It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

criss angel discussion...

page: 102
13
<< 99  100  101    103  104  105 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 03:49 PM
link   
Originally posted by eyewitness86
reply to post by MrdDstrbr
 

Sigh, let's go round the merry go round again shall we?

First off you have been asked numerous times to present your probabilities and odds by In Spite Of yet never have.

Now for you points one by one.

1. Prove to me CA does his high levitiations really in public venues open to everyone? Where was the B to B done? Have any of them been announced to the public before hand? Have you talked to one person present at any "high Levitation"?


2. CA has been filmed by his own film team which then produces the special. Do you have third party film of any of the events? DUH of course you aren't going to see the props, it's his own production of it.

3. No one prior to CA decided to rely almost totally on Videotaped performances of such events. Even DC and Dough Henning toured. Let's see CA perform his high levitation on live TV and then we can talk.

4. This one is a farce and you know it. Even your other semi supporter acknowledges that each of the high levitations other than the top of Luxor were witnessed by only a few handful of people. The Top of Luxor was so far away, there were no upfront witnesses.

5. Hello? how about the Car chicken event? Or the Motorcycle jump event? Or the Building to Building Event. Or the Saw event? Is that enough for you? Each of those show either splicing of two separate events or intentional editing/cutting of scenes to give a false impression.

6. There is nothing illegal with what CA does, don't know where you are getting that. Obviously you know nothing of magic is you don't think he takes site lines into consideration. I am sorry someone was using basic geometry to calculate how far up CA was suspended. He must be able to change not only the laws of physics but mathematics as well.

7. CA performs the Building to building with a very linear "float" across the parking lot, at the same pace as the person below him in the video that "mysteriously" vanishes in the latter part of it. Couldn't someone who actually levitates be able to move however they wanted ie up and down, left and right, forward and backwards?

To Summarize:
The last few paragraphs of yours are just full of drivel. You provide no proof other than the Mindfreak episodes. CA himself states he has no supernatural powers. We show multiple errors/discrepancies/edits in his videos. We actually discuss many probable ways he performs them. After all of that, you still cling to your belief in something you have never and can never prove with any shred of proof other than the Mindfreak episodes.


Again I will leave it to the readers to determine which side is more rational and logical.

Just once provide some proof of your claims other than the videos themselves. Prove to me for example that one of the manufacturers of the wire we talk about is not based in Vegas. Tell me the times and ticket prices for CA "daily" shows? Tell me where and when the B to B was done?. Were any of the "high levitation's announced to the public prior to them happening?
C'mon try to answer them, or are you scared of what you might find?




posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 03:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
Well here again, what you are basically saying is, "we don't have even the slightest clue how he could have done the saw trick for UNPAID spectators - therefore the whole audience must be paid! Therefore CA uses paid audiences!".

No, YOU don't have a clue, how it was done, obviously, even tho i explained it at least five times by now. You once again changed your position, only to suit your needs.



Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
Meanwhile, you still don't have a shred of evidence for such a thing


Look, i don't know how many times i have to explain it, obviously nothing will do.
You seem to be the type that wants to believe, there is no explanation, so you can then imagine fancy things.

Well, in that case, there is no point in anything i do. Why don't you rather stop asking questions, so you will understand even less, and be able to imagine even more? It would be easier to all of us.



Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
I can't explain how he did the saw trick, because I don't know. But just because I can't figure it out - does not automatically mean that the entire audience is in on it


Again, you're twisting logic. No, you not understanding how it's done, doesn't mean the entire audience is in on it.
But if you would for a moment stop thinking backwards (- starting by the final assumption and working back from there), you could perhaps realize how it was done, because i explained it IN DETAIL!

Look, if you want to believe in UFOs and the government having anti-gravity devices, that is great. It can't be prooven, nor disprooven.

But why are you clinging to CA for confirmation?!?

Unlike UFOs and anti-gravity, Criss Angel's stunts CAN be explained. But if you don't want an explanation, so you could speculate on what you'd like to believe, you shouldn't ask for one.


You're starting to sound a little like Eyewitness, only with anti-gravity, instead of mystic vibrations. Still, at least you're not insulting us. Thank you for that.




Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
Do you have a source for that? That other good illusionists look down on him....?

As a matter of fact i do.

It just fell out of the sky, and landed in front of me. One could say it was almost an act of magic...



This is from a 78 year old magicial Mark Wilson. He was the Magical advisor to the T.V. series The Magician and the film of the same name.

This is what he said:



Nani Wilson is the illusionist whom Magic magazine named as one of the Top 10 magicians of the 20th century. That list also included Harry Houdini, David Copperfield and Doug Henning.

.
.

Wilson spent several years trying to sell his show to a network. He got the same rebuff: Magic doesn't work on television.

But when Kellogg's stepped up as a sponsor, "The Magic Land of Allakazam" launched in 1960.

Whether it was his local or network show, Wilson always went out of his way to stress that no camera tricks were being used.

That's one reason why Wilson is so upset with some of the current magicians seen on television, particularly Criss Angel.

"He violates all the rules. Speaking as a professional magician, I will tell you that you cannot levitate from the top of one building to another without using television tricks. My fear is that using these kind of tricks will make it like before I began and people will start thinking that true magic can't work on television," Wilson says.


From FresnoBee - Entertainment - Hocus Pocus


And i have it on good authority, that he is not the only one.

BTW: This is just an example of what was said in public, on the record. What magicians are talking about among themselves, i have no way of showing you, because their circles really are secret. They do have internet forums, but we can't access them, without being magicians ourselves.

You're welcome.

[edit on 9/2/08 by deezee]



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 04:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by pavil
1. Prove to me CA does his high levitiations really in public venues open to everyone? Where was the B to B done?


Please forgive me for butting in here.

I don't know where exactly the B2B was done, but it's obvious from the video that it's right in the middle of the city somewhere, with lots of different streets and buildings around. Which is why I find the notion that every single witness was a paid actor and there was not one single independent witness around laughable.

Sure it wasn't say, Times Square, but it was public enough! Public enough that Team CA would not be able to have 100% control over the number of witnesses around....



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
I don't know where exactly the B2B was done, but it's obvious from the video that it's right in the middle of the city somewhere, with lots of different streets and buildings around.

To me it looked more like some warehouses or an industrial complex.



Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
Which is why I find the notion that every single witness was a paid actor and there was not one single independent witness around laughable.

Well then where are these witnesses, saying that there were no props? Or that there were? I don't care which they say, where are they?



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by deezee

Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
Well here again, what you are basically saying is, "we don't have even the slightest clue how he could have done the saw trick for UNPAID spectators - therefore the whole audience must be paid! Therefore CA uses paid audiences!".

No, YOU don't have a clue, how it was done, obviously, even tho i explained it at least five times by now. You once again changed your position, only to suit your needs.


Nope. Just because you feel there's no way he could have done the trick in front of unpaid, independent witnesses, does not automatically mean that the entire audience is in on it! Maybe Team CA thought of something you didn't?

And the same applies for every trick. Just because YOU can't see how it could be done without the entire audience being in on it - doesn't automatically make that so! Team CA may have other tricks up their sleeve that you haven't thought of





Well, in that case, there is no point in anything i do. Why don't you rather stop asking questions, so you will understand even less, and be able to imagine even more? It would be easier to all of us.


LOL! I'm quite sure no one's putting a gun to your head forcing you to reply to my posts, deezee





But if you would for a moment stop thinking backwards (- starting by the final assumption and working back from there), you could perhaps realize how it was done, because i explained it IN DETAIL!


Yes, you did give your theory on how it's done, in detail. But you prefaced it by saying "It would be impossible to do that trick in front of unpaid independent witnesses" (paraphrasing).

You started out with a faulty assumption! How do you know it's impossible? What if Team CA thought of something you didn't?

You can't just assume the entire audience is in on it, without proof, period.




Look, if you want to believe in UFOs and the government having anti-gravity devices, that is great. It can't be prooven, nor disprooven.

But why are you clinging to CA for confirmation?!?


LOL!

I told you not to take that too seriously, but you are anyway. It's just a pet theory. I'm hardly "clinging to CA for confirmation"! LOL!!!!!




This is from a 78 year old magicial Mark Wilson. He was the Magical advisor to the T.V. series The Magician and the film of the same name.

This is what he said:
[snippage]
"He violates all the rules. Speaking as a professional magician, I will tell you that you cannot levitate from the top of one building to another without using television tricks."


Well done deezee. Bringing in the opinion of a pro magician certainly does add weight to your argument


Although, here again - it's still possible that Team CA came up with a method that Mr. Wilson could not....



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 04:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by deezee

Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
Which is why I find the notion that every single witness was a paid actor and there was not one single independent witness around laughable.

Well then where are these witnesses, saying that there were no props? Or that there were? I don't care which they say, where are they?


That's an excellent question, and I wish I knew the answer.

It's definitely strange that people who have seen CA perform in person aren't posting about it on the net, in forums or blogs or whatever. (With the exception of "1 true criss angel fan" of course)



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by MrdDstrbr
 


By all means interject, The B to B looks like a warehouse / Factory area to me. Easy enough to find a vacant complex nowadays. I didn't see foot traffic or for that matter any car traffic in the background so it is not in a very populated part of a city.

I would have a much harder time argueing this if CA had decided to do his levitation from say the Luxor to the MGM Grand for example. It's very obvous that the building to building cannot be performed in front of a large audience for some reason.



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 06:31 PM
link   
Why have I never heard of Mark Wilson? Because he cannot do what Criss does, that why. He is jealous anda angry that Criss can make a fortune doing his thing, yet no one else can use his tricks and get the money..right?

Unreal. just because Mark Wilson is also a Denier, does NOT in any nway give him any reason tro comment on levitation. He must work some back alley stage shows or whatever and is not famous; Criss is #1, and Mark is just stumped trying to figure it out, since he had no idea any more than the deniers here do.

Why quote a failed( or maybe he is successful in his STAGE tricks and club acts that are NEVER outside in the public I am sure. Why doesn't HE have a stage show and all the fame? What makes Criss different? is it faked videos that people fall for, or it it more? I say more.

Pavil, once again you are doing it; assuming things not in evidence and asking me to reply to them. I have done so many times already. you and I are on different planes of belief, and thats OK. Just please do not assume that you know what happens in Criss events, because NONE of the MANY telling points I made in my big post have been dealt with and if you cannot deal with them, vice versa.

Question: Do you really believe that Criss edits video's to fool people into believing that no props are there and that all of the witnesses are paid and LOYAL forever? Do you? if so, WHY? Based on what? What could make someone believe odds likethat? One day you are going
to be very suprised.



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 06:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
Just because you feel there's no way he could have done the trick in front of unpaid, independent witnesses, does not automatically mean that the entire audience is in on it! Maybe Team CA thought of something you didn't?

Did you read ALL of my explanations of the sawing in half trick, or do i have to sum them up for you? Is Pavil right, when he is saying, you didn't really go through the thread?

Please read at least my last explanation, look at the illusion, reread my explanation and look at the illusion yet again.

You will notice a couple of things i mentioned.

1. When CA is "mounted" on the "table", the camera is moving to the right, then it suddenly switches and is even more to the right.
2. When CA is "sawn in half", you will notice, that his sawn part of the body ends quite a distance away from where the "table" was "sawn in half".

About 1: When the camera switches, it is not instantaneous, as they would have us believe. It's actually camera OFF, cumbersome moves, to get CA's body into the "table" and another person's legs out of the other part of the "table", then camera back ON again.

About 2: Since he is lying on the back, there was no way for his upper part of the body to be "cut" at the same place where the table was, because he had to bend over BACKWARDS. This is very hard to do, leading to the fact, that his upper part of the body (where the metal harness is "holding him to the table") end quite a distance away from the edge of the table.

Look at it, and you will see it's so.

Besides, that harnes, that is "holding him down", is not really doing that, but is just holding up his shirt on one side, to give the appearance his body is really there, and a black mini curtain on the other side, where he is "sawn in half", hiding where his body is really going.




Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
Yes, you did give your theory on how it's done, in detail. But you prefaced it by saying "It would be impossible to do that trick in front of unpaid independent witnesses"

You started out with a faulty assumption! How do you know it's impossible?

This is where you are wrong. Maybe i started my last (fifth?!?) explanation this way...

But when i was looking at the illusion for the first time, i was quite impressed by it. (If you would read all my posts about this you would know this.)
In one of my first posts about this illusion, i wrote, that David did it first, but CA improoved it. I actually thought CA's is better, because David needed a box. This is where i started from. Not from the assumption of a paid audience. I actually thought the audience was real! This is why i was so impressed with it initially.

But then i noticed the camera "switch" and i suddenly realized something. then i started looking more carefully and noticed the other things i mentioned.

Then i thought, that maybe, just maybe some of the audience was paid off, while the others were real. I thught, maybe the real ones were somehow distracted during the cumbersome moves.

This was when Qwenn contacted me, and confirmed my observations, and also helped me understand it even better.

After that, i realized, there was NO WAY, any of the audience was real, if they were there the whole time..

But hey, what if they brought some in, when he was already mounted on the table? (this was the next thought).

Unfortunatelly this presents yet another problem. David was on the stage, in a thinner table (because he was bent forward), further away from the audience (first three rows always reserved for family and fellow magicians).

CA allowed the "audience" to stand next to the table, even walk through the middle.

At this point i realized, all the "audience" had to be paid off, because there is no way they wouldn't notice a certain object under the table and it's real shape, when standing close, never mind, when walking through the middle.


This is what my thought process was like. Unlike some people here, i didn't start at the final assumption and worked backwards. You can check my old posts if you don't believe me.

So please don't start twisting my words around.




Originally posted by MrdDstrbr
Although, here again - it's still possible that Team CA came up with a method that Mr. Wilson could not....

And then Pavil and me are the one full of assumptions, right? Do you know, how many ungrounded assumptions you have made by now?

We don't just assume, we always explain everything in great detail - show, why this is the most likely explanation. But in some cases, it is not just the most likely explanation. It's the only one. This is why i like the sawing in half illusion. It is very telling, once explained.


But if you think it was done differently, you have to present a plausible theory on HOW. Otherwise you're just speculating and assuming things.

I explained all the whys and hows. If you want me to accept a different explanation, then at least offer one. I'm open to considering EVERYTHING.

But you have to offer something.
Without any basis, such speculations are meaningless.


I mean, even if CA would have the ability to bend over backwards at 180° angle (fold in half), he would still have to do this somehow and slide into the table compartment.

David did this in a box. CA did it by turning the camera OFF.


There is NO WAY for him not to have to do these moves, if the camera was on him constantly.
And there is no way, the audience wouldn't notice these complicated moves, without a box, like the one David used.


If you really think, that camera switch was instantaneous, then it would mean, CA didn't hide in the table, but was really sawn in half.

I guess the government had to give him some special "sawing in half technology", right?

But in this case, why is his body not sawn in the same spot, where the table is? Why does the "sawn" half of his upper body suddenly move away from the edge, where the table is "sawn" in half?
Why does the camera switch, instead of being on him constantly during this?


For me the realization came, when i saw, that with David, the camera was on him constantly, without flinching. With CA it's "flinching" constantly.

This was very disillusioning for me. I initially believed CA's trick was improoved from Davids. But i realized it's quite the opposite.

I used to be amazed by CA's preformances, now i'm not anymore..


Do you understand what i'm saying? I would much rather believe it's amazing and unexplicable.

But i am never again going to allow my wishes to cloud my judgement.



And just so you REALLY understand me:
I'm not saying "anti-gravity" is impossible. In fact i would love to believe it is possible. But CA is in no way proof of that.
I would also love to believe, that "supernatural" human levitation is possible. But again, CA is not proof of that even in the slightest way.

It would be wonderfull, if either or even both of these things were possible! The implications would be so profound...

But i am never again going to allow my "beliefs" to be based on wishfull thinking. In fact, i don't want ANY beliefs AT ALL. Beliefs prevent you from being open minded, because they prevent you from considering any other possibility, even if it is completelly logical and plausible or even prooven.


Beliefs NEVER did ANYTHING good for me or anyone i know. In fact they did just the opposite, and a LOT of it.

Logic, on the other hand, did a WHOLE LOT for me. It allowed me to achieve things i thought impossible.



P.S. I was thinking this a while ago, but forgot to say it, so i'll say it here..
NDAs have become a part of daily life for many people. I own a company, that developes certain complicated technological devices, and i had to sign many NDAs so far.
In fact, the most important one isn't even signed, but is just a verbal agreement.



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
Why have I never heard of Mark Wilson? He must work some back alley stage shows or whatever and is not famous; Criss is #1, and Mark is just stumped trying to figure it out, since he had no idea any more than the deniers here do.

Why quote a failed...

Do you even read the things you "comment" on?

If you did, you would know, Mark Wilson is among the top 10 illusionists ever. CA may be #1 on popularity list of TV "magic", but he is never going to be on any proffesional list, because of the way he does things.


A failed magician... Sure.. Believe what you want, as long as it makes you happy.

[edit on 9/2/08 by deezee]



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 07:06 PM
link   
But Criss is always number one and all the others are cool with this, right? All the other guys are always going to be happy as second rate nobodies doing stage magic and wishing that they could do what Criss does

. How can Criss stay at the top of the heap so long? Fraudulent videos? No way. He does thing no one else can do, thats as simple as it gets.



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
Why have I never heard of Mark Wilson? ......
Question: Do you really believe that Criss edits video's to fool people into believing that no props are there and that all of the witnesses are paid and LOYAL forever? Do you? if so, WHY? Based on what? What could make someone believe odds likethat? One day you are going
to be very suprised.


Why do you continually say you have answered those questions when it is blatantly obvious you have not? It's really quite absurd, that you continue to do this.

You are showing your ignorance of Mark Wilson, who is one of the first TV magicians. Calling him the names you are doing just shows how little you know or care to know. I didn't know him but hint, I researched him before making such judgments that you seem to have. Must you automatically belittle or insult anyone who opposes your view on this matter?

Answer to your question: Yes Criss Angel definitely edits some of his video events. We have shown for example in the Car Chicken, that there is definitely editing taking place to make the event look like something it really is not. The Saw event is the same way, there is no way for the audience to be amazed like they are when they would have had to see Criss maneuver his body into position. You contend the B to B is not edited, yet the man on the ground is a smoking gun to either multiple takes or editing, take your pick.

Again, some of Criss Angel's videos are not edited to remove things, they are just shot in a manner so as not to show the offending objects in the first place. Some however are blatantly spliced together to achieve an illusion. The Motorcycle Jump and the Car chicken are the two most obvious of those.


I understand you haven't looked into how these tricks are actually performed but rest assured trickery takes place. CA just tends to use camera trickery as well, which is why some magicians are put off by his approach. I know I will never change your mind but still you cannot answer my questions in the previous post. Do you ever do any of your own research?

Do you think everyone of CA tricks is the real deal? I didn't think you were that gullible.



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by deezee
 


deezee, I am, of course, completely overwhelmed by your lengthy and in-depth efforts to explain the saw illusion.

Well done.


You may be right in that many of the things CA does may not be real "magic" or illusions in the classic sense. Perhaps he really does resort to completely paid audiences and film editing regularly.

BTW I have never claimed that CA is conclusive proof of either "supernatural powers" or anti-grav technology.

Much of this thread has been a debate between the "illusions" camp and the "supernatural powers" camp; I was only trying to introduce a third possibility and create some interesting food for thought with my speculations about anti-grav technology.



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 10:36 PM
link   
Some of the magic is trickery the rest of it is occultist stuff I believe. He could use servitors and god-forms to levitate himself and other people. But if you listen to the lyrics of the theme song it pretty much sums it all up — "There's no reality, just this world of illusion," referring to the fact that reality (as we know it) simply does not exist, just this illusion created by our brains.

Reality is also in the eye of the beholder, maybe his brain is more advanced than most which gives him the ability not to just witness 'reality' but manipulate it.



posted on Feb, 9 2008 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by xion329alpha
He could use servitors and god-forms to levitate himself and other people.


Pleae elaborate why you believe this? What do you even mean by those terms? CA does not appear to conjure demons if that is what you mean.



posted on Feb, 11 2008 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by eyewitness86
But Criss is always number one and all the others are cool with this, right? All the other guys are always going to be happy as second rate nobodies doing stage magic and wishing that they could do what Criss does

. How can Criss stay at the top of the heap so long? Fraudulent videos? No way. He does thing no one else can do, thats as simple as it gets.


Criss isn't respected that much in the magic community.He's regarded as a bit of a egotistical fake,never coming up with new methods or techniques regarding his street magic and illusion shows.
Its well known he uses camera tricks,stooges and edits,but the magic family has an honourable view of not being bitter and snitching on certain methods he uses,it goes against our beliefs and opens the door to revealing how he does his other tricks,(which are mostly great classics with a modern twist)
I believe his methods of levitation are so basic even the masked magician wouldn't have the cheek to reveal how its done.(Actors,a big crane,harness,multiple camera takes,computers to clean up the wires and a gullible audience)
Mark Wilson is a very well known magician who has devised many tricks and is far more esteemed than Angel.
I've seen Criss do card tricks straight outta Mark Wilsons Complete course in Magic book!
I think your lack of knowledge in magical matters is whats letting you down eyewitness,its good to believe in Levitation and its good people are enjoying Angels shows and have got people talking,but this guy cant do it.
If he were in a room with a 100 other magicians and forced to levitate they would all being Balducci,Elevator,King rising,zero gravity etc and only going a few inches high,,,so would he, without the crane and camera tricks!

His style is so tacky and wrong.



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 04:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by xion329alpha
Some of the magic is trickery the rest of it is occultist stuff I believe. He could use servitors and god-forms to levitate himself and other people. But if you listen to the lyrics of the theme song it pretty much sums it all up — "There's no reality, just this world of illusion," referring to the fact that reality (as we know it) simply does not exist, just this illusion created by our brains.



Correction for the lyrics;

"Just this world of delusion"



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 05:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by pavil

Originally posted by xion329alpha
He could use servitors and god-forms to levitate himself and other people.


Pleae elaborate why you believe this? What do you even mean by those terms? CA does not appear to conjure demons if that is what you mean.


Pavil, you have read enough of PaulRichards posts to know that he gave detailed explanations of the spiritual entities that he believe allow Criss to levitate. Group entities, I believe. It has NOTHING to do with DEMONS, who in a religious sense are considerewd negative and devilish; no proof exists that the entities, if the exist, are negative in any way.

Gop back to PR's posts and read his links: They have a lot of info. I am not convinced of that but do insist that there are no props in the high levitations.



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 07:05 AM
link   
reply to post by eyewitness86
 


I dont think a godform or a servitors has anything to do with group entities.

From a quick google search, a servitors is akin to a thoughtform. In other words, its a servant created by the magician; its a construct, if you know anything about the occult, that name should tell you its purpose.

A godform is harder to define, but my best extrapolative guess is it is the spritual form of a god that you invoke.

Im no expert, but a 10 minute google search releaved some basic answers and if i felt like investing more time, im sure id be able to find definitive answers.

Here's the interesting part, pavil was closer (hell maybe even dead on for all i know) with his idea of those 2 things, while you, did no research, made no effort to find the answers for yourself, and just took a stab in the dark, which is indicative of your entire post history in this thread, isnt it?



posted on Feb, 12 2008 @ 08:58 AM
link   
reply to post by eyewitness86
 



I am aware of Paul Richards beliefs, the poster was not Paul Richards. I am unclear as to what they mean. The impression that I got was CA conjuring rather than CA "channeling" as PR describes. I just wanted clarification on his statement.




top topics



 
13
<< 99  100  101    103  104  105 >>

log in

join