Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Knowledge and How-To


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 01-16-2005, 12:08 AM   #81 (permalink)
My custom title's the shit!
 
Zephyr66's Avatar
 
Location: Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by LLL2
America system is pretty easy though

8oz=1 cup
2 cups=1 pint
2 pints=1 quart
4 quarts = 1 gallon

16oz=one pound
2000 pounds = 1 ton

but the metric system is a billion times easier than that, you can't get much easier than multiples of ten. for example, even with your "easy" conversions, it would still take too much calculation to convert... say... oz to gallons. with the metric system, you would just need to divide it by a multiple of 10
Zephyr66 is offline  
Old 01-16-2005, 06:32 AM   #82 (permalink)
Minion of the scaléd ones
 
Tophat665's Avatar
 
Location: Northeast Jesusland
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crisis
If beer needs the metric system then it is without question the right way of measuring.
Now don't be silly. Beer is to be dispensed in Pints. There is not other civilized way to drink a beer (no, litre steins are not civilized). If I had a scale that did Lbs, Oz, and Grains, then I wouln't bother with Grams at all.
__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns.
Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.
Tophat665 is offline  
Old 01-16-2005, 09:14 AM   #83 (permalink)
Banned
 
piesen's Avatar
 
Location: WA
I grew up in a country that uses the Metric system and when i came to the USA I had a few problems, but they are all gone and foot and inches are not that bad at all, allthough weight is a different issue all together the temps I have down pretty good even on the freezing side -40C is -40F lol


Easier
Read this

meter

The meter (abbreviation, m; the British spelling is metre) is the International System of Units (SI) unit of displacement or length. One meter is the distance traveled by a ray of electromagnetic (EM) energy through a vacuum in 1/299,792,458 (3.33564095 x 10-9) of a second. The meter was originally defined as one ten-millionth (0.0000001 or 10-7) of the distance, as measured over the earth's surface in a great circle passing through Paris, France, from the geographic north pole to the equator.

One meter is a little more than three English feet, or about 39.37 inches. One foot is approximately 0.3048 meter. There are about 1609 meters in a statute mile. The official span was at one time formally defined as the separation between two scratches on a platinum bar in Paris. This was, of course, intended mainly for show, and not for use in the laboratory.

Power-of-10 prefix multipliers facilitate the derivation of other, often more convenient, distance units from the meter. One centimeter (cm) is equal to 0.01 m, one millimeter (mm) is equal to 0.001 m, and one kilometer (km) is equal to 1000 m. These units are found in nonscientific as well as scientific literature. Smaller units are the realm of the scientist and engineer. One micrometer (symbolized ?m or ?), also called a micron, is equal to 0.000001 (10-6) m. One nanometer (nm) is equal to 10-9 m. One Angström unit (symbolized Ä) is equal to 10-10 m, or 0.1 nm.

The meter and its kin are used to specify the wavelengths of EM fields. The so-called radio spectrum occupies an informally defined range of wavelengths from roughly a millimeter (microwaves) to several tens of kilometers (myriametric waves). A 3-m radio wave falls near the middle of the standard FM (frequency modulation) broadcast band; a 300-m radio wave is near the middle of the standard AM (amplitude-modulation) broadcast band. The range of visible light wavelengths is from approximately 390 nm (violet) to 770 nm (red). The speed of EM-field propagation in a vacuum, to nine significant figures, is 2.99792458 x 108 meters per second. In this sense, the meter can be derived from the second if the latter unit has been previously defined in absolute terms; one meter is the distance a ray of light travels through a vacuum in 3.33564095 x 10-9 second.

In engineering applications, and also in an everyday sense, the term meter refers to any instrument used to measure the magnitude of a quantity. Examples include the volume-unit (VU) meter in home audio systems, the ammeter to measure electric current, and the kilowatt-hour meter to measure electrical energy consumed over a period of time.

