The reality is indifferent

So what's really going on?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

surreptitious57
Posts: 3304
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 6:09 am

Re: The reality is indifferent

Post by surreptitious57 » Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:37 am

Everything that is alive will eventually die because immmortality is not physically possible
And so the extinction of the human species at some future point in time can be predicted
Even the Universe itself shall die when it acquires heat death through maximum entropy

User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 3279
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: The reality is indifferent

Post by attofishpi » Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:49 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:12 am
surreptitious57 wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:10 am
Most of reality [ the observable Universe ] is physical and non biological and was entirely so before life evolved on Earth
We are part of reality but a very infinitesimal part of it and in mathematical terms an entirely insignificant part of it too.
Reality-is-all-there-is where human beings are part and parcel thereof.
You cannot exclude human beings and claim that is reality, i.e. all-there-is.
You are talking bollocks again.
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:12 am
surreptitious57 wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:10 am
When we finally become extinct with no trace of us left at all reality will simply carry on existing just like it always has
Note the catch-22.
The above is not fact unless you and other human beings are expressing and accepting the fact.
If humans are extinct, the above assertion cannot be asserted.
Thus 'all reality will simply carry on existing just like it always has' is moot.

How can you establish the truth of the above statement when there are no human beings to test, verify and accept it?
Are you claiming animals don't have a reality? Or that we as humans are not intelligent enough to know that animals will continue within their reality after we are gone?

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2004
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: The reality is indifferent

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Fri Jan 18, 2019 9:24 am

attofishpi wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:49 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:12 am
surreptitious57 wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:10 am
Most of reality [ the observable Universe ] is physical and non biological and was entirely so before life evolved on Earth
We are part of reality but a very infinitesimal part of it and in mathematical terms an entirely insignificant part of it too.
Reality-is-all-there-is where human beings are part and parcel thereof.
You cannot exclude human beings and claim that is reality, i.e. all-there-is.
You are talking bollocks again.
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:12 am
surreptitious57 wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 7:10 am
When we finally become extinct with no trace of us left at all reality will simply carry on existing just like it always has
Note the catch-22.
The above is not fact unless you and other human beings are expressing and accepting the fact.
If humans are extinct, the above assertion cannot be asserted.
Thus 'all reality will simply carry on existing just like it always has' is moot.

How can you establish the truth of the above statement when there are no human beings to test, verify and accept it?
Are you claiming animals don't have a reality? Or that we as humans are not intelligent enough to know that animals will continue within their reality after we are gone?
Intelligent enough?
You are SO sure?
How do you know with certainty, humans are intelligent enough?
Is the highest IQ of around 250++ and an average of 100 [could be lower] sufficient enough.
Is IQ the only intelligence necessary to know about reality?

You are the one who is talking bollocks.

Age
Posts: 2780
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The reality is indifferent

Post by Age » Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:20 am

surreptitious57 wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:37 am
Everything that is alive will eventually die because immmortality is not physically possible
And so the extinction of the human species at some future point in time can be predicted
Even the Universe itself shall die when it acquires heat death through maximum entropy
How CERTAIN of this are you?

User avatar
bahman
Posts: 2226
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: The reality is indifferent

Post by bahman » Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:46 pm

Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm
Age wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:15 pm
So, why then is that "evil"?
It is evil if you care to live.
Yes, and that was my point.

Because obviously if they did not want to live, and in fact knew they were going to die, soon enough, maybe they would like and much prefer to be put out of their misery and killed sooner than later.
That is another scenario. In my scenario however one of them could survive. No need to say that we don't kill a person who is for sure dying and have a miserable condition, a person with cancer for example, because we think that that is evil.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm
Otherwise it is indifferent.
Always?
Yes.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm
Age wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:15 pm
In fact it could be said that that is "good and right".
Oh well, you need to prepare yourself to kill a person which this is right but not good to you if you were used to being good.
If, however, a person wants assistance to be killed, to prevent unnecessary suffering, then could this be good?
Yes, if we intellectually grow enough then we would kill a person who has cancer and we know that s/he dies miserably.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm
Age wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:15 pm
I am not sure what you are saying here.
We just discover to make our food, agriculture for example, and that allowed us chance to eat non-human being. That is coded inside our genes as a good now.
So, for example, when you human beings stop killing and eating all animals, then is it by shear coincidence that that code inside your genes will say this is a good now also, or is it some thing else that decides that this code inside your genes as a good now?
Yes.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
By the way the coded "good" and "bad" within your genes does NOT change its "good" and "bad" along the way. The encrypted "good" and "bad" Knowledge code is fixed and the same ALWAYS. Just waiting to come-to-light or be revealed.
Yes.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
The passed on thoughts/knowledge, however, obviously changes along the way.
Yes.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm
Age wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:36 pm
This is were deciding gets very hard and tricky. If human beings are, as you say, CODED to do "evil" in "appropriate situations", then EVERY human being could "justify" ALL of their "evil" behaviors, and therefore when or what is a crime, and when and why could a human being be punished by another human being for a crime? Especially if the murdering of another human being could be "evil" in "appropriate situation" also, which is a crime deserving of punishment also by other human beings.
Yes, that was an impression from me because I was good at that moment. Death is hard to accept to anybody.
Surely there is some bodies that accept death very easily?
I guess no if s/he is in good state of mind. But s/he is free to decide.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm
So killing is evil if you are aware that everything is indifferent but you decided to be good.
But what if it is good to kill some times?
Yes, killing is good some times. For example, a person who surely die because of cancer.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm
Age wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 10:36 pm
If evil is as real as good does NOT have much to do with if evil is CODED within human beings or not. I said that evil only exists because adult human beings do evil things. If, and when, adult human beings stop doing evil things, then I will not experience evil but I will still experience good. Therefore, evil will NOT be as real as good is. Evil would have gone extinct and thus NOT be in existence, nor really happening anymore, but good will be very real and flourishing real.
Yes, if everybody decide to do good in spite of knowing that the reality is indifferent or simply following the code which instruct them to do good if they are unaware.
When you use the word 'the' in front of the word 'reality', to me, it sounds like you want to express 'The reality of some thing or other'. But do you just mean, 'Reality (itself) is indifferent?
That was my mistake. I think we don't use "the" for "reality".
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm
Needless to say for some people it is hard to be good.
Yes I have noticed this. There still exists some human beings who even consider, let alone those ones that BELIEVE, that punishment for a crime is NOT "evil", but in fact a "good" thing to do. Some human beings still BELIEVE that it is a very good thing to do, and they are very happy, when they kill/murder other human beings for doing so called "evil" acts, or for even just having different views and beliefs.

In fact it could be said that ALL adult human beings find it hard to be good.
Yes.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm
So you need to take care of them somehow.
I truly agree here wholeheartedly that I need to take care of ALL you adult human beings, so that ALL children can and will grow up NOT being abused, like they are now.

How I do this is by teaching adults that the word 'discipline' involves 'self-discipline' to learn how to teach children what is right in Life, and that 'discipline' does NOT involve rules, laws, NOR punishment in any way, shape, nor form.
That is good approach.

Age
Posts: 2780
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The reality is indifferent

Post by Age » Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:37 am

bahman wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:46 pm
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm

It is evil if you care to live.
Yes, and that was my point.

Because obviously if they did not want to live, and in fact knew they were going to die, soon enough, maybe they would like and much prefer to be put out of their misery and killed sooner than later.
That is another scenario. In my scenario however one of them could survive. No need to say that we don't kill a person who is for sure dying and have a miserable condition, a person with cancer for example, because we think that that is evil.
I was NOT directly thinking of an example like that at all here.

I was talking about the scenario that you gave of TWO human beings "starving to death". One MIGHT be much closer to death and NOT want to live anymore anyway. In order so the other (who may be a son or daughter for example) could live, they may wish to be killed, and since they have LITERALLY less to live for, the BETTER, MORE RIGHT, and MORE GOOD thing to do is want to be killed to let the younger one live. I was questioning the "evil" in that type of scenario, about "starving to death".

