Jump to content
Holidays
Local
Radar
Snow?
Sign in to follow this  
weirpig

Report Climate change ipcc

Recommended Posts

22 hours ago, Midlands Ice Age said:

Would you say that the 1C warming we have seen so far is NOT  beneficial?.

We have expanded the population by 4 times during the last 100 year period. Without widespread gains in productivity from agriculture we would have had many millions who also would not have survived (death by starvation).

So you are saying that our prosperity has been spurred on by a warming climate rather then advances in technology, education etc? That is a very poor argument 

There is little doubt that our new eco (warmer/ wetter)  environment has assisted in feeding this population explosion.

Same applies here

If we do manage to stop temperatures increasing by reducing CO2, how would you propose that we  feed the further increases in humanity in the future?. An increase of 2C (and the resultant more moisture in the atmosphere) would surely assist here? 

Try telling that to all those who have lost their supplies of food by flooding or drought being triggered faster by increasing temperatures.

Other points in your post -

1) the whole point is that the number of actual disasters  has been virtually unchanged. It is the reporting of them  that has exploded as communications around the around the world have improved.

Where is the proof that the number of actual disasters remains unchanged?

Weather related disasters have always occurred.

It used to be of the order of 2 weeks before anyone heard about a cyclone in say Bangladesh  (1950's) . Now we can watch it online.

In fact in the early 20th century the number of deaths was 10 times greater than has occurred this century.

Again where is the proof? Even so technological advance and the fact its easier to get to people aids rescue efforts but what happens when we struggle to keep up with the consequences of a warming climate?

I will try and find a graph issued by the USA Insurance agency of the trends of disaster related deaths.

Re the second point -

2) I do not doubt that a slight trend in rising temperatures is occurring - 0.87C in the last 130 years.  I have already explained that in my first post.

Slight? Land areas warm much faster then the oceans, a further +1C warming is huge, how do you expect nature and humans to keep up with the accelerating changes?

Melting of ice has also varied during this time. At the moment the Arctic ice level is quite low but this also occurred in the 1930's, and has clearly occurred at other times during the last 1000 years. Otherwise how could Greenland have been colonised in the 1300's?.

Arctic sea ice is much lower today then the it was during the 1930s. Besides who is to say that the conditions over Greenland were representative of the arctic sea ice basin as a whole?

Sea levels are still not a threat - Greenland and the Antarctic (the  areas of maximum and key ice) have actually gained ice very recently. These are the areas which will determine the height of the seas. Currently the change in sea level reflects that of a very small increase in oceanic temperatures.       Little more.        Remember that Arctic Sea ice has virtually  no affect on sea levels. 

Gained ice from record lows Here is the arctic sea ice plot in recent years. A gain in sea ice really isn't saying much at all. Besides your statements are fundamentally wrong and you ignore the issues of rising sea levels due to thermal expansion.

image.thumb.png.d2cc1a3b2dffb87ba949164b2cda6ef6.png image.thumb.png.cac23b99c809efb95bd2166c802be543.png

Shrinking forests - I think this is much more to do with Mankind's exploitation of the earth. I am not sure about Climate Change. 

Surely you must realise that trees take in C02 so the more trees that are chopped down, the more of a positive feedback this has on our warming climate?

Rising CO2 levels - yes it is happening, but not at the rate which we are producing it. Why might this be? It would seem as though the Carbon sinks on earth are actually taking in more as the levels in the atmosphere rise. This was not predicted and is still being investigated.

So there are carbon sinks? That is hardly groundbreaking news is it? The rate at which we are pumping CO2 into the atmosphere far exceeds anything from the records that we have. Also the land may turn in a carbon source rather then sink in a warming climate. If the AMOC really slows down carbon intake in the North Atlantic then that would also drastically reduce its role as a carbon sink. 

image.thumb.png.a16387a36ce475c6e8f65b1db477056c.png

So yes I agree that the latter  is having some effect on the above.  But the overall size of the effect, (either  direct or indirect)  has not been ascertained. It is only the models (which are still in their infancy) which dictates that there may be problems ahead  (CAGW).