Last edited by piesen; 01-16-2005 at 10:56 AM..
piesen is offline  
Old 01-16-2005, 11:38 AM   #84 (permalink)
Tilted
 
Location: Seattle, WA
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeePeeS'r
I think now, its just too late. Imagine all the databases, property deeds, road signs, standards, etc that would have to be changed. And that is just in my scope. It would cost billions of dollars to enact, and billions more to correct mistakes/transformation errors that would come along with it.
we made a mess we can not clean up ourselves. it's very american in a way that we are very individualistic.
derektor is offline  
Old 01-17-2005, 10:14 AM   #85 (permalink)
Addict
 
sashime76's Avatar
 
Location: Hoosier State
Does anyone know in terms of ratio, what percentage of countries (in the world) use Metric vs Standard? It's just plain dumb to have two sets of tools, units when you work on something. Don't US scientists and engineers also use Metric?

Metric bases on 10-increment, Standard - anything goes???? 2 pints to a quart (2), 4 quarts to a gallon (4), 12 inches to a foot (12), 3 feet to a yard (3), 5280 feet to a mile (5280!). Now for currency, it's a perfect 10-increment!?
sashime76 is offline  
Old 01-18-2005, 08:54 AM   #86 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Location: Top of the World, Mom!
Quote:
Originally Posted by sashime76
Don't US scientists and engineers also use Metric?
I think they do. But it's sad that you have to be a rocket scientist to understand the benifits of the metric system
__________________
Live life like you're gonna die, beacause you're gonna!

- William Shatner.
Thermopyle is offline  
Old 01-19-2005, 05:05 AM   #87 (permalink)
Pip
Likes Hats
 
Pip's Avatar
 
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Quote:
Originally Posted by piesen
One Angström unit (symbolized Ä) is equal to 10-10 m, or 0.1 nm.
It's Å actually, as in Ångström.
Pip is offline  
Old 01-19-2005, 05:55 AM   #88 (permalink)
plays well with others
 
kulrblind's Avatar
 
Location: Canada
Quote:
Originally Posted by ICER
So. if its 10c outside. Useing your conversion method it would be in the ballpark of 52' (10+10+32=52)) or jacket weather.
Not here. That's short-sleeve weather, baby! Woohooo!
kulrblind is offline  
Old 01-19-2005, 09:17 AM   #89 (permalink)
Addict
 
sashime76's Avatar
 
Location: Hoosier State
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thermopyle
I think they do. But it's sad that you have to be a rocket scientist to understand the benifits of the metric system
Rocket scientist??? Perhaps not, ANY engineer should know how to measure in Metric, and the technicians. Don't think we are too old to learn new tricks, are we?

sashime76 is offline  
Old 01-19-2005, 09:41 AM   #90 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Location: Top of the World, Mom!
Quote:
Originally Posted by sashime76
Rocket scientist??? Perhaps not, ANY engineer should know how to measure in Metric, and the technicians. Don't think we are too old to learn new tricks, are we?

I dont know, are you?
__________________
Live life like you're gonna die, beacause you're gonna!

- William Shatner.
Thermopyle is offline  
Old 01-19-2005, 12:09 PM   #91 (permalink)
Everything's better with bacon
 
SaltPork's Avatar
 
Location: In your local grocer's freezer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaniFaye
Why should we have to switch? You move to a different country you have to learn different things....language and money....weights and measures are no different.

That would be like me complaining that all countries should use the same money conversions
How very ethno/geocentric of you.

It would make commerce easier, cut down costs of manufacturing because everyone would be using the same units of measure (think speedometers, bolts, plans, etc.). I'm sure there would be other benefits too, but I'm not an economist. You can't just say, "My house, my rules" anymore. The world is a much smaller place now more than ever and it's only going to get smaller.

With regard to the money conversions, didn't 90% of Europe agree to merge all their currency?? You must have heard of the Euro. More and more countries over there want to be part of the European Union for one big reason, economic stability. Some would argue that there is a culture shift due to the money being changed resulting in some nationalistic identity loss, but those detractors aren't fervent, except maybe in the UK, which is still using the Pound.

