Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 03/31/2020 in all areas

  1. 3 points
    This might be of interest. An opportunity to get into the mind of one of the key investigators of the P-G film, René Dahinden. Here is the guy who pulled measurements of the filmsite, hoping that one day they would be important. He probably never anticipated the massive use of the internet, social media, or a forum devoted to our favorite subject, Bigfoot, and a sub forum just on the P-G film (PS: by the way, the term "Patterson-Gimlin film" was put into circulation by René, as he wanted to give credit to Bob Gimlin, who was always in the background. It is almost like he is sitting in your living room, talking directly to YOU. Having known René since the late 1970s, this is the first time I have ever seen this video. He never mentioned it once to me. Have a look. Somehow, I think Dahinden, Roger Patterson and John Green will be far more famous in death than they were when living. Never met Roger Patterson as he was before my time. Bill Munns was extraordinarily lucky to have met John before he died. https://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1402840325?fbclid=IwAR2ysCBOX9Ya_ihyxVSMpNPmIlmm30d8L0MAD7rsLMfwFPyfkjfEkzKflgs
  2. 2 points
    Here is a nugget to chew on. When George Haas visited the P-G filmsite with John Green on June 23, 1968, he collected these rocks from a footprint that Patty had stepped on. Presumably they were pressed to the bottom of the track. The footprints were still visible some eight months after the event. They are in my possession. Have a look. Neat souvenir. One of a kind.
  3. 2 points
    Hi, BFF members. I've been thinking about what I could do to help lighten what we are experiencing with this Covid-19 situation. The only thing I could come up with is to share as yet unpublished manuscript of "The Tale of Six Rivers with you. No need say more, I will just let the story speak for itself: The Tale of Six Rivers - by aka- hiflier.pdf for the slider
  4. 2 points
    https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/02/world/ancient-humans-skull-evolution-fossils-scn-trnd/index.html Interesting account of competition between Homo erectus, Australopithecus afarensis and Paranthropus and how it all plays out hypothetically re: morphology, brain development and migrational patterns And this re: Homo naledi https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0230440 And loving the great taste preferences of Neandertals https://www.newscientist.com/article/2238767-neanderthals-feasted-on-seafood-and-nuts-according-to-fossil-remains/?utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1585245771
  5. 2 points
    "It's springtime in Alaska, and it's forty below........." A pair of trumpeter swans flew over my camp headed north, though...... I caught three pike. They fileted out 2.5 lbs of meat. It was a 36 mile snowmobile trip, and I feel it. I'm getting a bit old for this silliness. I return home to news that ADFG closed all spring bear hunting due to coronavirus. Spring bear hunting is when I don't see anybody. I could understand closing all hunts that require commercial services, but why residents hunting our own backyards? I'll be registering my complaint along with thousands of other hunters.........
  6. 2 points
    I agree completely. The movies prove over & over again that Patty was the real deal.
  7. 2 points
    I suspect most footprint finds are entirely accidental. During the dry months they were very hard to find even though the area was active. I have stated it before but my footprint findings and active area location was not entirely accidental. At the danger of boring the reader, let me detail the process of finding my research area so that others can use it with similar circumstances. I started my field research by reviewing BFRO and published book sighting reports. I found a small cluster in an area fairly close to where I live. I was able to visit the exact locations of each sighting report. Looking around and trying to figure out at the location what the BF was doing in the area. One sighting by a newspaper carrier near the Lewis River was easy to find the exact spot from the BFRO report. Logic said that the BF was coming to water. Possibly to fish at night because the river has a Steelhead run or just to drink. Across the road I noticed sign of a game trail coming straight down the hill to the road. Examination showed use but no hoof prints for deer or elk. It was quite steep and while a human could come down, there were easier spots fairly close a human could do. Since the game trail pointed that direction, and across the river was a named mountain with a history of vocalizations in the mid 1990s, I wondered if the BF was traveling that direction and crossing the river. I was able to get to the other side of the river opposite to where the game trail came down to the road. Sure enough, a faint game trail came up from the river up a steep embankment. The human trail in that location was steep and a series of switchbacks. I could not follow the game trail directly but could by using the human trail with switch backs. At the side margin of the human trail, I found a partial footprint in the gravely soil, that was 5.5 inchs wide at the toes, and plainly showed toes. Based on the width that makes the foot likely over 20 inches long. The footprint and a smeared print on the other side indicated the BF had stepped across the muddy human trail and continued straight up the mountain on a faint game path. I followed that up the mountain as far as i could. Ok recent footprint and old vocalizations sure pointed to that mountain. I climbed it several times, summer and winter but never found any more footprint evidence. Then to my dismay they began clear cutting the Northern flank of the mountain. That continued across the top and down the East side to the Southern flank. Anything there would be pushed South. The trail up and over the mountain was not fun because of the climb, so I located the end of the trail to the South with easier vehicle access and began to explore that area. Pretty much being chased by the logging I began to hike around an area by a year round creek. One July day, it was hot, the trail was getting overgrown and I was wearing shorts, so I turned around went South instead of North, then turned again to explore a side trail, heard distant whoops back and forth, that were coming my direction, one headed directly for me. Heavy footsteps, breaking underbrush, heading towards me, I had no place to hide near the trail and waited to get run over. It saw or smelled me and went into a crouch with a big thud. Seconds later 4 rapid wood knocks, then silence. Moving towards the sounds camera ready, I got my picture of the juvenile peeking over the ferns at me. Well at that point the encounter and the BF traveling into that area seemed significant. I targeted that area as my research area, found footprints periodically. and had several encounters with what seemed to be a family of them. That continued until clear cutting rolled though the area and displaced them. That was the entire evolution of how I found my research area and others likely could use the same process to find an active area.
  8. 1 point
    I was there about 1974 after it was no longer in use. That was before they dammed the Applegate River. According to Wikipedia it is still there. Was there with the person who made the trap and had it transported to that spot. Have several other photos and even some of the miners cabin just below the trap. Does anyone else have any photos of the trap from the 70's?
  9. 1 point
    I am glad that you asked that question, because I have only had two really scary encounters on the hill. One was a bluff charge, and the other was a forceful escort off the hill. So when I said bluff charges, I should have said bluff charged. Other things like rock clacking, wood knocking, and stone throwing happen every time up there during the May to Nov months, but only two really scary events on that particular hill. So basically, one bright summer's day, on Aug 25th, of 2012, me and a friend, parked in the dirt area at the base of the hill, and started up the north trail entrance, check the map in my video, there is a north and a south entrance, and they circle around and come together to the trail leading up the hill. Well, anyways we started in just chit chatting and stuff, and came to the point where the trails meet, and went right up the hill, like what I had wanted to do. While we were walking up the hill, I could hear stuff moving in the bush on both sides of us. I would swing the camera, toward's the noise each time, never even seeing any brush move or anything. We had made it about a 1/4 of the way up the hill, when a thought popped into my head, that we were on the wrong trail. At this point, I had only been up the hill a few times, and I wasn't quite sure, if I went the right way, or I was actually heading back out to the south entrance. So I suggested, that we double back to make sure we were on the correct trail, and my companion had only been there once before, so it was my decision to make. Anyways, I shut the camera off, to save battery life, and we started back, and about where the north and south and hill trails meet, which is exactly where the nest is, but this was 2012 and I had no idea there was a nest there until 2019, well this is the point that a ton of stick breaking and noise like footfalls and brush moving and it sounded like an elephant running downhill through the forest to meet us on the right side of the uphill trail, and I fully expected something to come busting out of the laurel and other foilage which lined the trail on both sides, and I started shaking like a leaf. Unless you have experienced this for yourself, you can't even imagine the fear induced adrenaline rush. But we just stood there, we didn't run, for whatever reason, to me it seemed that running would be futile. I can't say why my friend didn't run. At this point, I turned the camera back on as soon as could, and suggested that maybe the forest people didn't want us around. The video is shaky as can be, I was literally shaking like a leaf in the wind. At this point, my friend suggests that maybe we could talk to the forest people and ask them if it was ok to hike into the forest. My friend was not the least be shaken by all the commotion, and I said go ahead and talk to them, and while my friend talked to them, we both still heard sticks breaking, and what sounded like a big stick breaking not 20 feet from us, and I couldn't tell where or what was breaking these sticks. I sat on a big rock and tried to get video of the bush, zooming in here and there, but couldn't see a darn thing. Then we heard what sounded like rythmic wood knocking, maybe a wood ******, but it seemed to go on for quite a while and it did sound like there was kind of a pattern to it. We must have waited about ten minutes, and nothing occurred after the wood knocking which again sounded like it was only about 20 feet away. So after about ten minutes, I was able to collect myself, and was still shaking just a little, but we contiued on our hike. But on the map, where you take a sharp right halfway up the hill to go past the nests on the hill, well that's what I used to call the decision point, and once there, you could go left, straight, or right, and that day we went straight. And aside from a couple of faint stick break sounds, nothing else of note happened. Well, that's what I remember, I'll never forget it.