The trouble with ALL of these: Is it wrong or right to do ... in this "scenario", morality/ethical issues, is ALL the variables are NEVER discussed, nor could they ever really be. What is perceived to be an "evil" act on first reading/hearing could in fact be a very loving, "good" act, with just the slightest variable looked at and/or added.

This applies to absolutely EACH and EVERY right/wrong, good/bad scenario.
bahman wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:46 pm
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm
Otherwise it is indifferent.
Always?
Yes.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm
Oh well, you need to prepare yourself to kill a person which this is right but not good to you if you were used to being good.
If, however, a person wants assistance to be killed, to prevent unnecessary suffering, then could this be good?
Yes, if we intellectually grow enough then we would kill a person who has cancer and we know that s/he dies miserably.
This is a completely different scenario from the one you began and from the one that I was referring.

(But maybe a subliminal thought was instilled into that sentence for a reason?)
bahman wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:46 pm
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm

We just discover to make our food, agriculture for example, and that allowed us chance to eat non-human being. That is coded inside our genes as a good now.
So, for example, when you human beings stop killing and eating all animals, then is it by shear coincidence that that code inside your genes will say this is a good now also, or is it some thing else that decides that this code inside your genes as a good now?
Yes.
Did you NOT real ALL of the question, or did you NOT understand it, or did some thing else happen?

I asked you a either/or question.

A "yes" (or "no") response does NOT work.

If it is just by shear coincidence that the genes say that this is good now, when morality/ethics change within human beings as they evolve, then so be it. Or,
If it is some thing else that actually DECIDES that the genes say that this is goo now, when morality/ethics change within human beings as they evolve, then so be it.

But which one is it? The answer is NOT "yes" nor is it a "no".
bahman wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:46 pm
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
By the way the coded "good" and "bad" within your genes does NOT change its "good" and "bad" along the way. The encrypted "good" and "bad" Knowledge code is fixed and the same ALWAYS. Just waiting to come-to-light or be revealed.
Yes.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
The passed on thoughts/knowledge, however, obviously changes along the way.
Yes.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm

Yes, that was an impression from me because I was good at that moment. Death is hard to accept to anybody.
Surely there is some bodies that accept death very easily?
I guess no if s/he is in good state of mind. But s/he is free to decide.
In the actual and Real Truth of Life, there is NO death. There is only change, or transformation. The passing on and changing from one perceived thing to another perceived thing is VERY EASY TO ACCEPT, from the One and only Thing's perspective.
bahman wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:46 pm
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm
So killing is evil if you are aware that everything is indifferent but you decided to be good.
But what if it is good to kill some times?
Yes, killing is good some times. For example, a person who surely die because of cancer.
But it would only be 'good' if they WANTED to "die", right?
bahman wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:46 pm
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm

Yes, if everybody decide to do good in spite of knowing that the reality is indifferent or simply following the code which instruct them to do good if they are unaware.
When you use the word 'the' in front of the word 'reality', to me, it sounds like you want to express 'The reality of some thing or other'. But do you just mean, 'Reality (itself) is indifferent?
That was my mistake. I think we don't use "the" for "reality".
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm
Needless to say for some people it is hard to be good.
Yes I have noticed this. There still exists some human beings who even consider, let alone those ones that BELIEVE, that punishment for a crime is NOT "evil", but in fact a "good" thing to do. Some human beings still BELIEVE that it is a very good thing to do, and they are very happy, when they kill/murder other human beings for doing so called "evil" acts, or for even just having different views and beliefs.

In fact it could be said that ALL adult human beings find it hard to be good.
Yes.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
bahman wrote:
Thu Jan 17, 2019 11:43 pm
So you need to take care of them somehow.
I truly agree here wholeheartedly that I need to take care of ALL you adult human beings, so that ALL children can and will grow up NOT being abused, like they are now.

