Spectroscopy Now For the Everyman

September 17th, 2014
submit to reddit Share

For those who don’t know, I have a bit of a side hobby fixing and using radiation detection equipment, such as Geiger counters.   If you’re not into amateur science and nuclear science/energy, this may not seem very exciting.

Geiger counters and other basic radiation detectors are great for getting a general idea what the background radiation is or finding radioactive materials.  However, they have their limitations.  A Geiger-Muller detector only tells you when a gamma photon (or alpha or beta particle) is detected.  It does not provide the energy level of the radiation.  Since Geiger-Muller tubes respond differently to different energy levels of gamma emissions, it’s difficult to get a completely accurate assessment of what the dose rate is.  A rough approximation is still possible, but a reading of the energy levels provides much more information.

In addition to better dose estimates, being able to measure the energy levels of gamma photons allows for identification of isotope which is being detected.  Gamma-emitting isotopes produce emissions at characteristic energy levels, and by measuring these energy levels it is possible to determine what kind of isotope is present.  It is also possible to tune a detector to measure only the desired energy levels and thereby pick up on a desired isotope’s emissions.

Bellow is a graph showing gamma measurements of a variety of radioactive materials.

Equipment required:

To do this, two things are required.  The first is a detector that is capable of measuring the energy levels of the radiation emissions.  The second is an instrument that can record and display those energy levels, rather than just the raw count rate of the detector.

Detectors:

Ortec DetectorDetectors that can be used for spectroscopy include semiconductor detectors, gas proportional detectors and scintillation detectors.   Of these, semiconductor detectors provide the best resolution and precision for measuring radiation levels.  Unfortunately, for a semiconductor detector to work properly, it must be kept extremely cold.  For this reason, a tank of liquid nitrogen is required, making it cumbersome and non-portable.  There are also some new semiconductor detector setups that have an integrated refrigeration system, but these are very expensive.  Because of this, semiconductor detectors are not appealing for field work or amateurs.  However, they are the mainstay for laboratory setups.

Gas proportional detectors can also be used, although they produce less high resolution measurements.  Still, a good gas proportional detector can provide measurements that are adequate for spectroscopy, especially when the radiation flux is relatively high.  Gas proportional detectors do have their own limitation, however.  Most gas proportional detectors require a constant supply of gas being feed to the detector. This is cumbersome for field work and requires the purchase of counting gas.  A common mixture is 90% argon and 10% methane, so it’s not an exotic or difficult to obtain gas mixture, but it does need replenishment as the gas escapes the detector.  There are sealed gas proportional detectors, but these are less common and mostly used for neutron detection.

scintScintillation detectors work by converting gamma energy to light and then measuring the light.  A material called the crystal is used.  When a photon strikes the crystal, it produces a brief and faint flash of light.   The crystal can be any number of different materials.  Not all materials are actually crystal.  Plastic and doped glass, for example, can be used.  For high resolution measurements and spectroscopy, thallium doped sodium-iodine is common.  Scintillation materials can also be liquid or gas, with liquid scintillation commonly used in laboratory analysis.

The light produced by the scintillation crystal is detected by a photomultiplier tube, which is a highly sensitive photon detector.  A few newer scintillation-based detectors use photo diodes, but they don’t provide the sensitivity of a photomultiplier.   When light is detected, the photomultiplier produces a pulse which is proportional to the energy level of the gamma photon.  Scintillation detectors have excellent sensitivity and are versatile, being useful with a ratemeter for simple surveying or with a multichannel analyzer.  They are inexpensive and rugged. Although they lack the precision of semiconductor devices, they are adequate for most spectroscopy work, such as identifying isotopes.

 Analyzers:

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERAThere are two basic types of analyzers: single channel and multichannel.  Single channel analyzers work like a regular ratemeter, such as would be used with a Geiger-Muller tube.  However they allow the energy level of pulses counted to be chosen.  The user of an SCA could therefore dial in something like one hundred thousand KeV (kilo electron volts) to two hundred KeV.  The counter would only respond to energy levels within that window.  This can be useful for searching for a particular isotope, while ignoring background.  It’s also possible to identify isotopes by measuring them with different detection thresholds, to establish what energy level is being emitted. Single channel analyzers have largely been replaced by multichannel analyzers.