Again nothing to back up your statement here, only conjecture.

The early models assumptions that the rise in temperatures compared to CO2 levels would be logarithmic and therefore would be directly related to temperature has proved incorrect. We now recognise that 'feedbacks' are the reason. The problem is that these feedbacks are still largely not understood. That is the reason we have a divergence of from 1.5C up to more than 6C in the models for the prediction for the end of this century,   even now..

No that is related to the emissions scenarios we take, not the uncertainty of the role of CO2 itself!!!!!

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Sun is a stable star.  During the 11-year solar cycle, the solar output varies by around 0.1%.  Compare this to the 6% difference in solar insolation during a single year (Earth has an eccentric orbit), the influence from the solar cycle is around 1.7% of this.  It's a tiny amount.  Sure, it can influence large scale weather patterns in the northern hemisphere (great chance of northern blocking in winter).  However, to suggest the Sun has boosted Earth's temperature by over 1C in under a lifetime is ridiculous.  If this were the case the Sun's output would have to wildly fluctuate on tiny timescales.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, weirpig said:

We have to get the countries who are not towing the line  to do so.  How can we do that is the big question.  Governments are unwilling to but pressure on other governments  because of many factors (Money Trade etc)  So its down to the people.  If the people in the know  are correct.  Then this only leaves one avenue to go down.  Because however you look at it   how often does peaceful protest really get  the job done  .  just ask Emily davison. 

But what do you suggest we do, Mark: unilaterally declare war on the USA, Russia and China?

We could, I suppose, revoke Article 50 and throw in our lot with the EU...but, then we'd simply lumber them with a work-shy bunch of semi-professional climate change deniers. So that might be counter-productive, to say the least...? But, whatever it takes to save the planet, a teeny-weeny offshore tax-haven isn't going to carry much weight,

So I think we might actually agree. In a way!:oldgrin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Ed Stone said:

But what do you suggest we do, Mark: unilaterally declare war on the USA, Russia and China?

We could, I suppose, revoke Article 50 and throw in our lot with the EU...but, then we'd simply lumber them with a work-shy bunch of semi-professional climate change deniers. So that might be counter-productive, to say the least...? But, whatever it takes to save the planet, a teeny-weeny offshore tax-haven isn't going to carry much weight,

So I think we might actually agree. In a way!:oldgrin:

Eu are no good  they are below us in the rankings   for Climate change.   All im saying is Pete  we are standing on the edge of disaster   that the human race may never recover  and all we are doing is gluing ourselves to windows and staging a protest at a dinosaur relic.    You want to make a difference?.   look at Venezuela  as we speak. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, weirpig said:

Eu are no good  they are below us in the rankings   for Climate change.   All im saying is Pete  we are standing on the edge of disaster   that the human race may never recover  and all we are doing is gluing ourselves to windows and staging a protest at a dinosaur relic.    You want to make a difference?.   look at Venezuela  as we speak. 

who says we are standing on the edge of disaster and the human race may never recover? based on what exactly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, cheeky_monkey said:

who says we are standing on the edge of disaster and the human race may never recover? based on what exactly?

   If you believe what some academics  say.    Me?  I couldnt care less really   everything has cycles 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who started the industrial Revolution?

Who ravaged Nations for their raw materials?

Whose demands drive China's exports?

5pm tomorrow you will be able to see your politicians line up, not in the division hall but on denialism/acceptance lines.

No Politician/Party, stood in the Denial line, will prosper from their choice.

As for this 'countdown' to some mythical 'tipping point'???

Forget it !

That boat has long sailed and it is now a matter of just how bad we allow it all to become ( if we even have that choice any more?)

Maybe this summer will provide a very scary event that will poleaxe every single person that ever muttered a denialist mantra dressed up as 'sceptisism'........

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Gray-Wolf said:

Maybe this summer will provide a very scary event that will poleaxe every single person that ever muttered a denialist mantra dressed up as 'sceptisism'........

