| | | 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 !!??
| Barls Knarkley
User ID: 28648
10/5/2007 9:50 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
" takes massive amounts of fuel to climb out of the Earth's atmosphere and speed up enough to remain in orbit rather than come crashing back to the ground.""
But very little fuel to go 243,000 miles after that.
Do you think we are all stupid?
"It takes a delta v of about 9.5 km/s to get into LEO. From there, it takes about an extra 4.1 km/s to get into lunar orbit, or about 5.7 km/s to get to the lunar surface. So getting into LEO gets you more than halfway there"
Like I said, you are always halfway there, in NASA speak. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 308090
Man, that's funny. Did you even read the figures in what I wrote and you quoted? |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 308090
10/5/2007 10:01 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Sure did.
Your Dilithium Crystals arent adding up...mate.
And the world sees it. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 91985
10/5/2007 10:47 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Did I forget anything...???
Well, I take issue with most of what you've said and you left out a lot more, but I'll settle for "where are those 13,000+ "missing" original Apollo video tapes?!"
"Sarkissian said the tapes were appropriately handled and archived in the mid-1970s after the hectic activity of the Apollo lunar landing era was over. “We are confident that they are stored at [NASA’s] Goddard Space Flight Center [in Greenbelt, Md.] … we just don’t know where precisely,” he told Space.com. It is important to note, Sarkissian added, that there is no inference of wrongdoing, incompetence or negligence on the part of NASA or its employees."
The U.S. military just threw out every murder charge from the civilian massacre at Hadditha in Iraq, Bush recently pardoned himself in advance of any war crime charges and NASA's press statements are more focused on absolving themselves from any "wrongdoing, incompetence or negligence" than answering the burning question, how the living hell could they "lose" every single tape from every single Apollo mission in what was purportedly humanity's greatest achievement?
For this alone, they should be officially declared one giant fraud on mankind.
And you sleazeballs should be ashamed of yourselves for defending these murderers, thieves and con-artists. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 91985
No takers? OK, I'll ante to the pot.
The Apollo 11 vehicle, or Saturn 5 was launched out of sight, then jettisoned into the South Atlantic, where all six rockets that were launched now reside. No astronauts were on board, of course. They were later dumped out of a C5A inside their command capsule which then floated to earth beneath it's red-and-white striped parachutes.
Once, a pilot and some passengers aboard a plane flying from San Francisco to Tokyo actually witnessed a capsule being dropped from the C5A.
The astronauts were floated on the "moon" by suspended wires, just like Peter Pan. There's even "moon footage" showing one of them being lifted to his feet after falling forward, which would be otherwise impossible.
"Moon rocks" are manufactured in special NASA ceramics laboratories with high-temperature ovens. The president of the University of British Columbia, David Strangway, was one of the guys in charge of inspecting the "moon rocks." Do a little research on what he thinks of them.
Did I forget anything...??? |
| Barls Knarkley
User ID: 28648
10/5/2007 11:17 PM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
The Apollo 11 vehicle, or Saturn 5 was launched out of sight, then jettisoned into the South Atlantic, where all six rockets that were launched now reside. No astronauts were on board, of course. They were later dumped out of a C5A inside their command capsule which then floated to earth beneath it's red-and-white striped parachutes. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 91985
What an interesting story. Of course, you have proof of this, no?
The Saturn upper stage plus Apollo stack was a bright naked eye object while it was in Earth orbit before the Trans Lunar Injection that sent them to the Moon. I mean it was really bright. People were told to look out for it, and many, many people saw it at exactly the time that was predicted. Numerous groups, both national and amateur, tracked the signals from the capsule all the way to the Moon. Whether you choose to believe there was anyone on board, there was undeniably a launch to the Moon.
I could go on. You have just made up a fairy story and have nothing to back it up. I can provide references to observations of every step of the whole process. You are entitled to your delusions, and boards like this certainly foster a feedback loop that lets you think that you are all swapping real information that can convince others, rather than being insulated from real standards of proof because the lies you tell are comfortable ones.
Once, a pilot and some passengers aboard a plane flying from San Francisco to Tokyo actually witnessed a capsule being dropped from the C5A. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 308090
Says who? Got a reference for that?