I wish the US would convert to the metric system. It would make the traveling I do that much easier. Just going north to Canada is a challenge sometimes, let alone going to Europe. But I make do. Having those experiences has made me a stronger advocate for the metric system. I give it another 5-10 years before the matter is broached again. Remember that Ford attempted to convert the country back in the 70's, but the measure fell flat on it's face. As Americans become more global, they will embrace the idea of a change a little bit less hesitantly. Will the conversion be painful? Probably. But no one ever said that change was easy.
__________________
It was like that when I got here....I swear.
SaltPork is offline  
Old 01-19-2005, 12:22 PM   #92 (permalink)
Getting it.
 
Charlatan's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: Lion City
As someone stated... the US already is a Metric nation... It just isn't being enforced.
__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke
Charlatan is offline  
Old 01-19-2005, 02:59 PM   #93 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zephyr66
but the metric system is a billion times easier than that, you can't get much easier than multiples of ten. for example, even with your "easy" conversions, it would still take too much calculation to convert... say... oz to gallons. with the metric system, you would just need to divide it by a multiple of 10

Maybe I like the US system because it's easier to measure when you have measuring tape.Like alot of people been saying.
LLL2 is offline  
Old 01-19-2005, 05:00 PM   #94 (permalink)
it's jam
 
splck's Avatar
 
Location: Lowerainland BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by LLL2
Maybe I like the US system because it's easier to measure when you have measuring tape.Like alot of people been saying.
Imperial might seem easier to you because you may not be used to the metric system. I use both and am comfortable with both. That said, the metric system is much simpler to use.
what's easier?
16mm + 23mm =?
or
13/16 of an inch + 9/32 of an inch =?
__________________
nice line eh?
splck is offline  
Old 01-19-2005, 05:23 PM   #95 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by splck
Imperial might seem easier to you because you may not be used to the metric system. I use both and am comfortable with both. That said, the metric system is much simpler to use.
what's easier?
16mm + 23mm =?
or
13/16 of an inch + 9/32 of an inch =?


Damn you got me,yeah guess you guys are right.

let me give you the answers so people don't think i don't know.

39mm
35/32 = 1 3/32
LLL2 is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 08:02 AM   #96 (permalink)
Insane
 
AngelicVampire's Avatar
 
Umm neither is much harder... its simple maths there...
AngelicVampire is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 11:47 AM   #97 (permalink)
Crazy
 
I know,but there more steps with the fraction.
LLL2 is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 01:53 PM   #98 (permalink)
it's jam
 
splck's Avatar
 
Location: Lowerainland BC
Quote:
Originally Posted by AngelicVampire
Umm neither is much harder... its simple maths there...
No one said they were hard, just that one is easier than the other.
__________________
nice line eh?
splck is offline  
Old 01-20-2005, 03:19 PM   #99 (permalink)
#1 Irish Fan
 
heccubusiv's Avatar
 
Location: The Burgh
as a pharmacuetical scientist in training, all i use is the metric system, no one wants a pint of medication or a gallon of fluid. Its just so much easier and less fool proof
__________________
Fuck Ohio
heccubusiv is offline  
Old 01-21-2005, 05:43 AM   #100 (permalink)
Minion of the scaléd ones
 
Tophat665's Avatar
 
Location: Northeast Jesusland
Quote:
Originally Posted by heccubusiv
as a pharmacuetical scientist in training, all i use is the metric system, no one wants a pint of medication or a gallon of fluid. Its just so much easier and less fool proof
Beg to differ. All depends on what you're medicating....
<img src="http://ip.rhps.org/gallery/sn/01/ed-yelling.jpg">
and the prescription...
<img src="http://www.brunningandprice.co.uk/images/beers/8.jpg">
That should be prescribed by the pint or gallon. (Take 8 pints before bedtime.)
__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns.
Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.
Tophat665 is offline  
Old 01-21-2005, 01:35 PM   #101 (permalink)
Pip
Likes Hats
 
Pip's Avatar
 
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Was that supposed to be an argument for or against the metric system?
Pip is offline  
Old 01-21-2005, 03:37 PM   #102 (permalink)
Minion of the scaléd ones
 
Tophat665's Avatar
 
Location: Northeast Jesusland
It's a silly argument.

