Ch'i

Another coincidence. Just the other day I was telling someone to be careful defending a hypothetical situation. Not to defend with such vigor as to lose sight of your opposition's argument; to lose sight of the possibility of being wrong.

I hold complete contempt for Bush and his actions. But Bush is not the problem (Yes UsTwo, a liberal who doesn't think Bush is the problem). He's just taking advantage of something that was already here.

ASU2003

There is the whole other conspiracy theory which is that Arab students who have never flown before couldn't have been good enough to hit buildings; therefore 'the government' took over the controls on certain aircraft it had modified with the UAV fly-by-wire technology or other remote control methods that we have.

Willravel

No argument here, just flaming and a COMPLETE lack of evidence. Do you want to actually try and disprove the 1500C temp? Or don't you have a good argument?
Uh huh, so at 600 MPH a pilot who is horrible at flying planes flies a commercial liner into a building. Sure thing.
Obviously not.

Notice the dust puffs several stories below the collapse.

Dilbert1234567

There is no need to defend it; fire is that hot, saying it isn’t just stupid. fastom has a fundamental misunderstanding of science, specifically but not limited to heat, temperature, and energy.

__________________
Donate Blood!

"Love is not finding the perfect person, but learning to see an imperfect person perfectly." -Sam Keen

Cynthetiq

Have you seen building schematics? There are pipes of water, vents, etc. Air pressure changing as the building collapses pushes air pressure down vents/pipes, those things have to go someplace especially in pipes since they are closed systems. Vents would be pusing air out, but eventually it would flow much more than it was designed for and push out greater amounts of air.

To see simply how this works take a garden hose and blow with your mouth from one end, then use a high pressure compressor on the same end and see the difference in how much distance the water goes from the other end.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Willravel

I was responding to Seaver, someone content to try and ride your coat tails and flame.

Fatsom said the fires were not 1500C, a fact that even Popular Mechanics agrees with:
Anyone who says that jet fuel, even assisted by perfect burning conditions, can reach a temperature of 1500C, or 2732F, needs to revisit basic chemistry and physics. 1500F is about 815.56C, the number that most 9/11 conspiracy theorists and debunkers alike agree on. Unless you're ready to say that Popular Mechanics, the primary antagonit to 9/11 conspiracy theorists, is wrong, then I suggest we agree from here on that the fires could not have been higher than 815C if they were caused by and fueled by airplane fuel. Fatsom is right to point out that 1500C is an outragous number, and I give him props for sticking with it. If you continue to claim 1500C, then you should admit that the fure was not fueled by the egular contents of the WTC and the jet fuel. In essence, you'd have to admit foul play and thus join the dark side. You'd be welcomed with open arms, of course, but I don't see that happening.

Fatsom also mentioned the fire suppresing system, something that isn't often discussed. We don't know a lot about the sprinkler system, and it could play a large part in the science of our discussion.

The buildings fell at basically a free fall speed. Are you suggesting that the copllapsing debris and dust inside the building were moving fast that free fall speeds? Do you know how much pressure that would take?

Cynthetiq

No I haven't any idea, but I can use simulation of basic physics and science. Again, taking that same hose, and flatten it from one end to the other, the faster you flatten it the faster and with more pressure the contents have to eject out the other side.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Ustwo

I think you missed a few words in this post, but have you ever worked a bellows?

Your arms move slowly, the air moves very fast. This is because the air is channeled and under pressure. I don't know about you but I think several thosand pounds of falling concrete will create a good deal of pressure. Not to mention that as things break they will shatter at supersonic speeds due to the nature of crack propagation, which would shoot debris out VERY fast with 'explosive' force. Its why an instron machine needs a shield when testing materials in compression.

Edit:Pounds should be TONS

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Cynthetiq

quite true, thanks for bringing that up, the idea of pressure is that it doesn't have to be for a long period of time but long enough for the subject to fail.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Seaver

Not a complete lack of evidence, it's been posted numerous time. I'm not riding his coat-tails, I've posted my evidence and you conspiracy theorists ignore them so I dont post them again.