The astronauts were floated on the "moon" by suspended wires, just like Peter Pan. There's even "moon footage" showing one of them being lifted to his feet after falling forward, which would be otherwise impossible. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 308090
The often debunked Charlie Duke footage. If you want to go into this one in detail, let me know. Why is it impossible to lift someone to their feet? Particularly in a 1/6g environment?
"Moon rocks" are manufactured in special NASA ceramics laboratories with high-temperature ovens. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 308090
Bill Kaysing was the first hoax proponent to come out with this one. He never presented any evidence that such ovens could do what he stated, and there are several reasons why this is completely fallacious. Go ask a geologist. Zap pits, convection patterns and age are not something you can fake in an oven.
The president of the University of British Columbia, David Strangway, was one of the guys in charge of inspecting the "moon rocks." Do a little research on what he thinks of them. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 308090
He wrote a number of scientific papers based on his early study of the samples. Can you point me to where he states he has a problem with what he found? |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 308597
10/6/2007 5:48 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
" Can you point me to where he states he has a problem with what he found?"
Your research is up to you.
You are the believer. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 305177
10/6/2007 6:40 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
If the 1969 Armstrong/Aldrin landing was faked for political purposes, whatever...why Nixon did speech prepared in case they could not get back (the speech was recently released)? |
| Barls Knarkley
User ID: 28648
10/6/2007 7:41 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
" Can you point me to where he states he has a problem with what he found?"
Your research is up to you.
You are the believer. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 308597
Somebody else made the accusation. It's up to them to prove it. Because at the moment, lacking any evidence to the contrary, I reckon it's a lie. |
| FreshLaundry
User ID: 304962
10/6/2007 9:10 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
If the 1969 Armstrong/Aldrin landing was faked for political purposes, whatever...why Nixon did speech prepared in case they could not get back (the speech was recently released)? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 305177
In case they weren't "cooperative" and had to die.
Just like the Apollo 1 boys. Jeez, people were a lot more cooperative after that.
This post pending review.
[link to kindagamey.com] |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 91985
10/6/2007 9:44 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
RARE PHOTO
Yes, it's a rarely seen photo of THE SUN, taken from the lunar surface:
[link to aulis.com] |
| SpaceCadet
User ID: 16644
10/6/2007 6:33 PM
 | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
So how does a space ship propel itself in the 'empty vacuum of deep space' beyond the Earth's atmosphere?
As Below it states about Newton's Third Law-'How do they do it? The engines propel gas particles out the back of the space ship. Since every force has an equal and opposite force, the space ship will be propeled forwards.'
The problem with Newton's law at work here is that the gas particles are not working on/against any other external force, outer space is empty, it has no kickback to propel anything forward!
Newton's Third Law
[link to www.angelfire.com]
"The Third Law at first seems simple, but is a very important law. Everytime we interact with our surroundings we feel the Third Law. When you punch someone in the face your hand not only applies a force to the person's face, the person's face applies a force to your hand. Since the person's face is softer than your hand it suffers more from the interaction. The Third Law is very important for space travel. In the cold void of space their is no air for jets to suck or for propellers to churn, and yet space ships can manouver in a vacuum. How do they do it? The engines propel gas particles out the back of the space ship. Since every force has an equal and opposite force, the space ship will be proppeled forwards. Because of the First Law, space ships do not need very much fuel -- once they are moving they will stay in motion. This law can get overly complex when all factors are calculated but to keep it simple we will not consider factors that do not play a massive role in the "action, oposite and equal re-action law." |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 219036
10/7/2007 2:18 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
So how does a space ship propel itself in the 'empty vacuum of deep space' beyond the Earth's atmosphere?
As Below it states about Newton's Third Law-'How do they do it? The engines propel gas particles out the back of the space ship. Since every force has an equal and opposite force, the space ship will be propeled forwards.'
The problem with Newton's law at work here is that the gas particles are not working on/against any other external force, outer space is empty, it has no kickback to propel anything forward!
