| | | Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144 | APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!??
| IDW
User ID: 316817
10/24/2007 8:26 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Slap yourselves on the back, but keep in mind if you add both of your iq's together it does not compound to equal a greater number than my own.
Idiot + Idiot = Idiot, not 2Idiot |
| nomuse
User ID: 316856
10/24/2007 8:31 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
That's all you have to say? You lied in print, in this thread, and were caught at it. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 314242
10/24/2007 8:33 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
However, those who chose to believe that the Apollo Program was faked in part or total, attempt to argue their point by showing where the program as described violates science as currently understood and engineering as currently practiced. Quoting: nomuse 316856
That is an unproductive approach, if only because the public sees NASA as "the experts" and will reject the possibility that NASA is "incorrect."
The more productive approach is to make clear that NASA is just another branch of the military bureaucracy. Since military bureaucracies have a well-documented strong propensity to lie to the public, any claims from NASA should be treated with the same harsh skepticism that we ought to apply to, say, the American army's "explanations" of civilians murdered and tortured by American or American-controlled personnel in Iraq.
The best process we have in America to find the truth inside a resistant bureaucracy is to extract sworn testimony under cross-examination, starting from the "bottom" (ordinary low-level workers who may actually disagree with the bureaucracy's lies and who are therefore less likely to commit perjury to protect it) and offering immunity when necessary to obtain truthful testimony incriminating higher-ups. Evidence is admissible only if those who collected and preserved it testify under oath and cross-examination to its authenticity.
Thus, what we really need is a full and unbiased grand jury investigation of NASA for the possible perpetration of a massive fraud against the American people. If NASA actually landed on the moon in 1969, it should have no difficulty proving the accomplishment in court. If such landing did not occur as advertised, however, I think that a full grand jury investigation would eventually find enough whistleblowers to uncover the truth. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 316817
10/24/2007 8:35 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
[link to ecmweb.com]
Power quality questions continue to revolve around one underlying issue related to electronic equipment: its ability to withstand the effects of electrical interference. If equipment sensitivity was always well known and defined, then we would have few, if any, doubts. In this perfect world, we would also know with a high degree of certainty that a voltage sag of a known amplitude and duration would have either no effect or a significant impact on equipment. Unfortunately, we seldom are privy to such information. Therefore, the possible effects of neutral-to-ground (N-G) voltage are often left up in the air.
When you measure N-G voltage, the measurement yields a simple voltage differential, which a voltage potential on either the neutral conductor or grounding conductor may create. Furthermore, this differential may be a simple by-product of neutral return current — or may even be part of a complex common-mode voltage signal. The effects of these conditions vary greatly.
The simple question — “What is the effect of N-G voltage?” — isn't so simple because it depends upon the magnitude, mode of propagation, timing, energy/frequency content, and sensitivity of the equipment involved. Let's try to resolve this important and confusing question.
Voltage drop and the NEC
Fig. 1. Basic single-phase circuit and load. As the load draws current, a voltage drop develops across the supply and return conductors. N-G voltage measurements at the load will reflect the voltage drop across the return (neutral) conductor.
Figure 1 shows a simple diagram of a single-phase load connected to a voltage source. As the load draws current, a voltage drop develops across the supply and return conductors. N-G voltage measurements at the load will reflect the voltage drop across the return (neutral) conductor.
The National Electrical Code, in Sec. 210.19(A), FPN No.4, states: “Conductors for branch circuits as defined in Art. 100, sized to prevent a voltage drop exceeding 3% at the farthest outlet of power, heating, and lighting loads, or combination of such loads, and where the maximum total voltage drop on both feeders and branch circuits to the farthest outlet does not exceed 5%, provide reasonable efficiency of operation.” This amounts to a 6V drop in a 120V branch-circuit home run. Assuming equal losses in the supply and return conductors, then you should see an N-G voltage of 3V, which is a realistic condition.
Origins of required low N-G voltages
Some equipment installation specifications list extremely small values for acceptable N-G voltage, such as 0.5V to 1.0V. To meet these stringent requirements, you would usually install a dedicated transformer at the load, and/or run large gage wiring directly from the source N-G bond to the load.
Where did these extremely tight N-G voltage specifications come from? There could be a bit of hyperbole in these specifications, but there are some realistic origins. For instance, in the early 1980s, some equipment manufacturers installed power supply and motherboard grounding in configurations that made them extremely susceptible to earth/ground-referenced offset. In response, a few surge suppressor manufacturers introduced TVSS products with N-G components and extremely low transient voltage clamping levels — with disastrous consequences in certain cases. However, over time those design deficiencies were corrected — present-day test requirements usually prevent the wide-scale introduction of such products.
Figure 2 (click here to see Fig. 2) shows the basic diagram of a power supply system. What possible effect could neutral return losses have upon a system with this configuration? After all, there are no ground-referenced components on the input to the power supply that a voltage potential on the neutral conductor could upset. In fact, UL power supply tests reverse the polarity of voltages applied to a power supply. Consequently, the power supply must withstand 120V with respect to earth/ground for both normal and reverse polarities.
The voltage sensing and feedback circuitry also must meet electrical isolation requirements for safety purposes. The bond between the grounding of the system and the electronics occurs on the secondary of the high-frequency transformer inside the power supply or system. If the system is well designed, the effects of low-frequency voltage potentials appearing on the neutral conductor should have no adverse effects. |
| IDW
User ID: 316817
10/24/2007 8:36 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Slap yourselves on the back, but keep in mind if you add both of your iq's together it does not compound to equal a greater number than my own.
Idiot + Idiot = Idiot, not 2Idiot Quoting: IDW 316817
SHould be represnted thusly:
idiot/idiot= idiot |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 316817
10/24/2007 8:38 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
So is your computer from the 80's?
LMAO! |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
10/24/2007 8:45 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
And proven a direct liar.
He claimed to have tested three computers.
Pages later he insisted that not only hadn't he done so, he would never do so.
I said I tested three computers, and I did. I tested them to see if they would come on!
LMAO! You were had. I knew you were so arrogant you would jump to the conclusion you did and test your own, believing I had done so. If you want to call it a lie, go ahead, but I just took advantage of the fact that you are not too bright and dont pay close attention to detail. Quoting: IDW 316817
There you go again, changing definitions to try to suit your twisted logic.
What about your statement regarding the motherboard grounding...how are you going to try and twist that now that you've been shown to be completely wrong? |
| idw
User ID: 316817
10/24/2007 8:47 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
And proven a direct liar.
He claimed to have tested three computers.
Pages later he insisted that not only hadn't he done so, he would never do so.
I said I tested three computers, and I did. I tested them to see if they would come on!
LMAO! You were had. I knew you were so arrogant you would jump to the conclusion you did and test your own, believing I had done so. If you want to call it a lie, go ahead, but I just took advantage of the fact that you are not too bright and dont pay close attention to detail.
There you go again, changing definitions to try to suit your twisted logic.
What about your statement regarding the motherboard grounding...how are you going to try and twist that now that you've been shown to be completely wrong? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 88145
I have?
LMAO!
You are a DOLT |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
10/24/2007 8:48 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
So is your computer from the 80's?
LMAO! Quoting: Anonymous Coward 316817
Try explaining how you're not wrong. |
| nomuse
User ID: 316856
10/24/2007 8:48 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
However, those who chose to believe that the Apollo Program was faked in part or total, attempt to argue their point by showing where the program as described violates science as currently understood and engineering as currently practiced.
That is an unproductive approach, if only because the public sees NASA as "the experts" and will reject the possibility that NASA is "incorrect."
The more productive approach is to make clear that NASA is just another branch of the military bureaucracy. Since military bureaucracies have a well-documented strong propensity to lie to the public, any claims from NASA should be treated with the same harsh skepticism that we ought to apply to, say, the American army's "explanations" of civilians murdered and tortured by American or American-controlled personnel in Iraq.
The best process we have in America to find the truth inside a resistant bureaucracy is to extract sworn testimony under cross-examination, starting from the "bottom" (ordinary low-level workers who may actually disagree with the bureaucracy's lies and who are therefore less likely to commit perjury to protect it) and offering immunity when necessary to obtain truthful testimony incriminating higher-ups. Evidence is admissible only if those who collected and preserved it testify under oath and cross-examination to its authenticity.
Thus, what we really need is a full and unbiased grand jury investigation of NASA for the possible perpetration of a massive fraud against the American people. If NASA actually landed on the moon in 1969, it should have no difficulty proving the accomplishment in court. If such landing did not occur as advertised, however, I think that a full grand jury investigation would eventually find enough whistleblowers to uncover the truth. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 314242
The military does not own the scientific method.
NASA claims no stars should be visible in photographs taken on the surface of the Moon.
You want to cross-examine them?
Why not examine the claim. This is easy for an individual to verify; set a camera to the exposure settings of the scene, and see if stars appear on your photograph.
And let's look at this idea of yours. You claim a powerful, rich, bureaucracy with the full support of the Executive branch, can be best examined in a court setting? When they have the power and experience to manipulate that system? When the judicial branch itself has proven to be uncomfortably close to the executive?
I put it to you, that the court system is a far easier place for a conspiracy to lie than is the venue of reproducible experiment. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
10/24/2007 8:49 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
And proven a direct liar.
He claimed to have tested three computers.
Pages later he insisted that not only hadn't he done so, he would never do so.
I said I tested three computers, and I did. I tested them to see if they would come on!
LMAO! You were had. I knew you were so arrogant you would jump to the conclusion you did and test your own, believing I had done so. If you want to call it a lie, go ahead, but I just took advantage of the fact that you are not too bright and dont pay close attention to detail.
There you go again, changing definitions to try to suit your twisted logic.
What about your statement regarding the motherboard grounding...how are you going to try and twist that now that you've been shown to be completely wrong?
I have?
LMAO!
You are a DOLT Quoting: idw 316817
No, you certainly have done no such thing. It doesn't help to keep telling a lie...it does not become true if you say it enough. Try to refute the pages I presented. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
10/24/2007 8:51 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
What about your statement regarding the motherboard grounding...how are you going to try and twist that now that you've been shown to be completely wrong?
I have? Quoting: idw 316817
Yes, you have. |
| IDW
User ID: 316817
10/24/2007 8:51 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
So is your computer from the 80's?
LMAO!
Try explaining how you're not wrong. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 88145
To you?
IMPOSSIBLE |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
10/24/2007 8:54 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
So is your computer from the 80's?
LMAO!
Try explaining how you're not wrong.
IMPOSSIBLE Quoting: IDW 316817
I'm glad you know that. OK, 74444, here's another one for your list of things that IDW doesn't know...PC motherboards are grounded to the power ground. This argument's done. |
| IDW
User ID: 316817
10/24/2007 8:55 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
I have?
LMAO!
You are a DOLT Quoting: IDW
No, you certainly have done no such thing.. Quoting: Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
I have?
LMAO!
You are a DOLT Quoting: IDW
Yes, you have. Quoting: Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
MAke up your mind. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 316817
10/24/2007 8:57 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
You ARE a dolt. You contradict yourself on consecutive posts to suit your own needs, thats very unintelligent. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
10/24/2007 8:59 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Forgive me for not seeing the question mark on your first post.
What is REALLY unintelligent is saying something ridiculous such as...
"A COMPUTER MOTHERBOARD IS A HIGHLY SENSITIVE DC CIRCUITTHAT WOULD NEVER BE CONNECTED TO EARTH GROUND " |
| IDW
User ID: 316817
10/24/2007 9:04 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Forgive me for not seeing the question mark on your first post.
What is REALLY unintelligent is saying something ridiculous such as...
"A COMPUTER MOTHERBOARD IS A HIGHLY SENSITIVE DC CIRCUITTHAT WOULD NEVER BE CONNECTED TO EARTH GROUND " Quoting: Anonymous Coward 88145
The dc circuitry is not connected to earth ground. I gave you an detailed description of why above. The fact that earth ground paths exist at all in a desltop pcs motherboard is because the computer has a power supply input of 120vac. Laptops are obviously not earth grounded, how do THEY work?? Not take a simple lead and connect between the negative of your cmos battery and the grounded shell and get back with me! |
| nomuse
User ID: 316856
10/24/2007 9:10 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
"it's highly sensitive."
Yeah, that's a detailed description, all right.
And yet, you still won't risk one of your seven computers with an actual test.
Hey, if they're all as good as that Compaq Presario, you aren't risking much... |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
10/24/2007 9:31 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Forgive me for not seeing the question mark on your first post.
What is REALLY unintelligent is saying something ridiculous such as...
"A COMPUTER MOTHERBOARD IS A HIGHLY SENSITIVE DC CIRCUITTHAT WOULD NEVER BE CONNECTED TO EARTH GROUND "
The dc circuitry is not connected to earth ground. I gave you an detailed description of why above. The fact that earth ground paths exist at all in a desltop pcs motherboard is because the computer has a power supply input of 120vac. Laptops are obviously not earth grounded, how do THEY work?? Not take a simple lead and connect between the negative of your cmos battery and the grounded shell and get back with me! Quoting: IDW 316817
Firstly, the article you posted says absolutely nothing about PC motherboard DC circuitry. If you think it does, I invite you to try and explain it in detail (this ought to be good!).
Secondly, you didn't even look at the reference on PC power supplies:
"Power is provided through wires and connectors to the mother board and disk drives. There are positive and negative 12 volts direct current, +/-5VCD and ground. All voltages are in reference to chassis voltage (chassis ground). In other words, if you have a 230Watt power supply and touch the +12Volt connection and ground(any metal part of the case), the power supply will do its level best to provide your body with twelve volts at 230Watts."
So, do you still claim that DC circuits on the motherboard are not connected to the chassis? |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
10/24/2007 9:32 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
The fact that earth ground paths exist at all in a desltop pcs motherboard is because the computer has a power supply input of 120vac. Quoting: IDW 316817
So, now you acknowledge it as a FACT, yet a few pages ago you said it was impossible? Which is it? |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 314242
10/24/2007 9:44 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
I put it to you, that the court system is a far easier place for a conspiracy to lie than is the venue of reproducible experiment. Quoting: nomuse 316856
NASA has already lost its case in that venue. The alleged moon landing was never independently reproducible. |
| nomuse
User ID: 316856
10/24/2007 9:48 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
I put it to you, that the court system is a far easier place for a conspiracy to lie than is the venue of reproducible experiment.
NASA has already lost its case in that venue. The alleged moon landing was never independently reproducible. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 314242
Only by your peculiar definition of "reproducible."
Was the voyage of the Kon-Tiki a fake? No-one since has taken a balsa-wood boat across the Pacific. What about Amundsen? The only other expedition to walk to the South Pole died on the way back. Never been done since. Trieste? No human has gone where Augustus Picard went, not since.
But let's take something simpler.
Do the Pyramids exist?
No-one has made one since the last. If you talk to the Egyptian government they'd tell you they can't make one now. Reproducibility fails utterly on the Pyramids.
Yet, there they are. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
10/24/2007 9:51 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Just for good measure, here is another article from Intel about grounding of the heatsinks on their processors:
download.intel.com/design/PentiumIII/xeon/applnots/24525003.pdf
Also, from:
[link to discuss.extremetech.com]
"This helps with reducing RF interference (RFI) both into and out of the case; as the FCC requires. It is important to NOT use the fiber washers so you can establish a proper signal to chassis ground. Also, remember that the DC common (black) connections from the power supply establish the rail grounds for the +5v, +12v, etc. so signal grounds and rail grounds meet at the mobo."