Look - the people who need metric, use metric. Folks who have to do a lot of quick math with measurements. Folks who have engineering tools instead of woodworking tools. This is a good thing. Folks who don't actually need to change the way they think use what they have always used - this is also a good thing because we don't have to spend a buttload of money (that would be two shitloads - two metric shitloads make nothing. A thousand make a Kiloshit, though.) changing signage and textbooks.

So why get worked up over this? It's really not very important.
__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns.
Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.
Tophat665 is offline  
Old 01-22-2005, 07:13 PM   #103 (permalink)
Crazy
 
Location: Top of the World, Mom!
Life goes on with or without the metric system, but it's a hell a lot of easier with it....
__________________
Live life like you're gonna die, beacause you're gonna!

- William Shatner.
Thermopyle is offline  
Old 01-24-2005, 02:24 PM   #104 (permalink)
Crazy
 
trib767's Avatar
 
Location: London, UK
The Irish have just (20th January) changed all speed limits from Mph to Kph.
trib767 is offline  
Old 01-24-2005, 05:47 PM   #105 (permalink)
Minion of the scaléd ones
 
Tophat665's Avatar
 
Location: Northeast Jesusland
trib767, this is true. They also banned smoking in the whole country. There's a reason there are almost as many Irish jokes as Polish jokes.
__________________
Light a man a fire, and he will be warm while it burns.
Set a man on fire, and he will be warm for the rest of his life.
Tophat665 is offline  
Old 01-24-2005, 09:07 PM   #106 (permalink)
Insane
 
Location: Houston
In my engineering classes at school we use both English system units and metric units. Metric units are ALOT easier to work with because the conversion factor is simple a factor of 10.
Here is the unusual part though...
The English system uses pounds for weight, and a pound is actually a force measurement. Remember that there is a difference between weight and mass. Mass is always constant and weight depends on gravity.
As a result, a pound and a kilogram are not actually the same thing. Infact this is the one thing that really annoys me about the english system.
We have sort of a joke going about how the users of the metric system don't go into a store and buy a Newton of potatoes because that would be absurd. (The Newton being the SI unit of force and is 1 kg*m/s^2) A pound is 1 slug*ft/s^2 with a slug being the english system measurement of mass. This is of course in accordance with Newton's Second Law of F = ma.

To compensate for this the EE (English Engineering system) has developed two very odd units, the pound mass (lbm) and the pound force (lbf) I hate both of those units and I hate the EE system. Its a stupid hybrid between the old English System and the metric system. Its stupid and I hate it. Its very annoying to have to convert between its own units and metric units.

Unfortunatley we are forced to learn to use all sets of units because the industry in the US uses the English System units and when engineers do things for industry we need to be able to convert all of these units.

I think of the English System as the measurement system for the "common people" in the US and the metric system for math and science and of course...the rest of the world.
supersix2 is offline  
Old 01-25-2005, 11:16 AM   #107 (permalink)
Junkie
 
kutulu's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by supersix2
As a result, a pound and a kilogram are not actually the same thing. Infact this is the one thing that really annoys me about the english system.
No, they are the same thing. You are just getting lbf and lb mixed up. The imperial system just uses two different units for mass.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force#I...force_and_mass

Quote:
Imperial units of force and mass
The relationship F=m·a mentioned above may also be used with non-metric units. If those units do not form a consistent set of units, the more general form F=k·m·a must be used, where the constant k is a conversion factor dependent upon the units used.

For example, in imperial engineering units, F is in "pounds force" or "lbf", m is in "pounds mass" or "lb", and a is in feet per second squared. However, in this particular system, you need to use the more general form above, usually written F=m·a/gc with the constant normally used for this purpose gc = 32.174 lb·ft/(lbf·s2) equal to the reciprocal of the k above.

As with the kilogram, the pound is colloquially used as both a unit of mass and a unit of force. 1 lbf is the force required to accelerate 1 lb at 32.174 ft per second squared, since 32.174 ft per second squared is the standard acceleration due to terrestrial gravity.