So you're suggesting I post evidence that fire is not hot? That we can not melt steel with fire? How about I post evidence that fire occurs and is not simply a government conspiracy. Jet fuel burns hot. Mixed with paper, carpet, and all sorts of flamable things inside the building it's going to burn hotter. With a giant hole in the side of the building plenty of air will flow in to feed the fire. With concrete floors that heat energy will be concentrated, and the only thing for it to do is give it's heat to the building itself.

So for that theory to hold true you'd see the flash effects of controlled demolitions along with the dust. You don't make explosions without a flash, it simply does not happen. Unfortunately for that theory there were no flashes, showing good evidence for the dust theory.

__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

Willravel

What you did was flame, and in that post you did not support your personal attack on Fatsom. Disagreement can happen without disrespect. I know you're a very intelligent and mature person, so I was surprised when I read your post. My response was intended to point out that you didn't actually have content in your post, just flame. That's not appropriate for TFP.
Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F. I belive carpet, paper, desks, etc. burn much cooler than jet fuel (please, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). Are you suggesting that the temperature at which jet fuel, carpet, paper, desks, chairs, houseplants, computers, etc. all burn is cumumlative? If so, that could explain the 1500C temperature, but it would lead me to a state of confusion that I may never come back from, as it goes against my basic understanding of the nature of fire.
*IF* demolitions explosives were used, then one could assume that they would be used in the interrior of the building, the rimary support of the building. This would help the building to fall into it's footprint, explain why the buyilding fell so fast, explain the way the outer supports exploded outwards, and a lack of flashes. Still, I am unconvinced. I don't know how the building collapsed, I am just prety sure I know how it didn't collapse. That's kinda the bottom line.

I do understand that. What I don't understand is how that pressure was channeled out of a few windows instead of equally across several floors.

Dilbert1234567

[QUOTE=willravel]Jet fuel burns at 800° to 1500°F. I belive carpet, paper, desks, etc. burn much cooler than jet fuel (please, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). Are you suggesting that the temperature at which jet fuel, carpet, paper, desks, chairs, houseplants, computers, etc. all burn is cumumlative? If so, that could explain the 1500C temperature, but it would lead me to a state of confusion that I may never come back from, as it goes against my basic understanding of the nature of fire.

You don’t need explosives to explain its speed; the building is nearly all air
More instances of conspiracy theorist getting there quote wrong.
Think of it this way, as soon as one window breaks, the pressure escapes through there, and there is no reason for the others to, how ever, the pressure was so great that it broke several before the pressure equalized.

__________________
Donate Blood!

"Love is not finding the perfect person, but learning to see an imperfect person perfectly." -Sam Keen

Willravel

So the NIST says it could have gone as high as 1800F? Well that's still a far cry from 1500C (2732F).
Ah, but the parts of the building that are not air, namely the massive colunms, should have given massive resistence even to the weight of the collapsing building. The free fall speed suggests that the undamaged columns didn't give any resistence. That's quite impossible.
I'm sorry, when did I quote Romero? I'm more than aware of his flip floppage.

Cynthetiq

so you would answer that a pound of lead falls faster than a pound of feathers?

Were you expecting some sort of movie type "pause" where the failing columns hold out long enough for another group of people can get out of the building?

Once structures fail they tend not to "hold up" or create any resistence. Otherwise, wouldn't they then need to put charges on ALL floors in order to demo buildings?

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Willravel

It's amazing how much that doesn't have anything to do with anything. Did the WTC fall in a vaccume? Of course not, so that question really isn't relevent.
I was expecting it to fall at less than free fall speed. I was also expecting you to be able to have a discussion without massive doses of sarcasm. You do realize that sarcasm hurts your arguments, right?
Demolition: the bottom middle gets destroyed first, then the bottom outside, then the middle and top. If the bottom were not destroyed first, the building collapse would meet with resistence and could fall outside of it's footprint. Both towers fell into their footprints.

Cynthetiq

again, once the structure object under pressure fails, the rest of it is pretty simple.

Regardless of the way it is imploded, the resistance is still the same is it not? A building in demolition is falling at nearly free fall speeds once the structural support is compromised.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Dilbert1234567

fastom, who I was originally arguing with, did not state F or C, I assumed he meant F.

Well no. the undamaged columns did offer resistance, a lot of it, how ever, the force of a collapsing building is orders of several orders of magnitude bigger

A static load is very different than a dynamic load, the weight of the above tower at rest is very different than when it fell one story, after falling 10-20 feet it exerts much more force than when it is stationary. Place a bowling ball on your foot, it will be very heavy, but not break anything, now drop it 1 inch onto your foot, it hurts like a bitch huh, now 6 inches, then 1 foot, then 2 foot, keep doing this until you realize that the higher it falls the force exerted increases exponentially. Nothing, and I mean Nothing could stop that many floors from dropping.

Never, just showing that a lot of the conspiracy websites are based off of false statements

__________________
Donate Blood!

"Love is not finding the perfect person, but learning to see an imperfect person perfectly." -Sam Keen

Willravel

As I understood your point, you were assuming a temperature close to 1500C (2732F). That's simply not the case.
Wouldn't the load of the crashing debris be decreased by the fact that it was demolishing and breaking into smaller pieces as it came down? Do you think that we can actually work out some rough math to compare weight with resistence?
I understand the difference between static and dynamic loads.
Well I think this will be easier if we work on a case-by-case basis. The point/counterpoint type of discussion seems to be more likely to bear fruit. There are so many stories coming from so many people on both sides that assuming there are only two sides to this is incorrect. I can't be grouped with all conspiracy theorists because some of them blame the illuminati or aliens for the collapse. I see no evidence of this, of course. Likewise, you can't be grouped with all anti-conspiracy people because there are several official explainations out there. FEMA and NIST disagree on many points,for example.

Comparing the theoretical situations at the WTC with demolitions:

Demo: First thing to go is the bottom supports in the building.
-the bottom of the building always has the strongest supports, as it is designed to take the full weight of the building.
-removing the bottom supports first ensures that as the building collapses it has little to no resistence from the frame.
-immediatally after the bottom of the building loses strength, then the middle and top are destroyed to ensure that the building will not fall anywhere but inside it's footprint.
-very few demolitions fall at free fall speeds. Many of them are close, but those are usually smaller.

WTC: The collapses started at the upper middle and top, with no structural strength loss at the lower middle or bottom of the building
-the strongest supports would still have been intact when the building collapsed, which would offer resistence, but more importantly that would cause the building to be more likely to fall well outside of it's footprint
-the building had experienced only moderate fires for a very limited amount of time
-it fell at free fall speed, and the WTC are the largest buildings to collapse in history

Cynthetiq

are there facts for it being timed at free fall speeds?

what i witnessed did not look much different than the speeds of buildings I've seen implode in Las Vegas.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Dilbert1234567

Eh? No, please don’t take my out of context, it makes me mad.

First this quote was when you said it was 1500C, and I agreed, then I recognized I meant F
If you nit pick my statements, you can make me say anything, context is what is important

Resistance would be impossible to work out; however, the amount of force compared to the resistance is like a bowling ball and a wet paper towel.

Yes, but as previously said, the amount of resistance is mute, it’s too small to stop the upper floors from crashing down and destroying the rest of the building.

I have a physics midterm to study for; I think this is my last post for the day.


Quick note to cynthetiq, the speed of collapse was just slightly longer than a freefall.

I’ll crunch some numbers to find the experimentally derived resistance the tower experienced to fall in the time it did.