From:
[link to www.fixya.com]
"Grounding, hard to mess up since the screws you use to mount the motherboard connect are what ground it to the chassis. The holes the screws pass through have exposed copper on the top edges, the heads of the steel screws make contact with the exposed copper and ground it direct to the chassis."
From an Aliance Systems server service manual:
www.alliancesystems.com/Documents/AX1000_Manual.pdf
"Metal screws provide an electrical contact to the motherboard ground to provide a continuous ground for the system." |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 314242
10/24/2007 9:52 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
NASA claims no stars should be visible in photographs taken on the surface of the Moon.
You want to cross-examine them?
Why not examine the claim. This is easy for an individual to verify; set a camera to the exposure settings of the scene, and see if stars appear on your photograph. Quoting: nomuse 316856
You must be an utter idiot. Your suggestion assumes that I myself can go to the moon to repeat the experiment. Neither I nor anyone else, including NASA, can do any such thing. Indeed, the strongest argument against NASA's boast is that no one has ever been able to reproduce it independently.
Besides, you assume that the verification of a single NASA assertion suffices to prove their entire account. False logic. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 314242
10/24/2007 9:56 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
You also assume, foolishly or maliciously, that the primary argument about seeing stars has to do with photographs; when actually, the primary issue is that the astronauts themselves assert that they didn't see any, or in other accounts they saw stars only on the dark side of the moon.
I will be happy to hear their sworn testimony in court, under cross-examination. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
10/24/2007 9:58 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
NASA claims no stars should be visible in photographs taken on the surface of the Moon.
You want to cross-examine them?
Why not examine the claim. This is easy for an individual to verify; set a camera to the exposure settings of the scene, and see if stars appear on your photograph.
You must be an utter idiot. Your suggestion assumes that I myself can go to the moon to repeat the experiment. Neither I nor anyone else, including NASA, can do any such thing. Indeed, the strongest argument against NASA's boast is that no one has ever been able to reproduce it independently.
Besides, you assume that the verification of a single NASA assertion suffices to prove their entire account. False logic. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 314242
You don't have to go to the moon to repeat the experiment. Set your camera's manual exposure settings for proper exposure of a brightly lit daylight scene in direct sunlight. Then, without changing the settings, see if you can take a shot of stars at night. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
10/24/2007 10:00 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
You also assume, foolishly or maliciously, that the primary argument about seeing stars has to do with photographs; when actually, the primary issue is that the astronauts themselves assert that they didn't see any, or in other accounts they saw stars only on the dark side of the moon.
I will be happy to hear their sworn testimony in court, under cross-examination. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 314242
Again, get your eyes used to bright sunlight and then within a couple of seconds, without allowing time for your eyes to adjust, go into a darked room and see if you can see a tiny faint light. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 88145
10/24/2007 10:01 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
You HB's are a real bunch of brainy guys, aren't you? Not a double digit IQ among you. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 314242
10/24/2007 10:06 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Do the Pyramids exist?
No-one has made one since the last. If you talk to the Egyptian government they'd tell you they can't make one now. Reproducibility fails utterly on the Pyramids.
Yet, there they are. Quoting: nomuse 316856
No ordinary human could say something as stupid as the above, so I have to take it as strong evidence that you are a paid shill.
But for the sake of naive readers...
Neither the existence of the Pyramids nor the existence of the moon is in question. Their existence is independently verifiable.
Particular hypotheses as to how the Pyramids were constructed are just that, mere hypotheses. Any attempt to prove any particular hypothesis must indeed include a demonstration--i.e., the building of a comparable pyramid from scratch. |
| | Page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 142, 143, 144 | |
|