Multichannel analyzers are much more capable.   They have a large number of different channels and can measure energy levels across the gamma spectrum.  It’s not atypical to have something like 2048 channels of analysis.  The multichannel analyzer graphs the energy levels across these channels to produce a displayed spectrum of the measurements.  This is useful for dosimetry, accurate measurement of activity and other purposes.  One of the most useful features is the ability to identify isotopes.  By comparing the detected emissions to a database of energy levels, it’s possible to determine what radioisotope or radioisotopes are present.

nim_bin_1In the past, analyzers were large and complex pieces of equipment.  They typically included a number of different components, such as signal amplifiers, analog to digital converters counters and pulse gates, often mounted into a NIM (nuclear instrument module) bin.  Early on, multichannel analyzers were limited in the number of channels because each channel needed a separate counter.

analyzerLater, self-contained analyzers became available.  By the 1980′s they had taken over for multichannel analysis.  They may look like a small computer and often include a high voltage power supply, to power the detector.  This greatly simplifies the equipment necessary.  There are also portable MCA’s, which can be used for measurement and identification in the field.

By the 1990′s, PC-based MCA’s were common.  These were simply a computer with spectroscopy software and a card or external device that captured the signal.  These have advantages such as the ability to save spectrographs and download isotope databases.

Unfortunately, all these options are expensive.  Stand alone analyzers typically sell for thousands of dollars.  If you are looking for one that is used, you might snag one on eBay for a few hundred.  Computer-based systems are not much cheaper.  Because it is such a specialized area, the hardware and software can cost into the thousands.

But things have changed!

The basis of a digital multichannel analyzer is an analog to digital converter, which samples the pulses and provides digital measurements which can be analyzed with hardware or software.  The equipment used to be quite expensive, but today, computers ship with a suitable ADC in the sound card.  Sound card spectroscopy requires only a detector and high voltage power supply.  An external amplifier may also be required, but they are not expensive.

There are even portable setups, with the detector connected to a smartphone.  One can make a dedicated MCA for just $79 using a cheap portable oscilloscope device.  Software exists which is free and open-source.

GS1100-03One simple and relatively inexpensive way of getting started is to use a device made by Gammaspectacular.  It is a soundcard interface and detector power supply that is simple and only costs about $300.  This plug-and-play system is easy to setup and much cheaper than systems of the past.  Of course, it is also possible to build one’s own interface, which is relatively simple.  Suitable HV power supplies are also not hard to find or expensive.

The one part of such a system that is not so easy and cheap to get is the detector itself. Basic scintillation detectors can be found on eBay for a couple hundred dollarsThere are also a few scintillation detectors that are available surplus and are pretty cheapA detector for low energy use can be found on this page for just two hundred dollars.

scintdetectorIt’s also possible to build a scintillation detector and not very hard to do.  It’s just a matter of pairing a suitable scintillation crystal to a photomultiplier and sealing it so no external light can enter the detector.  Photomultiplier are not expensive, with many available for less than $50.  Photomultiplier bases can be as simple as resistors soldered to the output pins.  There are also ready made photomultipler socket bases.  A seller on eBay offers them for $40.   Suitable crystals are not hard to find either.  Plastic-based detector mediums are cheap and sodium-iodine scintillation crystals are available for relatively low cost.  In general, larger crystals tend to cost more.  High quality Russian-manufactured crystals can be less than one hundred dollars, for a relatively small one.   Again, eBay is your friend here, as it’s a great place to find odd surplus items for use in radiation detection.

It’s also possible to scavenge suitable scintillation components from old equipment.  That is how I put together an NaI(Tl) scintillator.   I took the crystal from a PRI-111B scintillator.  These detectors were the high-end of radiation detectors sold during the 1950′s uranium boom.  They have excellent scintillation crystals.  I got the detector for about $50.  It did not work and had heavy corrosion in the battery compartment.  Even the dial was broken.  But the crystal was still good.  It had become opaque and yellow, due to exposure to moisture, which is common in old scintillation crystals.  However, there is a website that offers to rework the crystals back to like-new condition for less than  30 dollars.  I have no idea how it is done, but I believe it involves putting the crystal in a vacuum chamber and possibly heating it, to draw out moisture.    Unfortunately, the website that offered this is gone, but if anyone needs the service, I believe I have the contact information for the gentleman who provides the service.

EDIT:  I have found out that the individual who did the crystal reworking has died.  However, it should not be too hard to figure out how the crystals are dried and renewed.

Links and Info:

Check out these links for information on home spectroscopy, system descriptions and instructions

Gamma Spectacular - maker of a nice little interface box for sound card spectroscopy

Gamma Spectroscopy Yahoo group

Info on home built scintillation probe

Another site about amateur scintillation detectors

DIY Geiger Counter - includes information on scintillation detectors and spectroscopy

Gamma Explorer – A blog on spectroscopy

DIY Physics - Highly recommended site of advanced physics projects and numerous articles about spectroscopy with cheap and homebrew equipment.

Special Nuclear Materials - Carl Willis’s site on amateur nuclear-related projects including spectrometry

 


This entry was posted on Wednesday, September 17th, 2014 at 6:44 pm and is filed under Good Science, Misc, Nuclear. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
View blog reactions



23 Responses to “Spectroscopy Now For the Everyman”

  1. 1
    DV82XL Says:

    Very cool! It’s great to see a growing number of examples where instruments and devices that were beyond the reach of most getting cheaper. Too bad that the level of science education most kids are getting these days will mean that fewer will be taking advantage.
    .


    Quote Comment
  2. 2
    AKA the A Says:

    Sorry, but the only way to “repair” the crystal is to re-melt (and re-crystalise) the material after vacuum drying… (Bridgman-Stockbarger technique)
    There are several ways of doing this, one is very slowly moving molten material through a temperature gradient, the other moves the temperature gradient instead of the material.
    Both are relatively easy to DIY these days, but you need a special furnace, a rotary vane vacuum pump and a lot of time, even small crystals like the one you need take several hours to form and proper anealing takes even longer (otherwise the crystal forms voids or even cracks from the stress).
    The rest depends on what method you choose. If you wish to know more, contact me, I have pdfs describing both methods.

    As for the Gammaspectacular – for that kind of money you can make a battery-powered portable grapher, join the “geiger counter enthusiasts” group, they have a separate spectroscopy board and a few rather nice documented DIY constructions.


    Quote Comment
  3. 3
    Lucario Says:

    Very clever device! I definitely could see the police and environmental agencies making good use of it – would come in very handy for on-the-spot toxicology/heavy metal contamination measurements.


    Quote Comment
  4. 4
    drbuzz0 Says:

            AKA the A said:

    As for the Gammaspectacular – for that kind of money you can make a battery-powered portable grapher, join the “geiger counter enthusiasts” group, they have a separate spectroscopy board and a few rather nice documented DIY constructions.

    You’re right but it’s still a nice device for a turnkey thing for those who don’t want to make their own setup.

            AKA the A said:

    Sorry, but the only way to “repair” the crystal is to re-melt (and re-crystalise) the material after vacuum drying… (Bridgman-Stockbarger technique)
    There are several ways of doing this, one is very slowly moving molten material through a temperature gradient, the other moves the temperature gradient instead of the material.
    Both are relatively easy to DIY these days, but you need a special furnace, a rotary vane vacuum pump and a lot of time, even small crystals like the one you need take several hours to form and proper anealing takes even longer (otherwise the crystal forms voids or even cracks from the stress).
    The rest depends on what method you choose. If you wish to know more, contact me, I have pdfs describing both methods.

    Sadly I lack the equipment. You can get some very good NaI(Tl) crystals off of some of the old Precision Radiation Instruments equipment, for use back in the original device or reuse. But they’re so old that it’s very common that they’ve yellowed.

    I think I paid about 30 dollars to have my crystal redone.

    Do you know of anyone out there who will repair yellowed crystals for a reasonable price?


    Quote Comment
  5. 5
    Matte Says:

    This is interesting…but I can’t settle for anything less than a liquid nitrogen cooled HP-Ge-detector, thank goodness I have my grubby hands on a few when I need them.

    Neenor-neenor?!


    Quote Comment
  6. 6
    drbuzz0 Says:

            Matte said:

    This is interesting…but I can’t settle for anything less than a liquid nitrogen cooled HP-Ge-detector, thank goodness I have my grubby hands on a few when I need them.

    Neenor-neenor?!

    Yeah. Color me jealous.


    Quote Comment
  7. 7
    AKA the A Says:

            drbuzz0 said:

    Do you know of anyone out there who will repair yellowed crystals for a reasonable price?

    Nope, I was going to try it myself, but ran out of money…a rotary vane vacuum pump is fairly expensive here and ebay won’t help, since it’s heavy (costly shipping) and applies for import tax (21% of the total sum, even the shipping).
    I currently have a furnace built for growing crystals (bought from a closing-down lab), I need to get the vacuum pump, make a temperature controller and modify the device that moves the crystal through the furnace…I may try in a few months when I can afford to fork over a 1/3 of my monthly paycheck for a usable vacuum pump…

    p.s. If you have any damaged (even completely destroyed, water is not a problem) NaI:Tl crystals that you are willing to part with for cheap – I’m interested, since buying thallium ioidide is difficult (in my case borderline illegal) here, T+ stuff needs a crapload of paperwork and a license, both cost money and time I’m not willing to spend…


    Quote Comment
  8. 8
    drbuzz0 Says:

            AKA the A said:

    p.s. If you have any damaged (even completely destroyed, water is not a problem) NaI:Tl crystals that you are willing to part with for cheap – I’m interested, since buying thallium ioidide is difficult (in my case borderline illegal) here, T+ stuff needs a crapload of paperwork and a license, both cost money and time I’m not willing to spend…

    I have a PRI 111 scintillator. Those things have great crystals in them. I have no use if I can’t rework the crystal, because it’s yellowed by moisture.

    I always have mixed feelings about those things. On one hand, if you can get one cheap, it’s a good source of a high quality crystal, which works great paired with a new PMT (the old ones are okay too, but new are better).

    On the other hand, it’s a beautiful piece of equipment and a shame to take it apart for the crystal. Not only is it a good low field survey meter, I love how it looks like a ray gun… or maybe a hair dryer.


    Quote Comment
  9. 9
    drbuzz0 Says:

            AKA the A said:

    Nope, I was going to try it myself, but ran out of money…a rotary vane vacuum pump is fairly expensive here and ebay won’t help, since it’s heavy (costly shipping) and applies for import tax (21% of the total sum, even the shipping).
    I currently have a furnace built for growing crystals (bought from a closing-down lab), I need to get the vacuum pump, make a temperature controller and modify the device that moves the crystal through the furnace…I may try in a few months when I can afford to fork over a 1/3 of my monthly paycheck for a usable vacuum pump…

    I don’t have the funds or the space for that stuff.

    I would think the furnace is the more expensive part. You can probably get by with a small vacuum pump, although it will take a long time to draw the vacuum.


    Quote Comment
  10. 10
    Gordon Says:

    ADC’s are cheap these days and open up a lot of possibilities for software-based instruments. SOftware defined radio comes to mind. Also, now you can get oscilloscopes and stuff that are very cheap and of reasonably good quality.

    It would be nice if schools started embracing this stuff for educating high school or college kids about radiation.


    Quote Comment
  11. 11
    AKA the A Says:

            drbuzz0 said:

    I don’t have the funds or the space for that stuff.

    I would think the furnace is the more expensive part.

    You can probably get by with a small vacuum pump, although it will take a long time to draw the vacuum.

    If you are content with a small crystal, you can use a small furnace ;-)
    As for the prices – you can easily make the furnace out of fleabay procured supplies, but unless you are an experienced machinist with a well equipped shop, you are not making the vacuum pump, that has to be bought…
    The vacuum pump I spoke of was the second smallest they had in the shop, can’t get much smaller :-/
    Refrigeration compressors are very unsuitable for this, as they are designed to create pressure, not a vacuum. Venturi-type vacuum pumps need an expensive source of power (fast moving liquid or gas), so not really practical.

    btw the furnaces I acquired were DIYed by the previous owner of the lab. (ex-soviet satellite country mind you, if you wanted anything special, you had to either make it, or have some VIP friends and a lot of money…or steal it…)
    All of them are basically a white ceramic tube with nichrome wire wrapped around it, then a bunch of mineral wool and a thin sheet metal casing…
    The biggest one is about 75cm long, approx. 20cm dia., the smallest one is less then 10cm long and 10cm in dia.
    Anything bigger would require a different type of furnace, as the losses would make this very expensive(the furnace basically has to run near-full power for several hours, then the tempering).
    The furnace itself is probably the cheapest part of the project :D

    The controller however, is going to cost me, since I need several thermocouple sensors and the cheapest cold junction compensation ICs are around $20 a pop, be it with or without an integrated ADC…


    Quote Comment
  12. 12
    AKA the A Says:

            Gordon said:

    ADC’s are cheap these days and open up a lot of possibilities for software-based instruments. SOftware defined radio comes to mind. Also, now you can get oscilloscopes and stuff that are very cheap and of reasonably good quality.

    It would be nice if schools started embracing this stuff for educating high school or college kids about radiation.

    ADCs are cheap only if they are slow, once you cross the several MHz mark, the prices start to skyrocket…that’s why all the good SDRs cost and arm and a leg (and a kidney). Tried to design a direct-sampling scintillation counter where the slowest component would be the PMT, not ADC…no easy way it can be done under ~$400 just in parts…(fast ADCs also need a fast way to unload the data)

    But you don’t need a modern digital instrument, a 60s geiger counter will do fine for the rad 101, it’s just that with the current radiophobia and idiotic government systematically destroying the school system where kids had a chance to actually learn stuff, it won’t happen.
    First and foremost, education is not about the school, but about the teachers in it. No matter how much equipment a school can afford, it still has to be the teacher who…teaches…


    Quote Comment
  13. 13
    drbuzz0 Says:

            AKA the A said:

    ADCs are cheap only if they are slow, once you cross the several MHz mark, the prices start to skyrocket…that’s why all the good SDRs cost and arm and a leg (and a kidney). Tried to design a direct-sampling scintillation counter where the slowest component would be the PMT, not ADC…no easy way it can be done under ~$400 just in parts…(fast ADCs also need a fast way to unload the data)

    Well, they certainly are cheaper than they used to be.

    I suppose you are going to have to qualify what a “good sdr” is. There is a receiver out there now that is only 30 dollars and has an ADC that will sample up to 3.2 mhz at 8 bit resolution. Okay, that’s not great as far as ADC’s go, but it’s more than enough to use it as a general purpose analog receiver for VHF and UHF stuff (the tuner goes to around 2ghz)

    Admittedly, it’s not the best receiver in the world. Sensitivity, signal to noise etc are only so-so. But I’d say it’s pretty damn good for thirty bucks.

    But professional level SDR setups are available these days for less than a few grand. So I guess it depends on your definition of arm and a leg as well. It’s competitive with traditional wideband analog receivers, at least.


    Quote Comment
  14. 14
    Alan(UK) Says:

    Our older pupils have been using 5μC Co60 sources with MX168/ZP 1481 G-M tubes connected to scalers. The basic technology is the same as I was working with 45 years ago. The Co60 sources are getting end of life – the newest are 12 years old: 2+ half-lives. The most problematic experiment is verifying the inverse square law.

    We have been replacing the older sources with 370 kBq Cs137 sources. I have been trying some comparisons of different sources and G-M tubes.

    The Cs137 have twice the activity of the Co60 sources when new. But Co60 produces 2 photons per decay against 1 for Cs137. Therefore I would expect they would initially have given equal count rates. With the 12 year old Co60 sources I would expect a 4:1 count rate ratio. I actually get a 2:1 ratio. The Co60 photons pack twice as much energy each than the Cs137 ones but I would not expect this to make much difference.

    When I try a 5μC Ra226 source (shielding the tube from α and β) I get twice the count rate as the Cs137. I guestimate the source (quite old) would give two countable photons per decay from its daughter products. I would have expected the count to be comparable with the Cs137 source which has twice the activity.

    I have also tried an Am214 source but got negligable gamma counts through the tube wall. So I presume that this type of tube is insensitive to low-energy gamma unless it enters through the window.

    Thus our new, expensive, Cs137 sources are giving only half the count that I would expect when compared with both Co60 and Ra226:

    Co : Cs : Ra = 1 : 2 : 4

    This is disappointing. I have looked at the published energy spectra of the different sources but cannot work out why the Cs137 sources compare badly with the other sources.

    Now a second question. I can get quite good graphs to show the inverse squre law using any of the sources and either the existing tubes (now very expensive) or with a cheaper new one (unknown brand). Obviously the Ra is better than the Cs which is better than the Co which is better than the even older Co sources which are now due to be scrapped. But is this the best way to do it? These G-M tubes are probably only 1% efficient and it seem a brute force method to use a 370 kBq source to get a statistically meaningful measurement at 120 mm.

    Using second-hand equipment is not practicable as I would need 12 identical sets and our equipment tends to be replaced at 20 year intervals. I have thought about using Si detectors – 600 keV photons should be quite detectable above the noise threshold but would the efficiency be high enough considering that a good-sized PIN diode would still be a good deal smaller than a G_M tube?


    Quote Comment
  15. 15
    AKA the A Says:

            drbuzz0 said:

    Well, they certainly are cheaper than they used to be.

    I suppose you are going to have to qualify what a “good sdr” is. There is a receiver out there now that is only 30 dollars and has an ADC that will sample up to 3.2 mhz at 8 bit resolution.

    Okay, that’s not great as far as ADC’s go, but it’s more than enough to use it as a general purpose analog receiver for VHF and UHF stuff (the tuner goes to around 2ghz)

    Admittedly, it’s not the best receiver in the world. Sensitivity, signal to noise etc are only so-so. But I’d say it’s pretty damn good for thirty bucks.

    But professional level SDR setups are available these days for less than a few grand. So I guess it depends on your definition of arm and a leg as well.

    It’s competitive with traditional wideband analog receivers, at least.

    If you mean the re-puposed RTL USB dongle receiver (I have one as well), then the 3.2MHz receive bandwith is VERY unstable, if you want to continuously monitor/record, even 2MHz is pushing it (USB 2.0 limitations)…

    As for the definition of a good SDR – to be able to do the more interesting stuff, it’s nice if you can transmit as well, so at least half-duplex (that alone puts you in the >$250 range). Obviously you want the bandwith as big as possible, so that you can do more then just use it for audio-domain…
    AnalogTV/DVB experimenting with will need about 4 MHz, the ye-oldy “wifi” needs at least 20 MHz, RADAR experiments need a fair amount of bandwith (especially if it’s FMCW), GSM experimenting also needs bandwith, since narrow band hopping is difficult…
    Then there’s the frequency range, a good SDR must be able to go from 10s of MHz well into the GHz, HAMs might want the single digit MHz and below (can be had with upconverters, but that’s an extra box). Obviously you’d want the freq. range to be continuous with no gaps.

    The duplex, >20 MHz bandwith and GHz frequency put you in the >$1000 range, which is not exactly loose change even in USA, especially considering that you need a reasonably recent PC as well…

    A $1000 can get you a nice fully equipped electronics workbench, a nice PC gaming rig (or a profitable cryptocurrency miner :D ), a reasonable 2nd-hand car for “silly things”, or with a bit of luck a fully working scintillator probe and counter, possibly even with a bigger crystal…


    Quote Comment
  16. 16
    AKA the A Says:

            Alan(UK) said:

    I have thought about using Si detectors – 600 keV photons should be quite detectable above the noise threshold but would the efficiency be high enough considering that a good-sized PIN diode would still be a good deal smaller than a G_M tube?

    Yes, PIN diodes have a smaller cross section, but respond almost equally well as a same-sized tube…you can use more of them, but at the cost of increasing capacitance (slower response and greater dead-time). Or use more separate diode and amplifier modules to keep the response time reasonable, but that will be expensive (the LNAs needed for the diodes aren’t cheap). Also, because of the sensitive amps and the fact that they are photodiodes, everything has to be nice and shielded, both EM and light…

    p.s. BPW34 seems to be used in DIY constructions…


    Quote Comment
  17. 17
    cloud Says:

    YOU! ARE! SUCH! GEEKS! FREAKS! LAME BRAINS!


    Quote Comment
  18. 18
    cloud Says:

    YOU! ARE! SUCH! GEEKS! FREAKS! LAME BRAINS! ;(


    Quote Comment
  19. 19
    cloud Says:

    Nobody cares about your hobby fixing fixing hobby blah blah blah blah BLAH BLAH BLAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


    Quote Comment
  20. 20
    cloud Says:

    All you commenters you are idiots too because you take time to read this personally me i DELIGHT in reading this BECAUSE it is SO fun to make fun of all you geeks!


    Quote Comment
  21. 21
    DV82XL Says:

    Missing the anti-spam already


    Quote Comment
  22. 22
    Shafe Says:

    There’s no link to an outside website like you’d expect spam to have. This is some twelve-year-old who’s having a tantrum on the internet ’cause his mom took away his PSP.


    Quote Comment
  23. 23
    Amused Says:

            cloud said:

    All you commenters you are idiots too because you take time to read this personally me i DELIGHT in reading this BECAUSE it is SO fun to make fun of all you geeks!

    …said the person who failed science class and quite possibly life, itself…


    Quote Comment

Leave a Reply

Current month ye@r day *

Please copy the string MlRBY7 to the field below:

Protected by WP Anti Spam