Newton's Third Law
[ link to www.angelfire.com]
"The Third Law at first seems simple, but is a very important law. Everytime we interact with our surroundings we feel the Third Law. When you punch someone in the face your hand not only applies a force to the person's face, the person's face applies a force to your hand. Since the person's face is softer than your hand it suffers more from the interaction. The Third Law is very important for space travel. In the cold void of space their is no air for jets to suck or for propellers to churn, and yet space ships can manouver in a vacuum. How do they do it? The engines propel gas particles out the back of the space ship. Since every force has an equal and opposite force, the space ship will be proppeled forwards. Because of the First Law, space ships do not need very much fuel -- once they are moving they will stay in motion. This law can get overly complex when all factors are calculated but to keep it simple we will not consider factors that do not play a massive role in the "action, oposite and equal re-action law."
Are you a complete troll? You claim rockets need something to push against, and then quote something in support that says exactly opposite! Rockets DO travel into space, so maybe they aren't lying and you are just an idiot. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 143875
10/7/2007 2:20 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
RARE PHOTO
Yes, it's a rarely seen photo of THE SUN, taken from the lunar surface:
[ link to aulis.com] Quoting: Anonymous Coward 91985
How do you like this unusual looking sun? |
| Barls Knarkley
User ID: 28648
10/7/2007 4:58 AM | | Move over, Rover
User ID: 309054
10/7/2007 5:20 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
I particularly like the "trackless rover" photographs.
[link to aulis.com]
 |
| Barls Knarkley
User ID: 28648
10/7/2007 5:43 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Quite a few footprints and disturbed dirt there. Given the photo was taken from the LM, it is obviously looking at the rover after it has been parked for the day. The astronauts would have dismounted from the rover and moved around it removing samples and so on. They will have obliterated the rover tracks.
Look at the high resolution scan of the photo in question:
ftp://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/ISD_highres_AS17_AS17-140-21354.JPG
I can still see one or two traces of the rover tracks in the disturbed soil behind it. The rest is astronaut footprints. What's so odd about that? |
| Move over, Rover
User ID: 309054
10/7/2007 5:58 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Quite a few footprints and disturbed dirt there. Given the photo was taken from the LM, it is obviously looking at the rover after it has been parked for the day. The astronauts would have dismounted from the rover and moved around it removing samples and so on. They will have obliterated the rover tracks.
Look at the high resolution scan of the photo in question:
ftp://eol.jsc.nasa.gov/ISD_highres_AS17_AS17-140-21354.JPG
I can still see one or two traces of the rover tracks in the disturbed soil behind it. The rest is astronaut footprints. What's so odd about that? Quoting: Barls Knarkley 28648
There is no sign of any track marks IMMEDIATELY behind the right-rear wheel and, most tellingly, BETWEEN the rear and front wheels. Did the astronauts make sure to scuff their boots all over that area? It doesn't even look like it's been disturbed. |
| Move over, Rover
User ID: 309054
10/7/2007 6:03 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
More "trackless rover" shots;
[link to www.aulis.com]
Very hard to argue away, wouldn't you say? Well no, I suppose YOU wouldn't, Barls. I'll be interested in your comments. |
| Move over, Rover
User ID: 309054
10/7/2007 6:07 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
More "trackless rover" shots;
[ link to www.aulis.com]
Very hard to argue away, wouldn't you say? Well no, I suppose YOU wouldn't, Barls. I'll be interested in your comments.
Also very interesting, further down the page in the link I previously posted, is a picture of Conrad being "lowered into place". The lack of bootmarks is damning. How the hell did he get there if there are no boot tracks leading to his position. Did God just magic his ass up there?
You decide.
 |
| SpaceCadet
User ID: 16644
10/7/2007 6:09 AM
| | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Are you a complete troll? You claim rockets need something to push against, and then quote something in support that says exactly opposite! Rockets DO travel into space, so maybe they aren't lying and you are just an idiot. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 219036
No, I havn't graduated to being a 'complete troll' as yet. But tell me, since you have become a complete troll, does it leak under your bridge? |
| Barls Knarkley
User ID: 28648
10/7/2007 6:10 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
There is no sign of any track marks IMMEDIATELY behind the right-rear wheel Quoting: Move over, Rover 309054
You mean immediately in front of the rear equipment rack, where most of their attention would be concentrated when unloading the rover? What a surprise.