A real wake up call?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, weirpig said:

   If you believe what some academics  say.    Me?  I couldnt care less really   everything has cycles 

Humm? Is it you 'couldn't care less' about anthro climate change? Or is it you do care and you think 'we are standing on the edge of disaster' and need to 'look at Venezuela'?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎29‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 19:50, Devonian said:

To do as you do: Prove it. Prove you are dispassionate. Prove you have found the truth.

I am dispassionate  ive never disputed climate alters/changes what I dispute is the blind adherence to comments regarding such things as 97% of climate scientists say.... for once perhaps you need to prove that point rather than using your usual bluster technique that you believe discredits others points of view

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Quicksilver1989 said:

A scientific paper is as good as it can get, where is your evidence to prove otherwise. Even in 2013 the IPCC said the human influence on our climate is 'unequivocal'

If you want to prove your point against the 97% please go ahead and prove it.

really as a Phd student you make these comments please you prove the 97% comment beyond the cook paper which you should know is full of holes

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On ‎29‎/‎04‎/‎2019 at 19:21, cheeky_monkey said:

this is what i found just looking for 10 mins regarding the US summer temps..heatwave index and hurricanes..the trouble i find is there is lots of conflicting reports and graphs..even from NOAA and NASA..that you can spin which ever way you want to.

2018-09-13073010_shadow.png

hot6.png

Hurricane_Daniel.png

Those USA heatwave indexes are not really usable like you are. They are relative to the 10 year mean and are compared to what would normally be expected within a 10 year return rate, so the 30s had some pretty severe events RELATIVE to the mean...but the mean is just about everywhere still heading northwards, so for example a marginal heatwave event on your chart in the 20s/30s would not show as a heatwave event in the 00/10s as it would no longer be a 1 in 10 year event, but a lower number (EG 1 in 8 years, etc).

This is probably a more useful chart with regards to extreme heat events as they are a true reflection of hot days within the states:

spacer.png

As you say there does seem to be a little bit of uncertainty due to different understanding of indexes. Hot days are roughly at the same severeity as the 30s, night time mins are soaring way above...which makes sense as the 30s was broadly caused by a desertification type event (dust bowls , hence dry air which normally leads to higher maxes and relatively not as severe mins compared to maxes) whilst the warming now is purely from the global masses warming up around the states and the SSTs also heading northwards from all direction, hence why mins are holding up increasingly well. So the 30s was caused by a relative small scale event on a global scale, whilst the warming now is being caused by warming happening from at least 3 sources (Atl/Pac and the Arctic).

As for hurricanes, I don't personally think there is yet a solid case for saying there has been an increase, there maybe an argument for storms undergoing faster RI but as each basin measures intensity differently (Indian Met is horrid for example, very often way to slow at upping strength!) which always makes it hard to compare. Still I don't think we have been accurately looking at TCs outside of the Atantic before 1960s (1940s/1950s should be fairly accurate, BUT they could easily miss those subtropical storms/NE Atlantic storms that often get caught these days) so past years are highly likely under-represented.

Unfortunately Humans are selfish and we self-preserve as best we can. We (global collective here) lack the courage probably required to make the changes that will be required, and sadly our planets ultimate fate probably will be something akin to Venus (ok not that extreme!) but a kind of runaway warming. To an extent some areas may benefit (we maybe one such area in theory) but many will suffer and unless serious infrastructure work is done now, some parts of the world will likely be too extreme for natural life as we know it right now What event will prove to be a tipping point, I'm not going to pretend to know. We could be just a few years away, or perhaps still 50-100 years away, in which case we may still be able to tech our way out of it...my gut though says its closer to the former than latter...but in terms of human live, its probably still too far away for us to wrap our minds around it.

 

Edited by kold weather

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
9 hours ago, jonboy said:

I am dispassionate  ive never disputed climate alters/changes what I dispute is the blind adherence to comments regarding such things as 97% of climate scientists say.... for once perhaps you need to prove that point rather than using your usual bluster technique that you believe discredits others points of view

Prove your previous points please and also please prove that you are dispassionate.