__________________
Donate Blood!

"Love is not finding the perfect person, but learning to see an imperfect person perfectly." -Sam Keen

Willravel

I figured that you corrected the post, then I read the other one. Simple misunderstanding. So now we agree, the absolute hottest is 1800F, and it was probably less.
Tens of thoseands of tons of hardened and brilliantly designed steel framing is equatable to a wet paper towel? Didn't you just get finished saying resistence would be impossible to work out?
How can the resistence be moot if we don't know the resistence?

Dilbert1234567

1234567890

__________________
Donate Blood!

"Love is not finding the perfect person, but learning to see an imperfect person perfectly." -Sam Keen

fastom

Remarkable similarity, no? And the buildings in Vegas were not hit with airplanes at all. You don't s'pose somebody blowed 'em up?

I don't think it was 1500 F at all. I'm not sure how NIST figures 1832 degrees how did they sample that?

Dilbert1234567

free fall speeds:

They know the temperatures reached 1000C because they ran test to simulate the conditions, both physically and through computer simulations, both came up with a high bound of 1000C. instead of saying ‘I don’t know so they musty be lying about it’ try doing some real reassearch findng how they knew it

__________________
Donate Blood!

"Love is not finding the perfect person, but learning to see an imperfect person perfectly." -Sam Keen

Cynthetiq

No I don't.

It may APPEAR similar but that's because from what I understand of physics things fall at the same rate and speed. Once the building structure was compromised, the collapse was similar to me.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Ustwo

Why are you arguing with someone who couldn't pass physics 101?

Debate requires a baseline understanding of the issues and you have shown that fastom lacks that understanding many times over.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Cynthetiq

actually I didn't pass physics 101 either. It's taken me years to make up for it, thank goodness for simulations because I had a hard time visualizing it all which is why I failed the class in high school.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Ustwo

But I'll assume you understood concepts of thermal expansion and KE=1/2 MV^2. Using physics 101 may have been a bad example, but the basic concepts are whats at issue here, not the ability to determine the angle a cannon needs to be fired for a projectile to travel X feet, which is the stuff of physics 101.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Dilbert1234567

I tutor students in physics, so seeing all the misconceptions here it better prepares me to deal with the students. Cynthetiq, if you’re ever trying again and have questions, let me know I’d be glad to help you.

__________________
Donate Blood!

"Love is not finding the perfect person, but learning to see an imperfect person perfectly." -Sam Keen

Willravel

I tutor kids at piano lessons, but unless we get into acoustics I guess it's notm relevant. Oh well.

Cynthetiq

I'm sure there was some acoustic tile in WTC? /sarcasm

BTW, I was reading my other post, and I wasn't trying to be sarcastic, slightly snarky I admit it came out, but was trying to elicit a response as to what your expectation was.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Dilbert1234567

that’s why your so patient like me.

__________________
Donate Blood!

"Love is not finding the perfect person, but learning to see an imperfect person perfectly." -Sam Keen

fastom

I guess we just see things differently.
If we both saw a man jump off a bridge we'd probably gasp as we watched him fall. When he started slowing then stopped short of the ground then began to rise up again we'd analyse what we saw.

You'd come up with some fancy physics that say his body was in shock which caused him to lose enough weight to slow his fall and his screams made warm air pockets and the inversion lifted him back up.

Me, i'd notice the rubber cord around his ankles.

stevo

Yeah, right. because physics is made-up voodoo gobbledeegook, while your observations are infallible. Great analogy, way to ignore the evidence. You're going to be a great success one day!

__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser

Cynthetiq

so now you are implying that those who are using physics as part of their understanding means they completely miss obvious bungie cords? that's just completely absurd.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Willravel