Another imperial unit of mass is the slug, defined as 32.174 lb. It is the mass that accelerates by one foot per second squared when a force of one lbf is exerted on it.

When the acceleration of free fall is equal to that used to define pounds force (now usually 9.80665 m/s²), the magnitude of the mass in pounds equals the magnitude of the force due to gravity in pounds force. However, even at sea level on Earth, the actual acceleration of free fall is quite variable, over 0.53% more at the poles than at the equator. Thus, a mass of 1.0000 lb at sea level at the Equator exerts a force due to gravity of 0.9973 lbf, whereas a mass of 1.000 lb at sea level at the poles exerts a force due to gravity of 1.0026 lbf. The normal average sea level acceleration on Earth (World Gravity Formula 1980) is 9.79764 m/s², so on average at sea level on Earth, 1.0000 lb will exert a force of 0.9991 lbf.

The equivalence 1 lb = 0.453 592 37 kg is always true, anywhere in the universe. If you borrow the acceleration which is official for defining kilograms force to define pounds force as well, then the same relationship will hold between pounds-force and kilograms-force (an old non-SI unit which we still see used). If a different value is used to define pounds force, then the relationship to kilograms force will be slightly different—but in any case, that relationship is also a constant anywhere in the universe. What is not constant throughout the universe is the amount of force in terms of pounds-force (or any other force units) which 1 lb will exert due to gravity.

By analogy with the slug, there is a rarely used unit of mass called the "metric slug". This is the mass that accelerates at one metre per second squared when pushed by a force of one [Kilogram force|kgf]]. An item with a mass of 10 kg has a mass of 1.01972661 metric slugs (= 10 kg divided by 9.80665 kg per metric slug). This unit is also known by various other names such as the hyl, TME (from a German acronym), and mug (from metric slug).

Another unit of force called the poundal (pdl) is defined as the force that accelerates 1 lbm at 1 foot per second squared. Given that 1 lbf = 32.174 lb times one foot per second squared, we have 1 lbf = 32.174 pdl.

In conclusion, we have the following conversions:

1 kgf (kilopond kp) = 9.80665 newtons
1 metric slug = 9.80665 kg
1 lbf = 32.174 poundals
1 slug = 32.174 lb
1 kgf = 2.2046 lbf
Good luck in engineering school. Make sure you know your imperial units. Chances are pretty good that you will almost always use imperial and rarely use SI. That's how it is for me and most of the people I know.
kutulu is offline  
Old 01-25-2005, 11:22 AM   #108 (permalink)
Insane
 
Location: Houston
Actually the pound that normal people use to measure things is a force measurement. You are correct that in the Imperial Engineering System or the English Engineering system there is a difference between a lbf and a lbm and I did say that in my topic.

However when you step on the scale and measure yourself in pounds you are finding your weight and not your mass and that means that pounds are a force measurement.
supersix2 is offline  
Old 01-25-2005, 03:21 PM   #109 (permalink)
Junkie
 
kutulu's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by supersix2
Actually the pound that normal people use to measure things is a force measurement.
And so is the kilogram measurement you see on the scales. The factor g/gc is equal to 1 kgf/kgm or 1 lbf/lbm. As a result, on Earth an object with a 1kg mass weighs 1kg force. The f subscript is just dropped because for common everyday applications it doesn't need to be there. Read to the bottom of the link I posted previously, they briefly touch on kgf as if it is rarely used but when was the last time you saw a scale give a reading in newtons? They all say kg (meaning kgf).

Therefore, your mass and weight both have the same numeric value, even if the units are different. Kgf is not an si unit but it is a unit derived from the metric system is used more often in everyday life. It really causes havoc when you have to remember when to add in the gc factor.

It all works because we all live on the same planet and even though the acceleration due to gravity is higher in Death Valley than it is at the top of Mount Everest, it's not enough of a difference to make it a gross inaccuracy.

I rememeber back in my lab days we had an instructor that liked to screw with us. He had pressure guages that represented all sorts of units and he'd switch them around too. There might be 4 guages and they'd all have different units (psi, lb/ft2, kg/m2, kg/cm2).