  10. 1 point
    Thanks WSA, Huntster, hiflier, and MIB for the comments! I was also there in about 76 or 77 and here is another photo with the door open. Really don't remember the trap being active all the time up until 1980. Probably just active sporadically. I will post some photos of the cabin later which I see now is just a pile of boards. Also wished I had taken a photo of the mine shaft where the miner who reported the sighting did his mining. It was close to where the cabin was.
  11. 1 point
    I was there a couple years ago. I've lived less than an hour from it for over 20 years. Neat spot. I've investigated reports around the general area. One of my friends has done even more. Those are his stories to tell, not mine. I suspect it was a very good location but the building of the dam and filling of the reservoir have redirected BF travel from that particular ridge to others upstream and downstream from the one with the trap. There are recent reports from the other side of the lake even without a through-route anymore so I suppose there could still be intermittent activity near the trap. MIB
  12. 1 point
  13. 1 point
    I have some questions for further investigation. 1) Were the limbs from the trees under which they were found? 2) Were the limbs cut or broken. 3) They seem kind of spread all over the place rather than something that could be laid on. Is there any sign that there was anything laying on them? Other than snow. 4) Is there any possibility some kind of bough harvesting is going on in the area? I ask because bough harvesting of several tree species occurs at certain times of the year in the PNW where I live. 5) Are there other hemlock out in the forest, away from the trail, that show the same thing around them?
  14. 1 point
    According to René Dahinden's notes Tree #1 was down by 1968. Tree #2 was down by 1972. Trees marked "O" and "X" were down by 1975. Please keep in mind that during his early days in British Columbia he was employed in surveys for the government, so even if the trees were down he may have known exactly where and how to measure the center of the misplaced tree. I believe René's first trip to the filmsite was in 1971 and his knowledge of Tree # 1 being down surely must have come from John Green, who was on site on June 23, 1968. René sometimes alluded to the idea the film subject (which he called the "creature") was anywhere between 6 feet 8 inches tall and 7 feet, but with no reference as to how that information was derived or whether the reference applied to a walking height or standing height, as he never made any comments that I know of that differentiated between the two.
  15. 1 point
    Hi guys, here is the methodology to get you going. The following shows how to use Patty's height to get her distance from the camera, which can be used to solve the T1->T2->Camera triangle. If we can agree that based on Patty's arm ruler, her body length vectors from the bottom of her foot to the top of her crest is approx. 78" (6' 6") then we can use her body as a ruler (bottom of foot to top of head = 6' 3"). This doesn't even need to be her actual standing height as long as it is an accurate measurement relative to her arm ruler. It is an extension of her arm ruler where 578 pixels = 75". This gives us a ruler to measure her distance from the camera. Let's use the Holy Grail image that MK Davis scanned from the slide image for frame 352. This scanned image is correct in aspect and the best resolution frame available. Now we need the camera specs and the frame height (3453 pixels) to calculate the distance using the lens equation: Now we need to solve the Tree Triangle (T1->T2->Camera) using the cosine rule for non-right triangles: Derive the angles and the sides of the Tree Triangle below to determine the pixels/inche ratio for the horizontal distance between T1 and T2 as seen on the film (black line): To get you started, the angle between T1 and T2 is calculated by measuring the number of pixels between the trees (black horiz line) divided by the width of the full frame (4769 pixels) times 23.26 degrees (25mm lens). Use some geometry to fill in the rest, and if the distance between trees was actually 12 feet then the distance to T1 can be calculated as well as the horiz black line. Then compare that to Patty's distance from the camera in frame 352 and more importantly determine what the scale factor is for the black line (pixels/inch). Then use the difference between ratios for Patty's height (pixels/inch) and the black line to recalculate their distances to see if it matches the geometric soln. There is a relationship between the length of a vector on film and their distance from the camera, as illustrated by the following graphic: This scale factor tells you that Patty in F480 was 1.46 times farther from the camera than in F288. If this scale factor doesn't jibe with the distance calculations from the camera to T1, T2 and Patty in frame 352 then we have a problem with our premise. LIkely, the distance between T1 and T2 was NOT 12 feet and/or the camera specs are off. Give it a go and let me know. I actually did all this at one time but I can't find my results. Best to let you repeat the experiment anyway, then I'll post my old results to compare. Good luck! GF
  16. 1 point
    It goes beyond typos. One example he claims that the rescue dive team told the gentleman's wife, they were 100 % sure that if he was in the lake, they would have found him. This lake is 218 km2 in area and around 900 feet deep, and has a history of not giving up bodies.
  17. 1 point
    I listened to him telling the story of a missing camper by Harrison lake. At best he wasn't really familiar with the area, at worse he was deliberately misrepresenting it
  18. 1 point
    .........or both. I thought it was bizarre. Negligent? At the very least. Agreed. Those strange twists are what make his books pertinent.
  19. 1 point
    I agree that the 411 books do not establish anything. But not strange? I disagree with that. Your example in that tragic story definitely shows negligence on the part of the mother.... but nothing strange. Strange would be after three days the body of the five year old is found 100 feet up the trail where searchers walked 1000 times. Or stranger yet after three days the child is found unharmed and when asked where they had been, the child replies they have been living in a hollow log with a bear to keep them warm. The common denominator of most of the 411 stories is some unseen force that is unexplained by conventional wisdom. Bears do not sleep with children in hollow logs. And yet after three days of exposure here is a healthy child. There are just too many cases like that too ignore.
  20. 1 point
  21. 1 point
    The Portland morning news had a picture of a big cougar prowling a womans back yard someplace in the Portland area. She had seen it more than once. DNR showed up with a dog but could not locate the cat. The woods are pretty quiet now based on what I saw the other day. BF has to wonder where we all went.
  22. 1 point
    I'll test the file this time... Solving Patty 2 040320.pdf There is supposed to be links to your web page, but I see that didn't work in the PDF. The theory is that Roger was further back, but had a 25mm lens, while John Green had something near 20mm. However, it may still be that Roger's position, and lens are what is not correct in the model. IF this is the problem, then I fear that we may not have John Green in the correct place, except we have his measurements. I believe a 20mm lens can be ruled out. It takes a 23-25mm lens to have Patty walking away at the correct angle. (See Gigantofootecus web pages) This leaves us with practically nowhere to go from here... Actually - maybe the next step is to determine the focal length on John Green's camera. I'd need to look at a few full frame JG/JM images AND would have to know the aperture on what seems like a modified camera. I 'measured' the Apparent Distance of the TC1-TC2 trees from John Green's location in the CAD drawing, without actually looking at the images. If we can nail down John Green's focal length, and calculate the true TC1-TC2 apparent distance, then it might alter everything enough to fix the CAD model. When I imply that the CAD model is still incorrect, I mean that I can't line up far trees when I try to place Roger's position during other frames. All of the closer trees can be lined up line up very well. SOMETHING is off, and at the moment, I don't know what it is.
  23. 1 point
    That is a magnificent view. Looks like it could be perfect for squatching. Access to water, ability to retreat to mountains, lots of forest and cover. Thanks for sharing.
  24. 1 point
    No apologies necessary. I have read it . I enjoyed it very much.
  25. 1 point
  26. 1 point
  27. 1 point
    I do like your scale as I said . One thing it shows is though rare 7 ' men do exist. 1 in several million. The number of 6 foot Sasquatches or 7 foot is a lot less. Zero documented..
  28. 1 point
    Thanks bro! Got it downloaded for reading in the next few days!
  29. 1 point
    Thanks Hiflier...that is the culmination of a ton of hard work, energy, thought, and time. Thank you for all of that and I welcome the enjoyment of reading it and sharing your insights.
  30. 1 point
    Looking forward to reading it. Thanks!
  31. 1 point
    I’m reading it and enjoying it. Thanks to Hiflier20!
  32. 1 point
    Hey NorthWind.....I've done some research on this particular species of Sotol, and the roots were a main staple of the Native Americans in the South, however it couldn't be eaten raw and had to be baked in earth ovens for up the 24 hours to remove the toxins, couldn't ever find anything about the leaves as food source though, and can only assume they are fine....they taste good and haven't made me sick, plus the hairyman doesn't eat the roots and older leaves....guess they already know about the toxic (raw) roots. There was plenty of mention about the leaves being used for all kinds of other stuff, such as cordage, baskets, etc.
  33. 1 point
    For a tasty sweet snack, put your thumb in the groove, the outer edges are sharp be careful, and pull.....scrape with your teeth like an Artichoke leaf and enjoy.......Lulu thinks it might be good too, lol:) If you look at the scrape marks that my flat teeth make, it's exactly the same as what I find, there's just no way a person or persons are doing this........and what I find has remained very consistent for many years, hogs will get after these too but is very easy to tell the difference, and in particular they don't carry them off to be consumed at a different location, they just tear up the plant and surrounding dirt.
  34. 1 point
    Thanks hiflier, just downloaded, look forward to an interesting read!
  35. 1 point
    They are loving the Sotol this time of year.....the tender white meat of the young shoots are not quite soft enough for my taste, but the hairyman doesn't seem to care. Here's an hours old chomp, wasn't there yesterday....it's still white too, as the white part turns brown very quickly. Found this on a frequently used BF trail......notice the 3 large flat teeth marks on the leaf, on the 1st & 2nd bite, the white part was not soft enough yet to preform a proper scrape with the teeth, but on the 3rd bite success....it was soft enough. Have any of you guys noticed this in the Southern States, it is more than interesting to me, gotta be DNA all over these things too.
  36. 1 point
    Hi Sweaty. you're right that the example I used to show the difference between Patty's walking and standing height didn't measure from the ground. My bad. My graphic was originally intended to demonstrate the difference between her height vectors (bottom of her foot to the top of her head) and her standing height (her height vectors stacked up vertically). As you correctly stated, her actual walking height needs to be measured from the bottom of her foot only if it is on the ground. The problem here is that I was never interested in determining her walking height since it varies depending where she was in her step cycle and her body orientation relative to the camera plane. Then you need to account for all the foreshortening of her height vectors (tilted toward or away from the camera). Too many variables to bother with to reach an unreliable conclusion. So I only focused on her standing height (body length) and only from frames where she was close to profile (minimal foreshortening). To measure her minimum walking height requires measuring the following frame (309?). This was the exact midpoint (low point) of her step as she transferred her body weight from her left to right leg. However, with frames that are not in profile, you have foreshortening effects to deal with. When I did a quick measure I got ~10% reduction in standing height, which is a lot less than 17%. So I admit that you were right about the "apparent" walking height as seen on film can be considerably less than the actual walking height when Patty was not in profile. You must account for foreshortening. Good observations and well done! To use a surrogate to measure Patty's walking height, we needed to ask Soarwing to assume the same position against a wall, measure his "actual" walking height, then compare it to his "apparent" walking height (as measured on film) to determine the foreshortening effects on his image. Then we could have applied the same scale factor to determine the foreshortening effects on Patty's image and calculate her actual walking height. That is, providing you find this info useful. Cheers GF
  37. 1 point
    Deduction is not everything. A big dose of luck and a lot of intuition can help.
  38. 1 point
    Thanks for your additional explanation, Giganto. I have to disagree with one detail in your graphic, though....the point you used, for the lower-end of Patty's 'walking height'. I would use the bottom of her left leg....since her right leg is up off the ground. Here is an approximation of where Patty's left foot would be, in F350... Here is a more detailed graphic....something I made a long time ago... So, for those two particular film frames...I see the WH/SH differential as being significantly less than 15%. Thanks for elaborating on that. So, you are saying that there is at least one 'error factor', in that calculation of Soarwing's 'walking height'. The differential between his W.H. and his S.H. was not actually that great of a percentage. In the 'foot ruler' calculation, using F72....I think there is one additional 'error factor'....that being...the difference in ground elevation between Roger and Patty. Patty is a few, or several feet higher than Roger, in the opening segment. In F72...Patty's head does not appear as high up, above the shoulders...as it does in the middle segment of the film, where Roger and Patty were on the same level of ground. That effect doesn't introduce a lot of error...but I think it may be a couple of inches worth, of error.
  39. 1 point
    Wyatt and I went in behind lake Ellen yesterday. Just got back. Found a suggestive track but no toes, and then we found a hunting blind, hay and salt back in there. Probably bow hunters in December. The blind was smashed..... too bad. Lots of Moose sign too. Also found a ancient face cut that they never came back to. Yesterday was pretty nice. Today we had a lot of rain and hail. The roof top tent did a good job keeping us dry and warm.
  40. 1 point
    While probably few, if any, I wonder how many of these missing, wanted to "disappear"?
  41. 1 point
    Seems a bit early for snakes. But I'm in snow anus deep to a tall giraffe here. I guess that's why there are no snakes here.
  42. 1 point
    We only saw deer and squirrels, it's early and cold still. It's in the mountains, so Everytime it rains it get foggy. It was a foggy day, but in the summer when WVFooter and I got followed. Today was nice... Below is Seneca Rocks. We tried to hike to the top, but I couldn't do it, got 75% of the way there . I have a new goal now.
  43. 1 point
    That’s a good question, miles from any human activity, and wasn’t near any human trails, it was on a trail that I use and pretty sure the hairyman does too......always find tracks in the area. I couldn’t find any tracks that day, a few from nearby down by the creek. The Sotol is coming out, they’re chowing down on that now.
  44. 1 point
    I work in trucking. We do a lot of medical supplies. We have been deemed an essential operation by the government so we do not get effected by shutdowns. Prior to this all going down my boss was in Europe, Italy and Spain to be specific so he has made it back stateside this week but is in quarantine. That leaves me in charge of the entire show as I"m #2 for the company. We are a cross country carrier so on a daily basis I have to interact with drivers that are just coming back from runs across the country. We service Maine to California. God bless these drivers for being on the front line and willing to drive and deliver anywhere in the country despite fears. So far we have had 2 employees that are awaiting results, they have come back negative for FLU so Corona test is next, they most likely have it given the symptoms. We have strict cleaning regiment we have to perform every 2 hours and we have to wash our hands at least once every 30 mins. I've had to balance my week between calming down scared employees, running the operations, and on conference calls and meetings about what we do next. I have to do my best to keep this thing going, I have a lot of drivers, warehouse workers and office staff that need their paychecks as long as they can. Plus we are delivering things to hospitals that are necessary to operate. I"m both mentally and emotionally worn out tonight, and I cant go see my gf because I dont want to expose her to anything. I go to work and come home trying to interact with the "public" as little as possible. I hate the idea that I could be a carrier that does not show symptoms and could be spreading it at stores or gas stations but I need to keep doing what I can as long as I can to move essential items and keep my people paid as long as possible. Stay safe out there people.
  45. 1 point
    Dean Koontzs was pretty close 38 years ago.
  46. 1 point
    Today is my last day working on site. I'll be working from home 'til at least late April. Possibly extended, not likely reduced. I hope to leverage this .. use what was 45 minutes commuting to work to walk down to the river and fish for 45 minutes, use my hour lunch for a walk instead of surfing the net, and add the 45 minutes I spent commuting home to the time for yard chores so I'm in a better position for goofing off when summer comes. Just have to see how effective I can be. Everybody be safe. MIB
  47. 1 point
    *Political finger pointing follows*: The 2009 swine flu, the same virus that infected @ 27% of humanity and killed @ 7% of humanity in tge two year period of 1918-1920, originated this time in Mexico. There was no way in Hell the American government at that time was going to even utter a peep about "travel restrictions" with Mexico when 5% of all Mexican nationals in existence at the time were already in the United States illegally.
  48. 1 point
    Howdy......hope everyone is doing well:) Here are a few recent print pics, fresh animal kills with interesting breaks circled, and more evidence of someone carrying fire down a very remote trail.
  49. 1 point
    This COVID 19 thing is a media political event. No one seems to remember and are certainly not being reminded that the H1N1 swine flu infected 60 million Americans. 270,000 + were hospitalized, 12,000 + died. No travel restrictions, no quarantines, no mass event closures, no political finger pointing.
  50. 1 point
    I had to give you a hearty laugh on that Guy, but must ensure that my reputation remains un-impugned
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-04:00
  • Create New...