Or, stop asking other people for proof. Your bluster isn't an answer.

Edited by Devonian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Devonian said:

Humm? Is it you 'couldn't care less' about anthro climate change? Or is it you do care and you think 'we are standing on the edge of disaster' and need to 'look at Venezuela'?

In my mind there is no doubt  that Climate change  will happen with or without Human contribution   history tells us that.  However it seems fairly certain that Human activity has  increased the speed at  which it is happening.   its just my opinion  but there is very little chance in anything changing   for that to happen there would have to be vast investment across the globe.  Western countries leading totally different lives then what they are used to. It will never happen.  IF the climate scientists are correct  in their predictions  then that is what will happen.  My honest opinion is that all we can hope for is that they have got it wrong.   In regard to Venezuela  my point was really directed at The ext rebellion crowd.  They obviously believe in the worst case scenario. They honestly believe in we are standing on the edge of a Disaster that will be the greatest the earth has ever seen.  i can only speak of myself  but if i had that type of opinion/ Will  and conviction i would do more than just protest in a city in a small European Country that is already performing much better than the majority of the world in regard to Climate change.    For world governments to take stock and listen  there has to be a huge mass protest that brings major cities World Wide to there knees   Peaceful protests  do not cut any ice.  If i had the same conviction/opinion as them  and i thought my son/grandkids would suffer for governments failures  then i would  cause carnage.  Thats why i have no time for these protests.  its nothing more than making out they care  with little results 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Gray-Wolf said:

Sorry weirpig but I think non violent protest IS the way forward.

"Rise like Lions after slumber
In unvanquishable number,
Shake your chains to earth like dew
Which in sleep had fallen on you-
Ye are many - they are few."

just by the sheer number of folk demanding action?

Once the world has grasped the peril it is in ( after one of the coming 'climate shocks' hits home?) then we will be unstoppable and we will change the world.

Capitalism caused this ( the greed of the Few) and so will not supply the answer and the folks who dare not see this world run any other way are our problem.

I'm OK as I am a Socialist so my recognition , via Marx's astute observations all those years ago, that Capitalism will 'naturally' die helps me in my wish to see that process 'helped along' ushering in a more equitable World, for the many, not just the fortunate Few?

But then so many appear more scared of my world view than they do of the world burning? 

 

Hope your right.  but My time on this Earth (40 odd years)  has shown me that peaceful protests very rarely work .   if we are are in such a grave position and short time frame that experts think 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ed Stone said:

We need a man-/woman-of-the-people who's not a 'wolf in sheep's clothing'; a person who not only genuinely feels/understands the thoughts of ordinary people, but one that isn't a multi-millionaire tax-dodging, lying do nothing? One thing we can be certain-of, is that anyone who proclaims himself a 'man-of-the-people' will be, in reality, no such thing!

That's why I'm happy to follow the young folks, on matters climate -- they've neither had the free-time nor the resources, with which to cover themselves in a populist veneer.

i hate to say but the ordinary people are not the same people proclaiming disaster is only a few years away..every 10 years or so. Ordinary people really have more important issues that they are concerned with.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, cheeky_monkey said:

i hate to say but the ordinary people are not the same people proclaiming disaster is only a few years away..every 10 years or so. Ordinary people really have more important issues that they are concerned with.

Which explains (rather succinctly I think) just how and why the world has been allowed to get into such a perilous state, in the first place...?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, weirpig said:

In my mind there is no doubt  that Climate change  will happen with or without Human contribution   history tells us that.  However it seems fairly certain that Human activity has  increased the speed at  which it is happening.   its just my opinion  but there is very little chance in anything changing   for that to happen there would have to be vast investment across the globe.  Western countries leading totally different lives then what they are used to. It will never happen.  IF the climate scientists are correct  in their predictions  then that is what will happen.  My honest opinion is that all we can hope for is that they have got it wrong.   In regard to Venezuela  my point was really directed at The ext rebellion crowd.  They obviously believe in the worst case scenario. They honestly believe in we are standing on the edge of a Disaster that will be the greatest the earth has ever seen.  i can only speak of myself  but if i had that type of opinion/ Will  and conviction i would do more than just protest in a city in a small European Country that is already performing much better than the majority of the world in regard to Climate change.    For world governments to take stock and listen  there has to be a huge mass protest that brings major cities World Wide to there knees   Peaceful protests  do not cut any ice.  If i had the same conviction/opinion as them  and i thought my son/grandkids would suffer for governments failures  then i would  cause carnage.  Thats why i have no time for these protests.  its nothing more than making out they care  with little results 

Ok, I understand you position wrt the atmosphere. 