How I do this is by teaching adults that the word 'discipline' involves 'self-discipline' to learn how to teach children what is right in Life, and that 'discipline' does NOT involve rules, laws, NOR punishment in any way, shape, nor form.
That is good approach.

User avatar
bahman
Posts: 2226
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2016 3:52 pm

Re: The reality is indifferent

Post by bahman » Sat Jan 19, 2019 6:00 pm

Age wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:37 am
bahman wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:46 pm
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am

Yes, and that was my point.

Because obviously if they did not want to live, and in fact knew they were going to die, soon enough, maybe they would like and much prefer to be put out of their misery and killed sooner than later.
That is another scenario. In my scenario however one of them could survive. No need to say that we don't kill a person who is for sure dying and have a miserable condition, a person with cancer for example, because we think that that is evil.
I was NOT directly thinking of an example like that at all here.

I was talking about the scenario that you gave of TWO human beings "starving to death". One MIGHT be much closer to death and NOT want to live anymore anyway. In order so the other (who may be a son or daughter for example) could live, they may wish to be killed, and since they have LITERALLY less to live for, the BETTER, MORE RIGHT, and MORE GOOD thing to do is want to be killed to let the younger one live. I was questioning the "evil" in that type of scenario, about "starving to death".
It is all good to kill another person in such a situation.
Age wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:37 am
The trouble with ALL of these: Is it wrong or right to do ... in this "scenario", morality/ethical issues, is ALL the variables are NEVER discussed, nor could they ever really be. What is perceived to be an "evil" act on first reading/hearing could in fact be a very loving, "good" act, with just the slightest variable looked at and/or added.

This applies to absolutely EACH and EVERY right/wrong, good/bad scenario.
Yes. Good or evil are situational.
Age wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:37 am
bahman wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:46 pm
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am

Always?
Yes.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am

If, however, a person wants assistance to be killed, to prevent unnecessary suffering, then could this be good?
Yes, if we intellectually grow enough then we would kill a person who has cancer and we know that s/he dies miserably.
This is a completely different scenario from the one you began and from the one that I was referring.

(But maybe a subliminal thought was instilled into that sentence for a reason?)
I wanted to mention that good and evil are situational.
Age wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:37 am
bahman wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:46 pm
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
So, for example, when you human beings stop killing and eating all animals, then is it by shear coincidence that that code inside your genes will say this is a good now also, or is it some thing else that decides that this code inside your genes as a good now?
Yes.
Did you NOT real ALL of the question, or did you NOT understand it, or did some thing else happen?

I asked you a either/or question.

A "yes" (or "no") response does NOT work.

If it is just by shear coincidence that the genes say that this is good now, when morality/ethics change within human beings as they evolve, then so be it. Or,
If it is some thing else that actually DECIDES that the genes say that this is goo now, when morality/ethics change within human beings as they evolve, then so be it.

But which one is it? The answer is NOT "yes" nor is it a "no".
You can decide about whether engage in eating animal meat or not. I guess that is a good practice in regards to what is coded in our gene.
Age wrote:
Sat Jan 19, 2019 5:37 am
bahman wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 5:46 pm
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
By the way the coded "good" and "bad" within your genes does NOT change its "good" and "bad" along the way. The encrypted "good" and "bad" Knowledge code is fixed and the same ALWAYS. Just waiting to come-to-light or be revealed.
Yes.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am
The passed on thoughts/knowledge, however, obviously changes along the way.
Yes.
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 4:27 am

Surely there is some bodies that accept death very easily?
I guess no if s/he is in good state of mind. But s/he is free to decide.
In the actual and Real Truth of Life, there is NO death. There is only change, or transformation. The passing on and changing from one perceived thing to another perceived thing is VERY EASY TO ACCEPT, from the One and only Thing's perspective.
So there must be a reason why you don't kill yourself if life is just about change. What is that?

