red (interest bill of $12 billion at 3%), so what's another $100 million on a search? Boeing and the insurance company have more than a passing interest in finding it, so they'll probably be contributing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David48 Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Malaysia have given up but Abbott will spend any amount of Australian taxpayers money to look good in the worlds eyes. That's not what it's about. The search area is in Australia's area of responsibility for Search and Rescue. Abbott has already indicated that other countries will be chipping in. You're obviously a labor/greens voter??? Is it a big deal if he spends more money? Labor came to power with $70 billion in the bank and left with $360 Billion in the red (interest bill of $12 billion at 3%), so what's another $100 million on a search? Boeing and the insurance company have more than a passing interest in finding it, so they'll probably be contributing. Sorry for the intrusive quote ... but I like the first few sentences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebeli Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Lots of evidence that it shadowed the Singapore Airliens flight. Plenty of guesses/conspiracy theories indicating that, but 'lots of evidence'?? If so, it would be in conflict with the information provided by Rolls Royce that the engines suffered fuel exhaustion. RR are unequivocal about that, and that has been one of the cornerstones of narrowing the search area to the current zone. As I said in an earlier post, to support any other theory would involve 'buying' Rolls Royce to be complicit in the charade, and I think that's less than likely. How did rolls royce receive the engine data. I thought they switched off all communication equipment. Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4UCorsair Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Lots of evidence that it shadowed the Singapore Airliens flight. Plenty of guesses/conspiracy theories indicating that, but 'lots of evidence'?? If so, it would be in conflict with the information provided by Rolls Royce that the engines suffered fuel exhaustion. RR are unequivocal about that, and that has been one of the cornerstones of narrowing the search area to the current zone. As I said in an earlier post, to support any other theory would involve 'buying' Rolls Royce to be complicit in the charade, and I think that's less than likely. How did rolls royce receive the engine data. I thought they switched off all communication equipment. Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app The engine performance is monitored by RR and cannot be disabled by the crew. If you'd been following the news, that was announced about a week into the search, and that all resources are being poured into that area, it indicates that the searchers are relying on that data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebeli Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Lots of evidence that it shadowed the Singapore Airliens flight. Plenty of guesses/conspiracy theories indicating that, but 'lots of evidence'?? If so, it would be in conflict with the information provided by Rolls Royce that the engines suffered fuel exhaustion. RR are unequivocal about that, and that has been one of the cornerstones of narrowing the search area to the current zone. As I said in an earlier post, to support any other theory would involve 'buying' Rolls Royce to be complicit in the charade, and I think that's less than likely. How did rolls royce receive the engine data. I thought they switched off all communication equipment.Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app The engine performance is monitored by RR and cannot be disabled by the crew. If you'd been following the news, that was announced about a week into the search, and that all resources are being poured into that area, it indicates that the searchers are relying on that data. If you read the news the you must know that the search does not rely in that data from rolls royce but on eight pings that the inmarsat sattelite has received from the plain. Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KunMatt Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 If you read the news the you must know that the search does not rely in that data from rolls royce but on eight pings that the inmarsat sattelite has received from the plain. Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app But the data sent to RR shows that the engines were running until fuel exhaustion, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4UCorsair Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 How did rolls royce receive the engine data. I thought they switched off all communication equipment.Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app The engine performance is monitored by RR and cannot be disabled by the crew. If you'd been following the news, that was announced about a week into the search, and that all resources are being poured into that area, it indicates that the searchers are relying on that data. If you read the news the you must know that the search does not rely in that data from rolls royce but on eight pings that the inmarsat sattelite has received from the plain. Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app I did read the news, and my understanding of it was that the pings were from the system monitoring aircraft engines, via the Inmarsat satellite, to Rolls Royce, not from the plane. Currently aircraft are not tracked by any external means to my knowledge, but the engine manufacturer has an interest in how its engines are performing so they are monitored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rebeli Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 How did rolls royce receive the engine data. I thought they switched off all communication equipment. Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app The engine performance is monitored by RR and cannot be disabled by the crew. If you'd been following the news, that was announced about a week into the search, and that all resources are being poured into that area, it indicates that the searchers are relying on that data. If you read the news the you must know that the search does not rely in that data from rolls royce but on eight pings that the inmarsat sattelite has received from the plain.Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app I did read the news, and my understanding of it was that the pings were from the system monitoring aircraft engines, via the Inmarsat satellite, to Rolls Royce, not from the plane. Currently aircraft are not tracked by any external means to my knowledge, but the engine manufacturer has an interest in how its engines are performing so they are monitored. Are you on crack? The inmarsat data was from communication equipnent IN the plane and not from roll royce which produces extremy good engines but does not know anything about satelite communication. The roll royce statement is btw denied by the malaysian authoroties. Google on mh370 rolls royce and you find some nice stories Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chao Lao Beach Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 Shadowing the SQ flight is very plausible. Seems so plausible that the authorities are very shy about it. Why ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chao Lao Beach Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 http://keithledgerwood.com/post/80154688823/questions-answers-follow-up-1-how-did-malaysian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JacChang Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 For all I know there are two types of people concerning the MH370. 