I think what you're saying is if it's as bad a XRers think they should stop being peaceful and get tough - but shouldn't you be doing so, because you don't seem to be taking the 'sceptic' line? I don't think that 'get tough' is the answer but I do think for some it might come to that. If XRers are right, then right will be more and more on their side and the job easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, cheeky_monkey said:

i hate to say but the ordinary people are not the same people proclaiming disaster is only a few years away..every 10 years or so. Ordinary people really have more important issues that they are concerned with.

What is an 'ordinary' person? Aren't we all people?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Devonian said:

Issues come and go (like dangerous dogs or duck houses) but our effect on climate and the symptoms of said aren't (sadly) going to go away. In five years time (unless a hell of a lot of us are not just wrong but 100%  wrong) things will be worse. In ten likewise. Scoffing wont change that I fear (and I'm not a fan of Corbyn and I do think they're politicing - if you want Green vote it)

It is, though, amazing what is happening. I hoped i was wrong, but I actually think we really will see an ice free Arctic within a few decades at most - isn't that just amazing? Changes will get more and more profound. OK, most don't notice change because most of us don't notice the weather, most people like it warm, or boose, or game of T, or hangin out with people and not much else. But, I'm also much more sure than I've ever been that we'll see two summers soon (decades at  most) that will make 75/76 seem wet an cold. This country will be profoundly changed both by what is happening to the atmosphere, the Arctic and to our climate.

I really, really, hope I'm wrong. I'm sure the likes of quicksilver, ed, GW all of us 'greenie' types (or whatever we're labelled as) , are too. But, we're not because it's happening just like it was projected to.

So, scoff away, the next generation wont as much and the one after that less so.

So what is the solution? If we assume climate change is actually happening, and we further assume it is human-made, what changes would you make to society? It's all very well people mouthing "We need to act now to save our planet" but what does that actually mean?

Do you place restrictions on people travelling by car and/or plane? 

Should people only be allowed to travel by plane once or twice/year?

Do you ban all coal burning fires and/or wood burners?

Do you ban all gas-fired central heating systems?

Is the solution to tax, tax, tax?

If you fundamentally change the way a developed country actually operates then what happens if tax revenue suffers or an economy becomes less developed? How do you replace govt revenue that pays for hospitals, the welfare state, etc?

How do you support the population?

The younger generation that supposedly are more morally correct on the future of our planet continue to play hypocrites when it comes to sustainability. Three of the most successful clothes retailers over the last year or so (latest financial results prove this) are also responsible for the cheapest clothes that one can throw away after a few wears; those clothes retailers are Boohoo, Asos and Primark. All 3 attract most of their customers from the under 30s age groups. So is this age group really more morally responsible than the rest of us?

Edited by Bristle boy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, Bristle boy said:

So what is the solution? If we assume climate change is actually happening, and we further assume it is human-made, what changes would you make to society? It's all very well people mouthing "We need to act now to save our planet" but what dies that actually mean?

Do you place restrictions on people travelling by car and/or plane? 

Should people only be allowed to travel by plane once or twice/year?

Do you ban all coal burning fires and/or wood burners?

Do you ban all gas-fired central heating systems?

Is the solution to tax, tax, tax?

If you fundamentally change the way a developed country actually operates then what happens if tax revenue suffers or an economy becomes less developed? How do you replace govt revenue that pays for hospitals, the welfare state, etc?

How do you support the population?