Last edited by kutulu; 01-25-2005 at 03:24 PM..
kutulu is offline  
Old 01-30-2005, 08:25 PM   #110 (permalink)
Upright
 
Location: Upstate New York
Quote:
Originally Posted by sashime76
Does anyone know in terms of ratio, what percentage of countries (in the world) use Metric vs Standard?
Besides the United States, Liberia (Western Africa) and Burma (Southeast Asia) are the only other countries that have not officially converted to the metric system. So your ratio would be 190 to 3, depending on whose count of the number of countries on Earth you prefer.
captanhero is offline  
Old 02-01-2005, 10:37 PM   #111 (permalink)
Crazy
 
I wish we would change to the metric system though.
jstory is offline  
Old 02-11-2005, 11:49 AM   #112 (permalink)
Upright
 
Location: Rochester, New York
Howdy!

Maybe some night we should all just go out and change the speed limit signs to furlongs/fortnight (or sumthin' like that) and force the issue!

Other than that, guess we'll just have to wait for the baby boomers to die out (or at least retire) and try again.

Your mass v. weight for kg all depends on whether you are stepping onto a spring scale or a counterbalance scale.
__________________
Dave ©¿©¬

"Noli illigitemi carborundum decendus"
"Ego sum quis ego sum quod ut est quicumque ego sum" - Popeye
howdydave is offline  
Old 02-13-2005, 07:35 AM   #113 (permalink)
Delicious
 
Reese's Avatar
 
Trying to convert Imperial to metric is much harder when you don't know metric to begin with. That is the problem most people have - that is why the metric conversion act pretty much failed. How can you be expected to learn and know metric when you never have to practice metric measurements in everyday life. All of our companys make things in easy to remember imperial sizes like 1 gallon and 20oz and that leaves us with 4.5 liters, and 591ml which isnt as easy to remember and gives us more reasons not to use it. I'll just assume that metric using countries have nice rounded numbers on their products.
__________________
“It is better to be rich and healthy than poor and sick” - Dave Barry
Reese is offline  
Old 02-13-2005, 10:40 AM   #114 (permalink)
Too Awesome for Aardvarks
 
stevie667's Avatar
 
Location: Angloland
As the generation in the UK that is switching from imperial to metric (i went through school learning imperial measurments, with the odd bit of metric towards the end), i can say it's bloody confusing metric.

I have no idea how fast 100 kph is, or how far 100 meteres is, but i can do 100 mph and 100 yards.
Don't have a clue about volumes or areas, mainly because i'm bad with that type of thing, but for some reason little bitty scale (<1cm) i do in metric, but above in imperial.

Kind of a mish mash of everything, it's easier to go with imperial. It will take 2/3/4 generations for everything to fully convert from imperial to metric due to parents/grandparents passing on their sysem, and thats just too long for most governments these days.
stevie667 is offline  
Old 02-13-2005, 08:48 PM   #115 (permalink)
Crazy
 
AFAIK there is no intention in the US to switch. Arco ones tried it and it ended up in a desaster. People wanted gallons of fuel and not liters. My bet is, that it will never change. Too late.
__________________
Knowing is not enough, we must apply.
Willing is not enough, we must do.
Dyze is offline  
Old 02-21-2005, 03:05 PM   #116 (permalink)
Psycho
 
Location: Houston, Texas
I Love the Precision of Metric

Whenever I have a project around the house, I always measure using metric units for precise accurate measurements.

And in the kitchen I use my digital metric scale for baking.

However, I still do my temperature read-outs in Fahrenheit.
Jay Francis is offline  
Old 02-24-2005, 07:34 AM   #117 (permalink)
Addict
 
sashime76's Avatar
 
Location: Hoosier State
I agree with Jay Francis, I think it's more precise to use Metric when you are building a bookshelf or cutting floor boards. It's easier to add, subtract, multiply and divide using Metric as oppose to Standard. I know where to mark .3 cm or even mm, but 1/3 of 1/16" would have me guessing for a while.
sashime76 is offline  
 

Tags
adapt, metric, system


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:15 AM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

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