Keep in mind also that it is not just the footprints which would obliterate the tracks, but also the dirt that they kick up that lands outside the footprints. If you watch any of the EVA footage you will see just how far they can kick dirt with every step.
and, most tellingly, BETWEEN the rear and front wheels. Did the astronauts make sure to scuff their boots all over that area? Quoting: Move over, Rover 309054
Given you can't see half of that region because it is occluded by the LM RCS thruster, I'm not sure you can accurately judge that. They moved all the way around the rover during checkout, if you watch the video you will see how much dirt they can move in doing so.
It doesn't even look like it's been disturbed. Quoting: Move over, Rover 309054
What are you talking about? There's a whomping great footprint immediately behind the front wheel, for a start. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 28648
10/7/2007 6:21 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
More "trackless rover" shots;
[ link to www.aulis.com]
Very hard to argue away, wouldn't you say? Well no, I suppose YOU wouldn't, Barls. I'll be interested in your comments.
Also very interesting, further down the page in the link I previously posted, is a picture of Conrad being "lowered into place". The lack of bootmarks is damning. How the hell did he get there if there are no boot tracks leading to his position. Did God just magic his ass up there?
You decide.
Jack White's photo studies are well known, as his his complete refusal to acknowledge any counterarguments. Evan Burton at the Education Forum has done an extensive rebuttal of Mr White's claims:
[link to educationforum.ipbhost.com]
In it, he raises a very important point - why would they do it the way White suggests? Why lower the rover in on a crane rather than just roll it onto the set? Why do the same with Conrad when he can just walk? Are these 'lower them in on a wire' procedures used in any movie productions? What would be the point?
It's odd that on the one hand you will find HBs pointing to the showers of dust kicked up with every step and use them in arguments about whether it was shot in 1/6g or here on Earth, but then deny that this dirt could possibly obscure anything it falls on. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 143875
10/7/2007 7:14 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Quoting: Barls Knarkley 28648
Your studied nonchalance is amusing, to say the least.
Well, of course it's the sun! Don't all suns glow from an interior bulb and appear 6x larger instead of 3.66X smaller than the Earth as seen from the lunar surface?
Barls. Seriously. I'm trying to be magnanimous. This is your cue to offer your humble congratulations, admit your defeat and start taking what governments say with a grain of salt. I promise not to gloat. I'm sure this isn't TPTB's worst deception and it's certainly not unique to America. It's finally time to admit that much of the world is fake, including your beloved Apollo missions.
Maybe Duncan could use some help with the chemtrail threads... |
| Barls Knarkley
User ID: 28648
10/7/2007 7:36 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Well, of course it's the sun! Don't all suns glow from an interior bulb and appear 6x larger instead of 3.66X smaller than the Earth as seen from the lunar surface? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 143875
You obviously didn't read the links I posted.
Given all you've done is post links and summarize their contents, why should I go to any more effort than that? If you have problems with the explanation, tell us, and we'll examine it in more detail. |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 51053
10/7/2007 7:40 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Seen and touched the hardware. It's real.
Understand the science. It's valid.
I'm in the biz.
EC |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 143875
10/7/2007 8:32 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
Quoting: Barls Knarkley 28648
My apologies. I didn't realize you'd been previously ridiculed about this:
Lens flare ?!??!! ... Unbelievable ! ... I was wondering what silly excuse you boys would come with for this one ... Did you think this one up all by yourselves, or did you run to your think tank pals at clavius moon base for some back up ?
Since when is "lens flare" the exact same exact shape as a light bulb ?
Why don't you guys go a take an "overexposed" picture of the real sun and see if you can match the "lens flare " in this phony Apollo photo ..
You're right about one thing Dave [Barls]... This photo wasn't produced by whistleblowers , it was produced by NASA's photographers on the Apollo moon set ... and you're right about something else too ... No one knew over 30 years ago what type of computer enhancement technology would come along to expose nasa's faked 'moon' photos .