The younger generation that supposedly are more morally correct on the future of our planet continue to play hypocrites when it comes to sustainability. Three of the most successful clothes retailers over the last year or so (latest financial results prove this) are also responsible for the cheapest clothes that one can throw away after a few wears; those clothes retailers are Boohoo, Asos and Primark. All 3 attract most of their customers from the under 30s age groups. So is your age group really more morally responsible than the rest of us?

I'm (to my amazement!) 61 yrs old 😉. I'm just too young to remember winter 1963, but I just remember the fear in my mother during the Cuban missile crisis...

All I can do is do what I think is right, live as well for the planet as I can, vote how I think is right and write /be active in favour of what I think right. I don't favour violence or worse so what more can I do? Perhaps terrorism is the way? No, I don't think so!!

But, the solutions are simple and have been known for along time - de-carbonisation. We need to help that along but encouraging alternative power, by not encouraging consumption of things that are unsustainable - both via the taxation system. The NuLab and coalition govts achieved a little in that direction, this govt stopped such things in their tracks - but a taxation policy that encourages us in the right direction is (IMO) fairly straightforward. That's what I would do, but I'm not in power, nor will I ever will be.

Look, were there two Earth's I'd be entirely happy for people to go and wreck one, to fly about it as they wished, to heave plastic everywhere into it, but there aren't two Earth's and at some point we've (not us in the UK, humanity) got to realise that or will end up living on an ever more and more degraded planet. This is the only Earth! It's our home.

When people glibly say 'oh, well, wa can't solve this, we've had it' they don't mean that, no one want us as a species to have 'had it'. What they mean is they're not ready to do what in their hearts they know we (again, humanity) need to - stop treating our home are a dump, and start caring about it. Humanity needs to become adult.

 

Edited by Devonian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There does seem to be certain general nastiness running through many 50-pluses: sod the environment we leave to our descendants; because, by the time the benefits are realised, we'll be dead and gone and will no longer be in a position to profit from global degradation...?

IOW, short-termism still rules the day. Or, given the subject matter, nihilism might be a better term?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ed Stone said:

There does seem to be certain general nastiness running through many 50-pluses: sod the environment we leave to our descendants; because, by the time the benefits are realised, we'll be dead and gone and will no longer be in a position to profit from global degradation...?

IOW, short-termism still rules the day. Or, given the subject matter, nihilism might be a better term?

Not really Pete. When it comes to waste, recycling, managing wildlife, etc i'm active enough but the whole issue of man-made climate change i remain part of "the jury's out". And more importantly people advocating a climate emergency arent really coming up with solutions to reverse it. A bit of tax here, a bit of tax there (air passenger duty, green levy on domestic energy bills).

And how does a developed country government mitigate revenue losses from inhibiting movement of goods, people going to work, driving car restrictions, air travel restrictions - all these examples would severely impact tax revenues and then public services?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Bristle boy said:

Not really Pete. When it comes to waste, recycling, managing wildlife, etc i'm active enough but the whole issue of man-made climate change i remain part of "the jury's out". And more importantly people advocating a climate emergency arent really coming up with solutions to reverse it. A bit of tax here, a bit of tax there (air passenger duty, green levy on domestic energy bills).

And how does a developed country government mitigate revenue losses from inhibiting movement of goods, people going to work, driving car restrictions, air travel restrictions - all these examples would severely impact tax revenues and then public services?

It's all a little bit Mr Micawber isn't it? We're living beyond our means but we're happy because we think were are not. How long can you take 'twenty pounds and six pence' (and take more each year)  from a 'twenty pound' planet?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Devonian said:

It's all a little bit Mr Micawber isn't it? We're living beyond our means but we're happy because we think were are not. How long can you take 'twenty pounds and six pence' (and take more each year)  from a 'twenty pound' planet?

again who says we are living beyond our means? based on what exactly?..the world and technology is ever evolving there are things present in our lives today that would not have been imagined 30 years ago..there will be things we cannot dream of that will be everyday technology in 30 years time..i don't buy this gumpf that we are standing on the edge of disaster or the end is nigh BS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...