Fatsom is kinda right. We've been dancing around this the whole time, but he's right. Example? The 1800F temperature is based on the maximum temperatures possible for a fire fueled by jet fuel, desks, chairs, paper, drapes, etc. It almost certianally wasn't that hot. Eyewhitness reports talk about how the fire was dying down as much as 20 minutes before the collapse. Cheif Palmer, on the 78th floor of the South tower (the one that fell fastest, and yet most of the fuel spilled out and exploded outside the building), [I]from the crash zone[/URL], said there were "two isolated pockets of fire" when he called for backup and requested 2 hoses to put them out. Reports like this one come from firefighters that were inside the building putting the fires out, and I'd imagine firefighters know a thing or two about the behavior of fire. Remember, jet fuel burns between 800F and 1500F, which suggests that it's more than posible that they were burning at 800F. They could have been burning at 400F, considering that most of the jet fuel burned off in the initial explosion. Not even Dilbert could make the buiding fall with 800F fires. Even with a 1500F fire, it's a real stretch explaining the collapse of the building. It has to assume most of the fire protection was stripped fom the steel. Some of the fire protection was stripped by the crash itself, of course, but it's not like all the fire protection from the whole floor was lost across several floors. You'd need to have ideal circumstances for a 1500F fire that was consistanly hot to heat the uncovered steel to a temperature where it started to lose any of it's tensile strength. I'll tell you what, let's split the difference and say that the fire burned at 1150F. Add to that the heat from the fires on the desks, chairs, paper, drapes, etc. (even though the temperature of a fire is not a cumulative number based on the emperatures of the individual fires), and we'll say about 1350F. And that 1350F temperature did not last a full hour. It started cold, built up to hot, then dropped off and went down again. Those are hardly the ideal situations that NISA, FEMA, Dilbert, and PopMech suggest. Oh, and if you want proof that PopMech isn't reliable, check out what they are saying about 9/11 cough, a condition that effects thousands of rescue workers and brave civilians who dug through the rubble to find survivors. Yikes. Talk about disrespecting the heros of 9/11. I can't belive that Popular Mechanics can't figure out that pulverized cement in the air is toxic. 70% of 9/11 recovery workers suffer from severe lung problems.

Seaver

I believe the aspestos has a lot to do with it too.

__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

Cynthetiq

by that same "dancing" I can easily say that the WTC core center structure was hit by a plane that was travelling at 500+MPH and that in and of itself was compromised, the fuel fires themselves just added a small component. The same plane which heavily damaged the Pentagon which is a reinforced building supposedly designed to survive military strikes was able to do as much damage to the WTC which was not designed to withstand such an onslaught.

Isn't that the same kind of thing just different perspective or dancing position?

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Willravel

You can state that it was compromised, but that doesn't make it true. Bear in mind that the WTC was designed to withstand impacts from aircraft, aircraft not much smaller than the plane that hit. The building dropped in just under and just over an hour each.

Dilbert1234567

So you noticed the explosives, that slowly bowed the outer supports over the final last minutes of the buildings until they finally gave way and collapsed. Yup. That’s how explosives work all right, slow and constant over a few minutes.




No fastom is not right. 1800F is the maximum temperature that jet fuel can burn, but other materials inside a building can burn much hotter, carpets, glue’s, and other hydro carbons can burn much hotter, as well as other exotic materials. But were not truly worried about temperature as we are with the amount of heat energy being transferred, there was a lot of combustible material in the towers and I completely disagree with the notion that the fires were dying done, there is no way to judge a fires oxygen supply based off of the smoke, that’s total baloney. You forget we have fire fighters saying, the building looks like it was going to collapse as they saw the sides start to buckle about 20 minutes before the collapse.

If it were explosives, it would have been a sudden transformation from stable to collapse, but we have multiple witnesses, pictures, and credible experts (the firefighters, and the assistant fire chief) saying the building was bowing and moving towards collapse.

Well you’ve got me stumped, I can’t find where in the article, or anywhere on the internet you have popular mechanics says the cough is wrong. Even if they did, I’m sure what they said was taken out of context; you can’t just ignore an organization with decades of good, credible research for one mistake. Please back your statement.

I’ve got a physics midterm, in 1 hour, I’d write more, but I don’t want fastoms ‘fisics’ clouding my mind.

__________________
Donate Blood!

"Love is not finding the perfect person, but learning to see an imperfect person perfectly." -Sam Keen