1) Those that offer possibilities to what has happen and what could happen, and it's the very same people who are searching the web for new information. With this new information, new theories can be drawn out. That's what we humans do, we are curious and we seek information and eventually it leads us somewhere. We don't log in to this post of "another MH 370 news" so we could see, no debris found, search still going on. We seek to discuss possibilities and any new ideas other members can contribute and it feeds our brains. We can choose to accept it or not. 2) "That's crazy" "No way that happened" "Are you guys out of your minds?" Yes, these people. Who offer nothing, those who know only to put down other ideas. Those who play it safe and could only accept the facts. The only thing in mind is to criticize other people. Basically a worthless individual who thinks he/she has the right to put down others while bringing absolutely nothing to the happen. Point the gun directly at this type of person. Ask them back, what is their side of the MH370 story then? "Ohhh, hmmm, I've never really thought about it, well, I guess the plane is just missing, because ohmmm, the news said so, and the news NEVER LIES I guess. Yea... I'll wait for more news. For the meantime though, I'll put down other bizarre ideas because it's just not possible!" Edit: KunMatt, you really are late to the game aren't you? It's already pretty obvious that countries are withholding their military capabilities with regards to intelligence. With you now stating China is just trying to find a reason to blame the American government, and has no photos/information to prove so. Why do you think China sent a rusty slow coast guard to the scene, and it took days? Why do you think radars of so many countries were not able to pick up the MH370? Are you going to assume again their technology is not good enough? HAHA. Naïve indeed. You never wondered, I carry a gun with me hidden, but I don't want to use it and let you know I have it, but I just want to kick you around? For now, most countries have capabilities and technology capable of all the said things, but they are keeping it to themselves in order to conceal what capabilities they have. Especially military, they simply don't like sharing information, and a public air transport gone missing is really not of their interest. It's really not their business, it's the government public relations concern. If google map can find that my roof has a hole in it, what do you think the US military is capable of? And you seem to be so negative about what the US is capable of. How US can possibly commit such a thing when the whole world is watching? It's called cooperation, or more likely forced. Just read the news, you can see, everything happening around the world, the US's attitude and stance is not questioning or concern. It's control, as if they own the world. Yes, each country has their own presidents/kings to govern their own country, but do you see the US relations with others as we are individuals to individuals? Think again, it's more like manager to staff. Try flying a private two seater airplane around Malaysia, let's see if the radar will not pick you out, and see if the air force will allow you to fly around with no directions. I could even throw in another wild one. Thailand breached the collaboration by revealing the radar 1 week late. The generals debated about it, and felt that the right thing to do was for the truth to come out instead of concealing "the operation". Then now Thailand is constantly spanked with negative relations from the US. Negative view about coup, sanctions, downgrades, what have you. Nothing personal Matt, just offering a sense. Think outside the box. Work with what you have, and what possibilities it could lead. That's how we become smarter. During war, there are 2 generals, there must be something that lets the 1 general win over the other. I disagree with you about so many things, including your "two types of people", but I did say I didn't rule out any theory as impossible, but as usual a conspiracy theorist has to make it about sides, the awake and the asleep, the enlightened and the sheep, those in the club and those who are not and obviously deserve to be condescended. The onus of proof should be on you to backup any theory not just state it as a fact because it is the most popular within conspiracy theory circles, which is what always happens. "I have a feeling" tops "zero proof" with you guys, and then all you look for is confirmation in any way to backup a theory but exclude and deny any fact which proves it to be wrong, i.e. the mainstream media is deemed as one of the evils of the world to conspiracy theorists as they work for, and are a tool for, the evil governments until they print a story which may backup a theory in any way and then the Daily Star or the Daily Mail is cited as a source of proof for a theory! Conspiracy Theorists are not experts or professionals in the field concerning the theories they come up with, they just all sit around making hundreds of wild contradicting guesses until one that fits their anti-establishment agenda becomes popular and then it is stated as a solid fact furthermore and will never be denied or backtracked on even when it is proved 100% to be nonsense. If MH370 is found at the bottom of the ocean, brought to the surface with all 239 corpses shown on video I guarantee it would be denied by conspiracy theorists who will say that it is all CGI, or actors, or a false flag and the real plane is still in Diego Garcia. They will never admit they are wrong and believe the truth, that's what they do and that is how they work. The truth is out there, but it is rarely ever discovered or revealed by any conspiracy theorist. Of course you disagree. That's what you are supposed to do. That's why you belong to group 2. Thank god, we're not in the same boat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KunMatt Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) Of course you disagree. That's what you are supposed to do. That's why you belong to group 2. Thank god, we're not in the same boat. Because I am asking for some shred of proof instead of just joining the drones and following ridiculous guesses put forward by non-professionals of a field? Again, this is just showing that all conspiracy theorists are is just a club that thinks they are superior to everyone who is not part of their thinking. Tell me, of all the conspiracy theories I referenced in post #60, which ones do you subscribe to? Edited June 25, 2014 by KunMatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckamuck Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 If you read the news the you must know that the search does not rely in that data from rolls royce but on eight pings that the inmarsat sattelite has received from the plain. Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app I did read the news, and my understanding of it was that the pings were from the system monitoring aircraft engines, via the Inmarsat satellite, to Rolls Royce, not from the plane. Currently aircraft are not tracked by any external means to my knowledge, but the engine manufacturer has an interest in how its engines are performing so they are monitored. My understanding is that Rolls Royce would have been receiving data had Malaysian air signed up for monitoring, but they didn't. The equipment is there to monitor the engines, and that is what was making pings, or handshakes every hour. Had there been monitoring of the engines Immarsat would have had a lot more data then the 8 handshakes. An we would probably know a lot more about the fate of that plane. That the plane suffered fuel starvation is an assumption not a fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4UCorsair Posted June 25, 2014 Share Posted June 25, 2014 (edited) I did read the news, and my understanding of it was that the pings were from the system monitoring aircraft engines, via the Inmarsat satellite, to Rolls Royce, not from the plane. Currently aircraft are not tracked by any external means to my knowledge, but the engine manufacturer has an interest in how its engines are performing so they are monitored. Are you on crack? The inmarsat data was from communication equipnent IN the plane and not from roll royce which produces extremy good engines but does not know anything about satelite communication. The roll royce statement is btw denied by the malaysian authoroties. Google on mh370 rolls royce and you find some nice stories Sent from my GT-I9300 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app No I'm not, but from your irrational, aggressive response, perhaps you are. Rolls Royce offered the information that the engines suffered fuel exhaustion abeam Geraldton, and that information comes from their continuous monitoring of their engines. Why they would volunteer the information, without anything on which to base it, is not clear to me. I don't know if they know anything about satellites or not, and I'm not sure you can say that with any degree of certainty, but they don't have to if there is a system in place, provided by another company (Inmarsat) and for which they pay, that permits them to monitor the performance of their own engines in airline aircraft. How could the Malaysian authorities deny what RR are saying? Do they know the aircraft is somewhere other than in the southern ocean? You seem to be the font of all knowledge on this subject, so let's hear. I've read quite extensively on the subject, and seen many conflicting reports, but you seem to have the greater knowledge, so I'll defer to you. It's interesting that some of us hang our hats on something we read on the internet, written by someone we don't know, or may not have any knowledge about what he is writing, but fits what some of us think. I think we're probably all a little guilty of that at some stage. Edited June 26, 2014 by F4UCorsair Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckamuck Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 F4U: I am not saying you're wrong about this, but I would love to see a link confirming that Rolls Royce observed data showing fuel starvation, or even that they had engine monitoring in progress. If they were monitoring the engines, why do we only have 8 handshakes from Immarsat? The monitoring of engines must be by satellite link am I right? Was the engine telemetry part of the handshake then? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neverdie Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 F4U: I am not saying you're wrong about this, but I would love to see a link confirming that Rolls Royce observed data showing fuel starvation, or even that they had engine monitoring in progress. If they were monitoring the engines, why do we only have 8 handshakes from Immarsat? The monitoring of engines must be by satellite link am I right? Was the engine telemetry part of the handshake then? Yes, if the aircraft is fitted with that particular Boeing system the. it is transmitted via Satellite. Boeing Engine monitoring systems involve using sensors placed in various locations in an aircraft engine to gather information about the engines performance. The sensors provide real-time information to pilots on the operation of the engines and also capture data for analysis of the performance of the engine over time. The data captured reveals important information about the health of the engine. The Sensors monitor things like fuel flow, fuel used, fuel used to achieve certain power settings and so forth. They can also detect impending failures and notify both the crew and ground stations.The data from the sensors are accumulated and transmitted at regular intervals to ground stations monitored by the engine manufacturers. Alert messages indicating anomalies are instantly transmitted. It's a Boeing option, just like Toyota might have an option for leather seats or extra airbags etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4UCorsair Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 F4U: I am not saying you're wrong about this, but I would love to see a link confirming that Rolls Royce observed data showing fuel starvation, or even that they had engine monitoring in progress. If they were monitoring the engines, why do we only have 8 handshakes from Immarsat? The monitoring of engines must be by satellite link am I right? Was the engine telemetry part of the handshake then? I don't have one, nor have I gone looking, but that was announced on the news early/ish in the search. I pass it on as I heard it, not looking for a brawl, nor being provocative, merely quoting what was news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckamuck Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 I think it is pretty important F4U because if fuel starvation is a known fact, then a lot of scenarios get folded up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P45Mustang Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 Maybe check the pilot's simulator? Did he practice without fuel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4UCorsair Posted June 26, 2014 Share Posted June 26, 2014 The morning news announced that the aircraft was on autopilot until it suffered fuel exhaustion, and it then crashed. I have no idea how that has been deduced, but that is what the morning news is saying. I can't provide a link, nor will I be looking for one. Believe or disbelieve at your discretion.....it is, after all, just a news report. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
F4UCorsair Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 For what it's worth https://www.linkedin.com/today/post/article/20140622064233-90103575-police-probe-names-mh370-pilot-prime-suspect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now