Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • neo9701 changed the title to Free Energy.
  • 3 weeks later...
On 5/27/2021 at 1:16 PM, neo9701 said:

Anyone knows about Tesla's free energy?

 

Hi!
Tesla was trying to tap into what he called Radiant Energy, this is energy all around us. Its not such an outlandish idea, back in the 60's I think Feynman gave a lecture on atmospheric electricity and he calculated there is a MicroMicroAmpere of electricity in every square meter around us. This may not seem a lot but it turns out that means there's 400,000 Volts with a current of 1800 amperes, that means there's 700 Megawatts of energy in our atmosphere.

 

Then there's the Schuman Resonance, this is an atmospheric cavity encircling the world that contains millions of volts, it is charged by the Sun.

 

Which brings us to the Sun, there's I don't know how much energy output by the Sun every day, some of this is electro-magnetic as well as sunlight and look what the sun powers. Think how much energy we could produce from fields of solar panels. And make no mistake, Solar Panels are Free Energy devices, they have no moving parts yet once you build them and position them they output energy with no further input energy - that is a free energy device by physics standards 100 years ago but its now defined as 'Renewable'and the term Free Energy has come to mean something different, something impossible, same as the concept of perpetual motion has also been changed to further obscure it. But thats another thread.

 

There was another scientist, Moray, he built a device that he said was tapping into the Van Allen belts that circle the Earth. In other words he was tuning in to those fields.

The secret in all this is simply resonance or radio transmission / reception, if Tesla had been able to tune a large antenna into the resonant frequency of the atmospheric energy that he knew was present he would have had access to 700 megawatts of power. Thats no fantasy, Feynman proved it back in the 60's.

 

So yes, I believe Tesla was onto the right idea and his theory was entirely sound and with the discovery of the Schuman Cavity and the atmospheric energy around us it is entirely plausible he could have done it, in fact it rather looks like he did. You see, he blew up his transmitter/receiver device - hence there must have been a large input of energy to cause the meltdown, so maybe he did tap into it but his system was overwhelmed.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, pi3141 said:

 

Hi!
Tesla was trying to tap into what he called Radiant Energy, this is energy all around us. Its not such an outlandish idea, back in the 60's I think Feynman gave a lecture on atmospheric electricity and he calculated there is a MicroMicroAmpere of electricity in every square meter around us. This may not seem a lot but it turns out that means there's 400,000 Volts with a current of 1800 amperes, that means there's 700 Megawatts of energy in our atmosphere.

 

Then there's the Schuman Resonance, this is an atmospheric cavity encircling the world that contains millions of volts, it is charged by the Sun.

 

Which brings us to the Sun, there's I don't know how much energy output by the Sun every day, some of this is electro-magnetic as well as sunlight and look what the sun powers. Think how much energy we could produce from fields of solar panels. And make no mistake, Solar Panels are Free Energy devices, they have no moving parts yet once you build them and position them they output energy with no further input energy - that is a free energy device by physics standards 100 years ago but its now defined as 'Renewable'and the term Free Energy has come to mean something different, something impossible, same as the concept of perpetual motion has also been changed to further obscure it. But thats another thread.

 

There was another scientist, Moray, he built a device that he said was tapping into the Van Allen belts that circle the Earth. In other words he was tuning in to those fields.

The secret in all this is simply resonance or radio transmission / reception, if Tesla had been able to tune a large antenna into the resonant frequency of the atmospheric energy that he knew was present he would have had access to 700 megawatts of power. Thats no fantasy, Feynman proved it back in the 60's.

 

So yes, I believe Tesla was onto the right idea and his theory was entirely sound and with the discovery of the Schuman Cavity and the atmospheric energy around us it is entirely plausible he could have done it, in fact it rather looks like he did. You see, he blew up his transmitter/receiver device - hence there must have been a large input of energy to cause the meltdown, so maybe he did tap into it but his system was overwhelmed.

So can we make these devices to make free energy for everyone on the planet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, neo9701 said:

So can we make these devices to make free energy for everyone on the planet?

 

I think so yes and NASA have been looking into it, look at Shuttle STS75 'Space Tether' basically they deployed a 12 mile electrical cable into our atmosphere from space, the tether collected a huge amount of 'free energy' it was supposed to be used to power Space Station etc but instead it generated huge power and broke off.

 

So yes as well as Tesla, Feynman, Morray and NASA have proved there is huge amounts of energy surrounding our earth which we can tap into. NASA would'nt have invested or tried the experiment unless they were sure it worked and it seems like Tesla's experiment the results were so positively huge the collected energy destroyed the equipment, that shows there is huge amounts of energy we can tap into. All NASA used was a long cable suspended at right angles to the Earths magnetic field which of course induces an EMF in the cable, before the cable broke NASA recorded a huge input of power.

 

So yes it seems all we need to do is put a cable up in the atmosphere and we could tap 'free energy' 

 

But there are also other methods.

 

Maxwell who wrote the theory of Electromagnetic Radiation also wrote a theory called Maxwells Demon where he proposed a free energy system that employed a theoretical demon to order a system. Anyway a similar thing is being done in Norway where they are using Osmosis - a naturally occuring process much like Maxwells Demon, i.e a natural process does some work for you for free, you just exploit it.

 

In truth I think there are many possibillities to tap 'free or radiant' energy and other methods to exploit natural processes to achieve a gain and then there's 'Zero Point Energy' proved back in the 70's by a Physicist working for Phillips Electronics.

 

So to answer your question, yes I think we can, its just they won't, although NASA have periodically tested and invented technologies that could lead us to free energy systems - they even proved the everlasting lightbulb back in the 70's and produced and sold a component that would extend the life of lightbulbs by 10 times, of course it was never picked up by lightbulb makers because if lightbulbs lasted 10 times longer, they would sell 10 times less lightbulbs and thats not good for profits is it.

 

Then there's Bedini and Tom Bearden with their 'MEG' and Bedini's motor generator combination (supposedly debunked by Mythbusters except it wasn't cos there experiment was flawed)

 

I firmly believe all the technologies we need for a paradise on Earth exist, its just financial constraints prevent them from being employed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And predictably there is now no record of the NASA lightbulb extender. Basically (from memory) they used a Thyristor to limit the input electric waveform to the lightbulb hence it never ran at full power and thus extended the lifespan.

 

NASA got a manufacturer to produce a 'button' that contained thyristors and you placed it in between the bulb base and the holder.

 

Its similar to a project I did in University, we used Diodes to perform half wave rectification and applied the output to a bulb, the diode reduced the input power by half and hence the lightbulb did not run at full power, we predicted this would extend the life of a bulb almost indefinitely. We got distinctions for the project. Then when I came out of Uni I found NASA had already done it years before . Makes you think - there's nothing new under the sun..

 

Still no record of it now on the web, 10 years ago I could find pictures of the original advert, today I can't find a thing about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • 4 weeks later...
  • 4 weeks later...
On 11/6/2021 at 1:59 PM, ink said:

Some interesting thoughts (and a bit of a rant) .... wonder if this bloke is genuine?

 

ROYAL NAVY OFFICER DESTROYED PHYSICS, GRAVITY, NEWTON & EINSTEIN AND 'THEY' DESTROYED HIS LIFE!

 

Backup Bitchute link:

https://www.bitchute.com/video/3UcUET1o0Jk9/

 

 

 

Thanks for posting, really enjoyed it.

 

At 11:34 secs he proves 'Free Energy', to me we already have proof of 'Free Energy' in Nuclear Fusion, its a gift from nature that just keeps on giving and of course we have Magnets that just sit there and with no discernible input and put out Magnetic Energy which can be converted to Electricity. On the old forum I suggested Magnets could be or would be used for Free Energy machines after I read a Fridge Magnet is a Free Energy device because it sits there, sticking to the fridge, defying the gravitational force and yet no energy is input into it.

 

His thinking regarding Einsteins E=MC2 reminds me of Boyd Loyd I think it was working at Lockheed that said when you map out E=MC2 you find there's a spike indicating another power or force as yet undiscovered. Only speculation as to what it is. 

 

There was a great Maths video on Youtube I watched which explained the best way to understand an equation is to put in Zero and work it out, the answer illustrates the equation. It was good advice and again, he seems to be doing the same by illustrating that Einsteins equation must have a Negative side to it and that then the most energy is at Zero, which exactly chimes with Zero Point Energy theory.

 

I see 'Free Energy' everywhere from Atmospheric energy, the Earths Magnetic field, the energy from the Sun, then there's natural energy, systems we can tap into and extract power from, waterfalls and dams etc, then there's clever little mechanisms in nature which we can exploit such as Osmosis as the Norwegians have done with an Osmotic power station. Then there's high science like this guy is talking about and in fact at Zero there is huge energy, I've heard it said there's enough energy in a coffee cup to boil the world oceans with Zero point.

 

When they finish with the Nuclear material from power stations they bury it in the ground. This is 100 or 1000 of small active balls that are constantly giving off heat that are just buried, why not use them in a steam generator power station, like a ground heat source, bury the balls ans arrange pipe work through them, that heats your water to a significant degree that to push it up to 100 degrees take less energy than the energy you get out, i.e a gain. We could easily recycle old Nuclear material in a safe manner.

Energy energy everywhere but not a drop to drink. We're still burning coal in our power stations and Petrol in our engines, haven't even moved to LPG which is cleaner and more efficient. We have the solutions, we just don't use them.

 

Its all about the money.

 

The only thing that put me off in his video was when he said he could cure cancer and then someone said 'well thats the Pharmaceuticals out of business' - Thats a huge statement, it implies that top scientist's in the Navy are well schooled in Conspirational thought and they 'know' the Pharmaceuticals are running a racket and they are ok with that. Well that seems like a stretch to me and the same for his other comments from the Navy scientists about ruining markets and putting the economy out of business. I don't know, it just doesn't fit in my head. Maybe I'm a bit naive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • 1 year later...
On 10/13/2021 at 3:27 PM, Guest said:

Ken Wheeler (18min video)

 

FREE ENERGY GEOMETRY and DEVICE POTENTIAL

 

He states that he always thought free energy wasn't possible but now he knows that he was wrong and free energy is undeniable!

 

1807563263_FREEENERGYGEOMETRYandDEVICEPOTENTIALbyKENWHEELER.jpg.b1dc00b77f6667592701dc0415c815d0.jpg

 


Well whoever he^^ is^^  I didn't know of, but I'll gloss over that some other time.


I meanwhile found this guy today.....Something quality on YT at long last as follows....
I will simply let him speak for himself for the most part, but in the below video, be prepared to maybe think again about thinking again? on some stuff at very least....
Testing Misleading Expectations of Theoretical Magnet Powered Free Energy >>

Aka "REVIEWING FREE ENERGY" >> (as author chooses to call it) >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbdU7AkH6QM

and so regarding situations or setups where you see in these examples the ones here get exposed FOR A REASON__
 
The presenter does well by keeping true on the subject as I see it.... This being Jeremy Fielding, and even though this is the first video I personally have seen him in,

image.png.f802dee3ebab2d6a8187153d2cf042fa.png
I still say he is most excellent at telling what he knows in honest and credible demeanor backed by factually stable debunk demo's of what the misconceptions ARE KNOWN TO BE and we got fooled perhaps because of how maybe we have watched unknowingly (easily done!) other less trustworthy YouTubers who unlike Jeremy are deceivers on YT trying to fool you just to make them money (fooled me too when I watched random free energy stuff).... but here at least disproving the make believe as proven by Jeremy F that SOME  types AT LEAST of free energy devices that we watch videos of and are led to believe work, DON'T work.. DO NOT provide perpetual free energy.

Edited by Certified Green of Heart
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/4/2023 at 9:30 PM, Certified Green of Heart said:

Well whoever he^^ is^^  I didn't know of, but I'll gloss over that some other time.


I meanwhile found this guy today.....Something quality on YT at long last as follows....
I will simply let him speak for himself for the most part, but in the below video, be prepared to maybe think again about thinking again? on some stuff at very least....
Testing Misleading Expectations of Theoretical Magnet Powered Free Energy >>

Aka "REVIEWING FREE ENERGY" >> (as author chooses to call it) >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sbdU7AkH6QM

and so regarding situations or setups where you see in these examples the ones here get exposed FOR A REASON__
 
The presenter does well by keeping true on the subject as I see it.... This being Jeremy Fielding, and even though this is the first video I personally have seen him in,

 

Ok, I watched, got half way through and gave up. He's talking science and everything he said up until I stopped watching was true.

 

However, thats NOT the full story.

 

So here goes.

 

I note the 1st rule of Thermodynamics is you can't get more energy out of a system than you put in. With this knowledge I sit down and design a car. I start with the cylinders, size and volume to produce X amount of power, I increase the cylinders, design the engine, build the car. I calculate the weight, the power, and the MPG. I take the car out, I drive it, it works, I measure the MPG and its as expected.

 

Then I take the car on a motorway and I find I have a really strong tail wind or a really strong head wind, or I drive down a hill - what happens to my MPG calculation now? Its no longer correct. The system - the car - is receiving energy from outside the system, wind or gravitational forces are having an effect on my equations - where was this wind or gravitational force on my drawing board and calculation sheet? It wasn't accounted for.

 

So then I remember my physics again, that first rule of thermodynamics - you can't get more out than you put in - in a closed system. IN A CLOSED SYSTEM.

 

What is a closed system?

 

Well its not a car, or a boat, or a plane, in fact its not anything. Its accepted in Physics that in fact there are NO closed systems in the Universe except, possibly, the Universe itself.

 

So, the first rule of thermodynamics does not strictly apply to anything I design and build. It helps me design and build with predictable results but when I take that machine out into the real world it is no longer subjected to the perfect conditions on my design board and hence no longer defined by the first rule of thermodynamics. Its now in the real world where it is free to be influenced by external forces not considered on the drawing board.

 

So what forces might a car be subjected to? Well as stated there are wind and gravitational forces but theres another that seems to get overlooked - momentum.

 

When a 1.5 tonne car gets accelerated to 50mph it develops a shed load of momentum, why is not possible to turn the power off to the motor for a second or two, allow the motor to generate energy and then when frictional forces start to take effect, apply power again and then repeat the cycle - why wouldn't that work?

 

It works on petrol engines, they call it hypermiling. Put power on gas for a few seconds, take foot off brake for a few seconds, put power back on. Apparently it does increase MPG. Whats moving the car when your pedal is off the accelerator - momentum.

 

Ok, so what the guy says about efficiency is true - motors have an efficiency rating, it is possible to get efficiency up to 90% for both generators and motors. He states that if you only get 80% out of the first motor, the generator will receive less power and itself put out less power. Well yes this is true however you can match the generator so that the RPM of the motor is the correct RPM for the input to the generator, now if we lose 20% in the motor and 20% in the generator does that not mean that we could still charge our batteries up to 60%?

 

If I have an EV battery that has a 100 mile range and I can recapture 80% of the energy then I just increased my range from 100 miles to 160 miles.

 

But there's more - there are effects we know little about. When we build an electric motor it needs a controller to operate it. When that controller is powering the motor the motor is also acting like a generator and produces back EMF. That power coming back out of the motor is enough to fry the components in the controller. To prevent this the controller is switched on and off in a pulsing manner, thus when its off its not susceptible to back EMF and the back EMF power generated by the motor is just wasted. Why not use it?

 

John Bedini discovered that actually the back EMF generated by electric motors can sometimes be huge. He experimented with 12V batteries and motors and he was seeing back EMF spikes of over 100 Volts! He was able to power a motor using a battery, and through switching the back EMF to empty batteries, recharge 2 batteries for every 1 battery he discharged.

 

There is a problem with his system though - the back EMF is negative and thus you would need to use and inverter, with losses, to invert the power to re-use it. However it provides significant energy gain if replicated.

 

Finally I will say a word about magnets - I presume the guy in the video will eventually get to them. There approximately 200 known effects of Magnets and Magnetic fields, currently we have only studied 10 or 20 of them (something like that) I have seen a magnetic system, with the magnets arranged in a novel fashion which clearly shows over unity. Video linked below.

 

Sorry but I think this guy still thinks 'inside the box' so to speak.

 

Howard Johnson - Magnetic Exchange

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TheConsultant said:

/

 

Part of the conspiracy is that they are using the most inefficient technology to extract the highest profit. To do this, they surpress and ignore scientific discoveries. They manipulate science.

 

Examples

 

The Everlasting Lightbulb - it has been shown that the major lightulb companies entered into a syndicate where every so many years they reduced the life of their lightbulbs while suppressing discoveries to extend the life in order to maximize profit. Search 'The Lightbulb Conspiracy' on youtube - you want the Norwegian one with subtitles.

 

While at university a fellow student mentioned to me in discussion he had worked out how to make lightbulbs last for ever. We used it as the basis for a project, proved everlasting lightbulbs exist and got a distinction for the project.

 

Wind power - Why? Tidal and wave power is far more efficient. The moon circles the Earth, we can predict the tides very accurately, can we predict the wind? So why wind, well the King owns the seabeds and to install wind farms you have to pay him. So a 100 of millions gets added to the cost of opur energy, the market becomes more profitable and away we go with an inferior, costly solution.

 

Fuel shortage. Why? We pay the farmers millions of pounds in subsidies not to grow, yet we could not pay them, they could grow Rape seed or Sunflowers and produce oil we could burn in our Diesel engines. It would cost about 50p a litre and be non polluting. Sop we don't do that instead we stick to petroleum derived diesel and pay top dollar even in times of fuel crisis.

 

I could go on.

 

The suppression of science and so called Free Energy is real to me. I know a bit about it.

 

I will offer this - the Tesla coil works on a simple principle. Tesla explained it like this - if you push a child on a swing, it takes some effort to get it up to speed but once the momentum has been achieved, it only takes a small input at the right time to maintain the momentum. This is how a Tesla coil works, the thing that revolutionized our society. Proven science.

 

Once we achieve a given momentum, it only takes a small input, at the right time, to maintain a large momentum.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks, I do too. I was going to add to the thread but then got distracted and my attention went elsewhere. 

A magnet on its own disproves the first and second laws of thermodynamics. You are absolutely correct in that free energy is supressed. I will find the norwegian version of the lightbulb conspiracy documentary.
 

Edited by TheConsultant
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

Once we achieve a given momentum, it only takes a small input, at the right time, to maintain a large momentum.

 

That's true, you can maintain the momentum indefinitely with very small inputs of energy, but to actually harness that momentum to power something (eg. do work) once again requires greater energy inputs.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, webtrekker said:

 

That's true, you can maintain the momentum indefinitely with very small inputs of energy, but to actually harness that momentum to power something (eg. do work) once again requires greater energy inputs.

 

But I say if the momentum achieved is great enough, we can extract the work from the momentum.

 

A 2 tonne electric car at 50mph would achieve a large momentum, I think you could switch the power off to the motor for a short duration, then re-energize when the car starts to slow. This could increase range on motorway journeys. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

But I say if the momentum achieved is great enough, we can extract the work from the momentum.

 

A 2 tonne electric car at 50mph would achieve a large momentum, I think you could switch the power off to the motor for a short duration, then re-energize when the car starts to slow. This could increase range on motorway journeys. 

 

This would be 'Tapping the wheelwork of nature' as Tesla would say.

 

There are other ways to tap the wheelwork of nature - Osmosis Power Plants is another way.

 

Maxwells demon, its real.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, pi3141 said:

 

But I say if the momentum achieved is great enough, we can extract the work from the momentum.

 

A 2 tonne electric car at 50mph would achieve a large momentum, I think you could switch the power off to the motor for a short duration, then re-energize when the car starts to slow. This could increase range on motorway journeys. 

 

The vehicle will start slowing immediately you remove the power to the motor (assuming level ground) and the additional power needed to acceleraate back to the initial speed will negate any 'savings' you have made.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

 

This would be 'Tapping the wheelwork of nature' as Tesla would say.

 

There are other ways to tap the wheelwork of nature - Osmosis Power Plants is another way.

 

Maxwells demon, its real.

Understanding a magnet, and tapping directly in to vacuum energy. Infinite capacitance at rest within zero point/counterspace/vacuum. A magnet is the key to doing just that, I know this from other works but the video above of the naval officer is absolutely correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, webtrekker said:

The vehicle will start slowing immediately you remove the power to the motor (assuming level ground) and the additional power needed to acceleraate back to the initial speed will negate any 'savings' you have made.

 

I think differently, I would like to see it tested. Tesla used that exact principle to create the Tesla Coil and hypermilers have been claiming for years they get extra mpg if they accelerate, then take the foot off the pedal for a bit, then accelerate again.

 

So I think it works. Momentum is the key, a heavy car travelling at speeds gains momentum, momentum is a force, it is 'energy' we could tap.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, TheConsultant said:

Understanding a magnet, and tapping directly in to vacuum energy. Infinite capacitance at rest within zero point/counterspace/vacuum. A magnet is the key to doing just that, I know this from other works but the video above of the naval officer is absolutely correct.

 

Yes I agree - I really enjoyed that vid with the Navy guy.

 

I keep looking at my fluorescent tube bulb - its a dipole, that means in the middle of the tube, at right angle to it, there is a magnetic field, emanating from the vacuum.

 

Free energy. Low, but still, its there.

 

Does anyone know how a light bulb works?

 

Please don't tell me it glows without explaining to me how the process of glowing produces photons.

 

I'd like to know.

 

So would Physics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

 

Yes I agree - I really enjoyed that vid with the Navy guy.

 

I keep looking at my fluorescent tube bulb - its a dipole, that means in the middle of the tube, at right angle to it, there is a magnetic field, emanating from the vacuum.

 

Free energy. Low, but still, its there.

 

Does anyone know how a light bulb works?

 

Please don't tell me it glows without explaining to me how the process of glowing produces photons.

 

I'd like to know.

 

So would Physics.


Just he alone has more exciting stuff than that lower output fluorescent tube. He is using LEDs to harvest light as they work both ways. He has set up a standing wave of EM along two poles which become an anode and cathode. He has tapped in to the magnetosphere. But I agree, interesting video.

Big oil is so fraudulent you cannot put it in to words.

As for a lightbulb, like all light we do and don't see its just a vibration at a particular speed and as such different elements, gases etc oscillate at different rates with voltage. We call that the visible light spectrum, the rate of vibration determines the colour / hue / spectrum of light. Although I am sure you are going to tell me something interesting regarding a lightbulb now :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, pi3141 said:

 

Does anyone know how a light bulb works?

 

Please don't tell me it glows without explaining to me how the process of glowing produces photons.

 

I'm assuming you mean a standard incandescent tungsten lightbulb?

 

Ok. As the tungsten filament gets very hot it excites electrons in the tungsten atoms to jump to higher energy levels.

 

Electrons don't like doing this so, in order to maintain natural stability, they instead drop to lower levels. Each drop emits a photon. As there are millions of atoms and electrons in a typical filament then millions of photons are emitted.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, webtrekker said:

I'm assuming you mean a standard incandescent tungsten lightbulb?

 

Ok. As the tungsten filament gets very hot it excites electrons in the tungsten atoms to jump to higher energy levels.

 

Electrons don't like doing this so, in order to maintain natural stability, they instead drop to lower levels. Each drop emits a photon. As there are millions of atoms and electrons in a typical filament then millions of photons are emitted.

 

Yep, incandescent tungsten.

 

Your first sentence, I don;t understand I would ask how heat causes electrons to change to photons. The sentence didn't explain it very well.

 

Your second part says that its the electrons in the filament that emit photons when they drop to a lower level?  Ok, last time I looked they couldn't explain how that happenst and I don't think you've explained it particularly well.

 

I'll give my explanation in the post below to save repeating myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...