Are you sure this lightbulb shaped image wasn't caused by "a smudge on the visor" ? .. LOL
Look at it again ... It's a spotlight with a light bulb in the middle of it .. and the phony Apollo photos have been ... BUSTED !
Indeed. Busted big time. So significantly and indisputably that any further attempts to defend this fakery that's now been proven beyond a reasonable doubt will make you appear obsessively rigid and troll-like instead of being a man and admitting that at the very least, this particular NASA photo is as phony as a three-dollar bill.
If you can't do that, then I see no reason why anyone should discuss anything further with you, because it'll demonstrate that even in the face of obvious, indisputable proof, you'll continue to advance "facts" and debunking based on little more than faith, which is more akin to religion than evidentiary science.
When no amount of evidence is ever sufficient, then it's time to admit that your arguments are based solely on beliefs. We'd actually reached that point some time earlier, but you stubbornly persisted and I knew it meant a lot.
Really though, it's OK. Just no longer worthy of debate. |
| Barls Knarkley
User ID: 28648
10/7/2007 8:41 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
I didn't realize you took Duane's burblings as serious rebuttal. I note you're still just pasting from somebody else's work. Why should I lift a finger to do more than that?
Again, the features of your so-called bulb are perfectly aligned with the rest of the lens flare and the center of the frame, prefectly consistent with it being the sun, a lense flare, and overexposure.
For that to be a light, a lot of work would have to go into aligning the camera and the internal features of the light. They would have to rotate the light on its axis to keep the bulb holder perfectly aligned with the center of the frame, for each shot. Why the hell would they do that? Why would they be taking pictures of a spotlight in the first place? Quoting: Education Forum |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 305177
10/7/2007 9:04 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
I didn't realize you took Duane's burblings as serious rebuttal. I note you're still just pasting from somebody else's work. Why should I lift a finger to do more than that?
Again, the features of your so-called bulb are perfectly aligned with the rest of the lens flare and the center of the frame, prefectly consistent with it being the sun, a lense flare, and overexposure.
For that to be a light, a lot of work would have to go into aligning the camera and the internal features of the light. They would have to rotate the light on its axis to keep the bulb holder perfectly aligned with the center of the frame, for each shot. Why the hell would they do that? Why would they be taking pictures of a spotlight in the first place? Quoting: Barls Knarkley 28648
Barls,
You're banging your head against a brick wall arguing with the 'moon landings were faked' die-hards. They have no evidence but that's not going to stop them!
All you moon landings hoax believers - are you saying all the moon landings were faked? If they were, for what purpose? There was no "race to the moon" - it was a one-horse show with Uncle Sam as the only runner. The Russians didn't leave the starting blocks. Hardly a great propaganda coup when no one else is even trying to compete. It seems like a vast amount of efforts to repeatedly pretend to land people on the Moon just to get one up on the USSR.
Just a thought moon hoax fans - have you consider you might have been duped yourselves into endlessly recycling this evidence-free nonsense? |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 143875
10/7/2007 9:06 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
I'm sorry you're so invested in trying to defend what everyone can plainly see is an obvious fraud that you'll continue with your obsessive dishonesty. So much for the respectful poster who decided to give you the benefit of the doubt rather than ascribe darker motives to your efforts.
But from now on, I'll let Karma and others deal with your disingenuous trolling. C ya! |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 143875
10/7/2007 9:15 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
That last post was directed towards Barls.
All you moon landings hoax believers - are you saying all the moon landings were faked? Quoting: Anonymous Coward 305177
No genius, I'm trying to prove this is really the sun:
[link to aulis.com]
Lemme guess, you believe JFK was assassinated by a lone gunman, Saddam had WMDs and 9/11 happened like the government said? |
| Anonymous Coward
User ID: 132975
10/7/2007 11:45 AM | | Re: APOLLO MOON LANDINGS ------- FAKED OR REAL !!?? | Quote |
How did the the Lunar Rover leave tracks in front of the LEM when it is clearly still in its original packaging?
[link to www.aulis.com]
I can't imagine how the debunkers will explain this, but they'll surely try! |
| | 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 | |
|