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2004
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: The reality is indifferent

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Sun Jan 20, 2019 6:27 am

Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:20 am
surreptitious57 wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:37 am
Everything that is alive will eventually die because immmortality is not physically possible
And so the extinction of the human species at some future point in time can be predicted
Even the Universe itself shall die when it acquires heat death through maximum entropy
How CERTAIN of this are you?
There is no such things as a 100% absolute certainty.
All the above are possible based on empirical evidences available, but we will have to rate their possibility based on various qualified circumstances.

On the other hand, I note what you are proposing is not even empirically possible thus what you are proposing is something that is non-sense and literally nonsensical.

Age
Posts: 2780
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The reality is indifferent

Post by Age » Sun Jan 20, 2019 11:15 am

Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 6:27 am
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:20 am
surreptitious57 wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 8:37 am
Everything that is alive will eventually die because immmortality is not physically possible
And so the extinction of the human species at some future point in time can be predicted
Even the Universe itself shall die when it acquires heat death through maximum entropy
How CERTAIN of this are you?
There is no such things as a 100% absolute certainty.
Besides the FACT that I did NOT say absolutely any thing here about 100% absolute certainty, and you are replying only to and about 100% absolute certainty, there can be 100% absolute certainty.

Now, who is RIGHT and who is WRONG here?
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 6:27 am
All the above are possible based on empirical evidences available, but we will have to rate their possibility based on various qualified circumstances.
Well what is that POSSIBILITY?

Did I NOT just ask you; How CERTAIN of this are you?

(You have completely FAILED to answer the question, by the way).

Are those so called "empirical evidences" based on human being's subjective views and perceptions of things?
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 6:27 am
On the other hand, I note what you are proposing is not even empirically possible thus what you are proposing is something that is non-sense and literally nonsensical.
What I am proposing will NOT be falsified with ANY and ALL scientific investigation/s.
The very BASIS of what I am proposing is NOT falsifiable.
What I am proposing can be and WILL BE verified, empirically.

By the way I did NOT propose absolutely any thing here. I only asked; How CERTAIN are you of what you said here?

I wonder if you will EVER answer my questions?

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 2004
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: The reality is indifferent

Post by Veritas Aequitas » Mon Jan 21, 2019 4:57 am

Age wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 11:15 am
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 6:27 am
Age wrote:
Fri Jan 18, 2019 11:20 am


How CERTAIN of this are you?
There is no such things as a 100% absolute certainty.
Besides the FACT that I did NOT say absolutely any thing here about 100% absolute certainty, and you are replying only to and about 100% absolute certainty, there can be 100% absolute certainty.

Now, who is RIGHT and who is WRONG here?
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 6:27 am
All the above are possible based on empirical evidences available, but we will have to rate their possibility based on various qualified circumstances.
Well what is that POSSIBILITY?

Did I NOT just ask you; How CERTAIN of this are you?

(You have completely FAILED to answer the question, by the way).

Are those so called "empirical evidences" based on human being's subjective views and perceptions of things?
Veritas Aequitas wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 6:27 am
On the other hand, I note what you are proposing is not even empirically possible thus what you are proposing is something that is non-sense and literally nonsensical.
What I am proposing will NOT be falsified with ANY and ALL scientific investigation/s.
The very BASIS of what I am proposing is NOT falsifiable.
What I am proposing can be and WILL BE verified, empirically.

By the way I did NOT propose absolutely any thing here. I only asked; How CERTAIN are you of what you said here?

I wonder if you will EVER answer my questions?
I brought in 'absolute certainty' as a limit and to ensure you are not going into that direction.

I don't believe in 100% absolute certainty, yes, even this statement. My basis is empirical-rationally possibility and to be justified with empirical evidence to confirm it is real.

If what you are proposing "can be and WILL BE verified, empirically" then show how it is empirically possible. Example;

I can speculate it is possible there are apples growing in a an earth-liked planet one billion light years from Earth.
The above speculation is empirically possible because all the elements [in blue] are justified empirical realities on earth. It is a matter of producing the empirical evidences.

Show how your proposition* is empirically possible?
*I don't know what it is anyway, but as long as your hypothesis is empirically-rationally based, then it is empirically possible.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests