A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

PSI, Mediums, Ghosts, UFOs, Things That Go Bump In The Night
Halil
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed May 03, 2017 12:32 am

A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Halil » Sat May 13, 2017 11:22 pm

I found a new OBE which sounds very compelling. Apparently this man was able to identify targets during his OBE:
https://awareofaware.co/welcome/resourc ... esearcher/

Does this prove the soul? It seems quite scientific, although it has never been published in a scientific journal. That aside, what do you think of it?

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27463
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Wild animal
Location: Transcona

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Gord » Sat May 13, 2017 11:29 pm

Noetics? Doesn't seem quite scientific to me.

Also, there's this quote straight from the article:

Given the results of your research, have you demonstrated the existence of the soul?
Sylvie Déthiollaz: Here, we want to be perfectly clear and honest: we have not scientifically proven anything....
Claude Charles Fourrier: First, we must remember that science, absolute proof does not exist. To the question “have we revealed the existence of the soul”, one can answer objectively no. Subjectively, then, each one can bring his own interpretation to the results that we present....

Well, gee. Okay then.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 18389
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sat May 13, 2017 11:46 pm

BTW, one experiment, test, anecdote, tall tale, short tail, or whatever, proves squat.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 24803
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sun May 14, 2017 12:05 am

Halil wrote:I found a new OBE which sounds very compelling. Apparently this man was able to identify targets during his OBE
They sealed images in envelopes. That was the first give away it was more likely a stage magic trick.

The reason you can see images is because your eyes focus radiating light waves, from objects, onto the rods & cones at the back of your eyes. If you were somehow projecting your non-physical "spirit thingee" through walls and envelopes, that indicates the spirit does not interact with physical things, however the moment the person having the OBE claims to see images, that means he is interacting with physical things (focusing photons) . Therefore this experiment really doesn't make any sense and simply adds more confused results.

Do you think souls can interact with physical things?

User avatar
fromthehills
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9846
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:01 am
Location: Woostone

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby fromthehills » Sun May 14, 2017 3:56 am

My soul reacts to stuff as good as yours does, Mate

User avatar
Shen1986
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2843
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:47 am

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Shen1986 » Sun May 14, 2017 6:07 am

"Death Dies Hard." - Deathstars.

User avatar
gorgeous
Persistent Poster
Posts: 3530
Joined: Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:25 pm

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby gorgeous » Sun May 14, 2017 11:35 am

well if it's debunked then it's not real ...debunkers never have an agenda....
Science Fundamentalism...is exactly what happens when there’s a significant, perceived ideological threat to one’s traditions and identity.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 18389
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sun May 14, 2017 11:43 am

gorgeous wrote:well if it's debunked then it's not real ...debunkers never have an agenda....

And that's the extent of your efforts on any {!#%@} thing, now ain't it.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

Confidencia
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Confidencia » Thu May 18, 2017 11:54 pm

If you think consciousness is a product of the brain then you might have difficulty understanding the concept of OBE or waking sleep.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 16591
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby scrmbldggs » Thu May 18, 2017 11:59 pm

If you think it isn't, you might have difficulty understanding the concept of reality.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 24803
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Matthew Ellard » Fri May 19, 2017 12:03 am

Confidencia wrote:If you think consciousness is a product of the brain then you might have difficulty understanding the concept of OBE or waking sleep.


Really? You seem totally unaware that scientists have already established a hypothesis for why people think they experience OBEs, tested that hypothesis and concluded the hypothesis is correct.

http://content.time.com/time/health/art ... 32,00.html

You seem to be stuck in the 1960s.
:D

Confidencia
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Confidencia » Fri May 19, 2017 9:19 pm

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Confidencia wrote:If you think consciousness is a product of the brain then you might have difficulty understanding the concept of OBE or waking sleep.


Really? You seem totally unaware that scientists have already established a hypothesis for why people think they experience OBEs, tested that hypothesis and concluded the hypothesis is correct.

http://content.time.com/time/health/art ... 32,00.html

You seem to be stuck in the 1960s.
:D



It is inconclusive, the phenomena has not been thoroughly tested. Henrik Ehrsson himself said he was not interested in out of body so his experiments was floored from the outset. You have to have at least an interest in what you are investigating for any conclusive evidence to come out of it. His lack of interest presupposed an hidden agenda. Maybe he wanted to get home for his pie and chips and his lap dog. Beside out of body and the study of it is not accepted by orthodox segments of our culture, all hypotheses and studies on the subject point to this obvious fact.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7604
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Poodle » Fri May 19, 2017 10:01 pm

Confidencia wrote: ... the phenomena has not been thoroughly tested.

Or even tested at all ...
Confidencia wrote: Henrik Ehrsson himself said he was not interested in out of body so his experiments was floored from the outset. You have to have at least an interest in what you are investigating for any conclusive evidence to come out of it. His lack of interest presupposed an hidden agenda. Maybe he wanted to get home for his pie and chips and his lap dog.

Well - sort of. But iffy. Does it REALLY make a difference? I can't, in all honesty, make the connection between 'lack of interest' and 'hidden agenda'. Would you care to expand upon your argument?

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 24803
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat May 20, 2017 12:13 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:Really? You seem totally unaware that scientists have already established a hypothesis for why people think they experience OBEs, tested that hypothesis and concluded the hypothesis is correct.
http://content.time.com/time/health/art ... 32,00.html
You seem to be stuck in the 1960s.
:D

Confidencia wrote:It is inconclusive, the phenomena has not been thoroughly tested.

Yes it has, The phenomena that people feel as though they have had a fuzzy out of body experience has undergone through the scientific method. Hypotheses established, repeatable experiments performed and result analysed. Science has now explained the OBE experience.

You are pretending there is some sort of paranormal OBE where magical spirits somehow leave the body and have journeys, seeing things and hearing things. Let me show you how silly you are

I want you to write down and define the nature of this magical spirit thing.
Can it float through walls? ( must not interact with the physical world)
Can it see things? ( receive photons and thus must interact with the physical world)
Can it see things in closed envelopes? ( has new "see in the dark" powers)


I already know, you won't be able to do this. There are too many conflicting claims. In fact you won't be able to define your magical spirit at all.

Soooooo..... You are posting on a science forum. What do you think is more probable to us? A defined hypothesis that explains why people think they have OBES or your claim that you can't even define what you are claiming? :D

Confidencia
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Confidencia » Sat May 20, 2017 12:17 am

Poodle wrote:
Confidencia wrote: ... the phenomena has not been thoroughly tested.

Or even tested at all ...
Confidencia wrote: Henrik Ehrsson himself said he was not interested in out of body so his experiments was floored from the outset. You have to have at least an interest in what you are investigating for any conclusive evidence to come out of it. His lack of interest presupposed an hidden agenda. Maybe he wanted to get home for his pie and chips and his lap dog.

Well - sort of. But iffy. Does it REALLY make a difference? I can't, in all honesty, make the connection between 'lack of interest' and 'hidden agenda'. Would you care to expand upon your argument?


Of course it does. You know out of your own experience that if you've lost something and you go looking for it half heartedly the chances are you will not find it. Henrik was not really interested in finding evidence for out of body but rather evidence against it.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 24803
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat May 20, 2017 12:21 am

Confidencia wrote: Henrik was not really interested in finding evidence for out of body but rather evidence against it.

How about you stop wasting our time and define a paranormal out of body trip and offer us a fixed definition of the magical spirit thingee that floats through wall & ceilings and can see things?

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27463
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Wild animal
Location: Transcona

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Gord » Sat May 20, 2017 4:07 am

Poodle wrote:
Confidencia wrote: ... the phenomena has not been thoroughly tested.

Or even tested at all ...
Confidencia wrote: Henrik Ehrsson himself said he was not interested in out of body so his experiments was floored from the outset. You have to have at least an interest in what you are investigating for any conclusive evidence to come out of it. His lack of interest presupposed an hidden agenda. Maybe he wanted to get home for his pie and chips and his lap dog.

Well - sort of. But iffy. Does it REALLY make a difference? I can't, in all honesty, make the connection between 'lack of interest' and 'hidden agenda'. Would you care to expand upon your argument?

The only difference it should make is if the person is actually interested in the outcome enough to bias it one way or the other. Lack of interest in finding one particular outcome is usually a good thing. Most people can't manage it, even if they think they can. That's why many of the best studies use the double-blind research design.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

Confidencia
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Confidencia » Sat May 20, 2017 6:55 am

Matthew Ellard wrote:
Confidencia wrote: Henrik was not really interested in finding evidence for out of body but rather evidence against it.

How about you stop wasting our time and define a paranormal out of body trip and offer us a fixed definition of the magical spirit thingee that floats through wall & ceilings and can see things?


There is no fixed definition, it is a subjective experience. If you want to define it try it yourself.

Confidencia
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Confidencia » Sat May 20, 2017 7:05 am

Gord wrote:
Poodle wrote:
Confidencia wrote: ... the phenomena has not been thoroughly tested.

Or even tested at all ...
Confidencia wrote: Henrik Ehrsson himself said he was not interested in out of body so his experiments was floored from the outset. You have to have at least an interest in what you are investigating for any conclusive evidence to come out of it. His lack of interest presupposed an hidden agenda. Maybe he wanted to get home for his pie and chips and his lap dog.

Well - sort of. But iffy. Does it REALLY make a difference? I can't, in all honesty, make the connection between 'lack of interest' and 'hidden agenda'. Would you care to expand upon your argument?

The only difference it should make is if the person is actually interested in the outcome enough to bias it one way or the other. Lack of interest in finding one particular outcome is usually a good thing. Most people can't manage it, even if they think they can. That's why many of the best studies use the double-blind research design.


The lack of interest in finding one particular outcome is not usually but always a good thing, as you say it avoids bias. But not in the testing and the application of investigation. In this area you must be absolutely focused.

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7604
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Poodle » Sat May 20, 2017 7:07 am

Ah - a subjective experience. That explains everything, then.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 16591
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby scrmbldggs » Sat May 20, 2017 7:08 am

We should ask Shaka. He/she/it would know...

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 16591
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby scrmbldggs » Sat May 20, 2017 7:10 am

Confidencia wrote:
Gord wrote:
Poodle wrote:
Confidencia wrote: ... the phenomena has not been thoroughly tested.

Or even tested at all ...
Confidencia wrote: Henrik Ehrsson himself said he was not interested in out of body so his experiments was floored from the outset. You have to have at least an interest in what you are investigating for any conclusive evidence to come out of it. His lack of interest presupposed an hidden agenda. Maybe he wanted to get home for his pie and chips and his lap dog.

Well - sort of. But iffy. Does it REALLY make a difference? I can't, in all honesty, make the connection between 'lack of interest' and 'hidden agenda'. Would you care to expand upon your argument?

The only difference it should make is if the person is actually interested in the outcome enough to bias it one way or the other. Lack of interest in finding one particular outcome is usually a good thing. Most people can't manage it, even if they think they can. That's why many of the best studies use the double-blind research design.


The lack of interest in finding one particular outcome is not usually but always a good thing, as you say it avoids bias. But not in the testing and the application of investigation. In this area you must be absolutely focused.

May we have dressing with that?

Confidencia
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Confidencia » Sat May 20, 2017 9:18 am

scrmbldggs wrote:
Confidencia wrote:
Gord wrote:
Poodle wrote:
Confidencia wrote: ... the phenomena has not been thoroughly tested.

Or even tested at all ...
Confidencia wrote: Henrik Ehrsson himself said he was not interested in out of body so his experiments was floored from the outset. You have to have at least an interest in what you are investigating for any conclusive evidence to come out of it. His lack of interest presupposed an hidden agenda. Maybe he wanted to get home for his pie and chips and his lap dog.

Well - sort of. But iffy. Does it REALLY make a difference? I can't, in all honesty, make the connection between 'lack of interest' and 'hidden agenda'. Would you care to expand upon your argument?

The only difference it should make is if the person is actually interested in the outcome enough to bias it one way or the other. Lack of interest in finding one particular outcome is usually a good thing. Most people can't manage it, even if they think they can. That's why many of the best studies use the double-blind research design.


The lack of interest in finding one particular outcome is not usually but always a good thing, as you say it avoids bias. But not in the testing and the application of investigation. In this area you must be absolutely focused.

May we have dressing with that?


Yes you can. I recommend mayo, it goes will with chips.

User avatar
scrmbldggs
Has No Life
Posts: 16591
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 7:55 am
Custom Title: something
Location: sees Maria Frigoris from its house!

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby scrmbldggs » Sat May 20, 2017 4:58 pm

Hey, you like mayo? Have some!

Yes, we're a generous and friendly bunch. ;)

Confidencia
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun May 14, 2017 9:43 am

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Confidencia » Sat May 20, 2017 5:14 pm

scrmbldggs wrote:Hey, you like mayo? Have some!

Yes, we're a generous and friendly bunch. ;)


If all you have to offer is stale and out of date I beg to differ.

User avatar
Gawdzilla Sama
Has No Life
Posts: 18389
Joined: Sun Jun 01, 2008 2:11 am
Custom Title: Deadly but evil.

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Gawdzilla Sama » Sat May 20, 2017 6:01 pm

Lee Berger's 9 yo son found a completely new species of hominid within minutes of starting his search that day.

Some people who come here spend less time on their claims and have even less skill than 9 yo at judging evident.
Chachacha wrote:"Oh, thweet mythtery of wife, at waft I've found you!"

WWII Resources. Primary sources.
The Myths of Pearl Harbor. Demythologizing the attack.
Hyperwar. Hypertext history of the Second World War.
The greatest place to work in the entire United States.

Matthew Ellard
Real Skeptic
Posts: 24803
Joined: Fri Jun 13, 2008 3:31 am

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Matthew Ellard » Sat May 20, 2017 11:25 pm

Confidencia wrote:There is no fixed definition, it is a subjective experience. If you want to define it try it yourself.
So, here you are on a science forum, claiming science isn't researching something that you can't even describe.

Try a religious forum.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 27463
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Wild animal
Location: Transcona

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Gord » Sun May 21, 2017 12:29 am

Confidencia wrote:
Gord wrote:
Poodle wrote:
Confidencia wrote: ... the phenomena has not been thoroughly tested.

Or even tested at all ...
Confidencia wrote: Henrik Ehrsson himself said he was not interested in out of body so his experiments was floored from the outset. You have to have at least an interest in what you are investigating for any conclusive evidence to come out of it. His lack of interest presupposed an hidden agenda. Maybe he wanted to get home for his pie and chips and his lap dog.

Well - sort of. But iffy. Does it REALLY make a difference? I can't, in all honesty, make the connection between 'lack of interest' and 'hidden agenda'. Would you care to expand upon your argument?

The only difference it should make is if the person is actually interested in the outcome enough to bias it one way or the other. Lack of interest in finding one particular outcome is usually a good thing. Most people can't manage it, even if they think they can. That's why many of the best studies use the double-blind research design.

The lack of interest in finding one particular outcome is not usually but always a good thing, as you say it avoids bias. But not in the testing and the application of investigation. In this area you must be absolutely focused.

I said "usually" to avoid an argument about whether or not it's always a good thing. Little did I know you would agree with me that it's always a good thing to lack interest on the one hand, but then disagree with me on the other. Perhaps I'm simply unaware of how you define the terms "hidden agenda" and "bias"?
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Poodle
Has More Than 7K Posts
Posts: 7604
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 9:12 pm
Custom Title: Regular sleeper
Location: NE corner of my living room

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Poodle » Sun May 21, 2017 8:02 am

No, Confidencia - you're actually unaware (or are pretending to be) of what people actually write - as opposed to what you want them to have written. Stop quibbling and hair-splitting. Of all people, Gord has no bias unless it a leaning towards good practice and seeking the truth. I put those together intentionally, as you'll never approach the second without the first.
Try again - what Gord was actually pointing out was that a lack of interest IN FINDING ONE PARTICULAR OUTCOME is usually a good thing (I would have put it more strongly). If you insist on a) putting words into the mouths of others and b) omitting words from the mouths of others then this discussion is going to hit the skids very quickly.

User avatar
Shen1986
Veteran Poster
Posts: 2843
Joined: Sat Sep 22, 2012 6:47 am

Re: A recent "proven" Out of Body Experience

Postby Shen1986 » Sun May 21, 2017 1:43 pm

Confidencia wrote:If you think consciousness is a product of the brain then you might have difficulty understanding the concept of OBE or waking sleep.


So whose product is consciousness? Also if the brain is not responsible for it then why after brain damage people loose their consciousness or have changes in personality? Also there are many questions to be asked if we have a soul like consciousness like in religion or myths. Do animals have consciousness like we do? Where did consciousness come from before my brain? Where does it go when I sleep, why cannot I remember my time in my mothers womb etc. there are countless of questions to be asked and as my philosophy teacher taught us if there are too many questions rising in a solution then there is a very small chance that this solution to that question is right. Also by waking sleep do you mean sleep paralysis? If yes this was explained and no magic is needed.

Confidencia wrote:It is inconclusive, the phenomena has not been thoroughly tested.


First not true. Second this is the answer I get from many people who believe in this stuff. You claim this because it will be tested when you get the result you desire and that is from your posts that it proves a afterlife.

Its not true it was not tested take for example the Ales Tanous or Charles Tart with his Miss Z OBE experience which ended as a failure and had many red flags which are repeated many times by proponents of paranormal OBEs:

OBE experiment[edit]
In 1968, Tart conducted an OBE experiment with a subject known as Miss Z for four nights in his sleep laboratory.[4] Miss Z was attached to an EEG machine and a five-digit code was placed on a shelf above her bed. She did not claim to see the number on the first three nights but on the fourth gave the number correctly.[5][6]

During the experiment Tart monitored the equipment in the next room, behind an observation window, however, he admitted he had occasionally dozed during the night.[7] The psychologists Leonard Zusne and Warren Jones have written that the possibility of the subject having obtained the number through ordinary sensory means was not ruled out during the experiment. For example when light fell on the code it was reflected from the surface of a clock located on the wall above the shelf. The subject was not constantly observed and it was also suggested she may have read the number when she was being attached to the EEG machine.[5] According to the magician Milbourne Christopher "If she had held a mirror with a handle in her right hand, by tilting the mirror and looking up she could have seen a reflection of the paper on the shelf... The woman had not been searched prior to the experiment, nor had an observer been in the sleep chamber with her — precautions that should have been taken."[7]

The psychologist James Alcock criticized the experiment for inadequate controls and questioned why the subject was not visually monitored by a video camera.[8] Martin Gardner has written the experiment was not evidence for an OBE and suggested that whilst Tart was "snoring behind the window, Miss Z simply stood up in bed, without detaching the electrodes, and peeked."[9] Susan Blackmore wrote "If Miss Z had tried to climb up, the brain-wave record would have showed a pattern of interference. And that was exactly what it did show."[10]

The experiment was not repeated at the laboratory, Tart wrote this was because Miss Z moved from the area where the laboratory was located.[11]


Taken from: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Tart

Also take a look on Dr. Sam Parnia who did the same but had negative results so please do not tell me its was not tested when parapsychology was on its high then this was tested many times with mixed results but when the sceptics came and took a more colder approach they seen the errors which made these paranormal things happen.
"Death Dies Hard." - Deathstars.


Return to “UFOs, Cryptozoology, and The Paranormal”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest