Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > Uncommonly Dense Thread 4

Pages: (356) < ... 303 304 305 306 307 [308] 309 310 311 312 313 ... >

Soapy Sam Posts: 659 Joined: Jan. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: June 22 2013,03:44    Quote (CeilingCat @ June 21 2013,16:35) For a more informative view of Meyer's latest production, Nick Matzke flays it alive at The Panda's Thumb.  However, I must urge caution here.  On UD, Andre points out that Nick has not yet produced the "textbook of macro evolution" someone at UD has apparently demanded of him. Mung drives by occasionally at TSZ shouting the same bizarre demand out his rolled-down window. It is one of evolution's best kept secrets: no-one has ever written a single word on 'macroevolution'. And of course if it's not in a textbook, it's not science. Anyone know what that magnifying glass thingy, or the word 'search', does on the Internet? http://www.amazon.com/s....ol....olution -------------- SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

Soapy Sam Posts: 659 Joined: Jan. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: June 22 2013,03:53    Quote (Soapy Sam @ June 22 2013,09:44) http://www.amazon.com/s....ol....olution Wha? 9th hit down: "I Don't Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist"! What, in the name of the Great Search Heuristic, does that have to do with it? Someone at Amazon doing the equivalent of my local nutter who slips cards into all the evolution books at my library? -------------- SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 22 2013,22:34    Joe: Quote Social facts: Gregory was self-abused and then abandoned. His subsequent life was filled with rejection and loneliness. In 2002 he lost half of his mind and in 2003 the other half went out looking for it. No traces of his mind have been observed since that time. KF: Ban him, or forever shut-the-fuck-up about civility, ad hominem, well poisoning etc. -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Soapy Sam Posts: 659 Joined: Jan. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: June 23 2013,04:16    Quote (Richardthughes @ June 23 2013,04:34) Joe: Quote Social facts: Gregory was self-abused and then abandoned. His subsequent life was filled with rejection and loneliness. In 2002 he lost half of his mind and in 2003 the other half went out looking for it. No traces of his mind have been observed since that time. KF: Ban him, or forever shut-the-fuck-up about civility, ad hominem, well poisoning etc. Preferably the latter. He is doing a very nice job down that well. -------------- SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

timothya Posts: 280 Joined: April 2013 (Permalink) Posted: June 23 2013,07:38    From Kairosfocus at UD:   Quote This is not a genuine petition, on track record of too many casesit is a license for mob-driven witch hunts, media lynchings and unjustified career busting driven by toxic slanders, willful misinformation, rage fed by hostility and stereotyping misrepresentations. But already, there is a push to tyrannise on conscience that has not been seen in a very long time, and it is going to lead to an awful mess if unchecked. Plato’s warning on nihilist, amoral, evolutionary materialist factions is coming true. The awful mess appears to have been supplied already. -------------- "In its majestic equality, the law forbids rich and poor alike to sleep under bridges, beg in the streets and steal loaves of bread." Anatole France

k.e.. Posts: 5432 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 23 2013,08:15    Quote (timothya @ June 23 2013,15:38) From Kairosfocus at UD:   Quote This is not a genuine petition, on track record of too many casesit is a license for mob-driven witch hunts, media lynchings and unjustified career busting driven by toxic slanders, willful misinformation, rage fed by hostility and stereotyping misrepresentations. But already, there is a push to tyrannise on conscience that has not been seen in a very long time, and it is going to lead to an awful mess if unchecked. Plato’s warning on nihilist, amoral, evolutionary materialist factions is coming true. The awful mess appears to have been supplied already. Not to mention failure of the legal system, judicial disconnect from the church and state. KF's elegy to the toads of ID needs an editor... Full fathom five your Bleistein lies Under the flatfish and the squids. Graves' Disease in a dead Jew's eyes! Where the crabs have eat the lids Oh woe is I -------------- "I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit "ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus "I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

sparc Posts: 2089 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 23 2013,09:53    Great that Denyse is back. Who else would dare to publish things like this (emphasis mine):     Quote Record number of journals manipulated “impact factors,” got banned June 22, 2013 Posted by News under Peer review 1 Comment Last May, I wrote about ”An insurrection against “journal impact factors” in science?” Now, we learn from Nature News Blog:     Quote A record number of journals — 66 of them, including 33 37* new offenders — have been banned from this year’s impact-factor list (released today) because of excessive self-citation or because of ‘citation stacking’ (in which journals cite each other to excessive amounts). This year, the named-and-shamed titles include the International Journal of Crashworthiness and the Iranian Journal of Fuzzy Systems. Only 51 were banned last year (28 new offenders), and 34 the year before that. Along with the record numbers, Thomson Reuters has posted a new explanation of why it decides to ban journals — essentially because the self-citations distort the rankings. *Thomson Reuters updated the number of new offenders from 33, to 37, on 20 June. Apparently, as a metric, impact factor is getting worse. Gregor Mendel wouldn’t have stood a chance. His work was unnoticed when he did it. The main lesson is that any system one human being can develop, another can manipulate, so there is no substitute for good judgement. Second, over time, such systems become a dead hand. Put another way, many more tenured Darwin profs could act to manipulate rankings than could any critics, coming from whatever position. Thus, the dead hand rules. Reality check: 1. How many "tenured Darwin profs" would publish in "Iranian Journal of Fuzzy Systems"? 2. How often do outspoken anti-Darwinian ID/-creationist non-profs cite themselves? I cannot answer the first question but we do have data from the recently published pseudo scientific "Biological Information: New Perspectives": Robert J. MArks II cites 9 of his publications his the opening paper of the first section "Information Theory & Biology". Werner Gitt only cites one of his publications ("Without Excuse") but he refers to it 17 times while mentioning of the other 12 references totals 18 times. And he dishonestly doesn't mention that the blurb of "Without Excuse" says     Quote all biological information comes from God William Dembski doesn't have a proper literature list (hasn't this book been checked by some editor for a common style?). Instead he lists 20 "References and Notes" (maybe this is the theologian's way of dealing with references) 9 of which refer to work by him, 2 cited publications by the paper's co-author Bob Marks II. And it remains questionable if all what Dembski refers to could count as valid publications (some are just proceedings from IEEE conferences where he and Marks managed to smuggle in their stuff without being caught for publishing what would have been considered BS at any biology meeting) especially when he has to admit that what he cites from his own work is not really obvious:     Quote This result is somewhat buried in Dembski and Marks, “The Search for a Search.” I cannot be asked to go through the rest of the articles. I guess there may be less self-citation in other articles. E.g. Jonathan Wells doesn't cite himself in his piece on junk DNA. However, with Wells' record of cherry picking, quote mining and lies one can be sure that his use of the 192 references he provided will not be much better than what Marks, Dembski and Gitt did. -------------- "[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God." - William Dembski -

Ptaylor Posts: 1180 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 23 2013,20:39    Bully's post 'Jerad’s DDS Causes Him to Succumb to “Miller’s Mendacity” and Other Errors', and (especially) its comments provide a great insight into the IDCreationist mindset. Somewhere else ID sceptic Jerad has apparently stated that a coin toss experiment giving 500 heads in a row would be unlikely but not impossible. Bully's reaction:     Quote No Jerad.  You are wrong. Stunningly, glaringly, gobsmackingly wrong, and it beggars belief that someone would say these things Some of the comments are hilarious. With mathematics being his specialty, Joe has to contribute:     Quote [500 heads in a row] would be doubtful even if you had magical infinity at your disposal. It would definitely be impossible in any human life-time. Comments go on in a similar vein, although, to be fair, many argue in favour of the mathematics. Axel finally ties it all together:     Quote Surely, here is a circumstance, where a slavish deference to statistical/mathematical possibility should give way to common sense – which, of course, is a bit of a misnomer, where atheists of all stamps are concerned, now that there are so many unambiguous pointers to, at the very least, theism. Yes, the probability exceeds universal probability bound (Barry's words) therefor baby Jesus. UD link ETA: 801 posts! We are the eight-oh-one, we are the central shaft Edited by Ptaylor on June 24 2013,20:26 -------------- We no longer say: “Another day; another bad day for Darwinism.” We now say: “Another day since the time Darwinism was disproved.” -PaV, Uncommon Descent, 19 June 2016

Henry J Posts: 5786 Joined: Mar. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: June 23 2013,20:54    Plato's warning on "evolutionary materialist" factions? That's Greek to me! - ancient Greek, that is! Henry

didymos Posts: 1828 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: June 23 2013,22:16    Quote (Henry J @ June 23 2013,18:54) Plato's warning on "evolutionary materialist" factions???? That's Greek to me! - ancient Greek, that is! Henry That's one of Gordon's favorite tropes.  He uses it even more than the infamous "Lewontin!" one. -------------- I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: June 23 2013,22:53    Quote (didymos @ June 24 2013,04:16) Quote (Henry J @ June 23 2013,18:54) Plato's warning on "evolutionary materialist" factions???? That's Greek to me! - ancient Greek, that is! Henry That's one of Gordon's favorite tropes.  He uses it even more than the infamous "Lewontin!" one. The text he loves to cite proposes a neat solution to the problem of atheistic influence. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 24 2013,00:07    I find 'Plato's Cave' to be nonsense. Sure, we could all be in the matrix, but we live our lives the same way. I suspect Gordon likes it because of the similarity to 'through a glass, darkly'. -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: June 24 2013,00:20    Quote (Richardthughes @ June 24 2013,06:07) I find 'Plato's Cave' to be nonsense. Sure, we could all be in the matrix, but we live our lives the same way. I suspect Gordon likes it because of the similarity to 'through a glass, darkly'. Gordon likes Plato because he is theistic. That, and his totalitarian wet dream of seeing atheists put to death. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Lou FCD Posts: 5455 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 24 2013,15:59    Quote (sparc @ June 23 2013,10:53) Great that Denyse is back. Who else would dare to publish things like this (emphasis mine):       Quote [snip some stupid shit] Apparently, as a metric, impact factor is getting worse. Gregor Mendel wouldn’t have stood a chance. His work was unnoticed when he did it. No, it was not "unnoticed". The significance of his work was certainly underappreciated, even by Mendel himself, but it was not "unnoticed". It was well-cited, in fact, just in the realm of hybridization, not inheritance. -------------- “Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas? Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

Kantian Naturalist Posts: 72 Joined: Mar. 2013 (Permalink) Posted: June 24 2013,16:00    I find the Allegory of the Cave to be not only beautiful but also basically true -- because I read it as being, not about skepticism and all that epistemological BS, but about how acquiring the practice of critical self-reflection is necessary for freedom from ideology and oppression.   Gordon's problem has nothing to do with what Plato said, and everything to do with how he reads Plato.  Gordon only ever cites that one passage from "The Laws," he merely assumes (sans argument) that Plato's criticisms apply to contemporary naturalists, and he never responds to criticisms of his interpretation.   Perhaps Gordon regards himself as a morally impassioned intellectual, but he's not -- because he doesn't care about the ideas for their own sake; he cares about whatever bits of text he can appropriate for his own political theology.  Gordon has as much genuine understanding and appreciation of philosophy as Philip has of quantum mechanics.  Such people are not only ignorant but uneducable, which is why I keep my interactions with them to a minimum.  William Murray, for whom I once held out some hope, has revealed himself to be of the same ilk.

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: June 24 2013,18:19    Quote (Kantian Naturalist @ June 24 2013,22:00) Gordon's problem has nothing to do with what Plato said Only thing I don't agree with. Sometimes Plato is plain and simple odious. Well intentioned, but odious nonetheless. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Kantian Naturalist Posts: 72 Joined: Mar. 2013 (Permalink) Posted: June 24 2013,20:08    I suppose that this thread isn't a good venue for getting into a serious argument about Plato.  All I'll say for now is that I think that the Plato-as-precursor-of-totalitaranism interpretation, made popular by Popper, is a really flawed reading of Republic.   Anyway, we don't have to get into it, especially if this isn't the right kind of forum.  It's a nice forum for making fun of the persona at Uncommon Descent, and I'm happy to keep it light and mocking.

midwifetoad Posts: 4003 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: June 24 2013,21:33    I would reverse the analogy. The shadow is the idea or description, which never full captures reality. -------------- Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: June 24 2013,21:46    Quote (Kantian Naturalist @ June 24 2013,21:08) I suppose that this thread isn't a good venue for getting into a serious argument about Plato.  All I'll say for now is that I think that the Plato-as-precursor-of-totalitaranism interpretation, made popular by Popper, is a really flawed reading of Republic.   Anyway, we don't have to get into it, especially if this isn't the right kind of forum.  It's a nice forum for making fun of the persona at Uncommon Descent, and I'm happy to keep it light and mocking. Nobody would mind you making a new thread about that, I expect. There's little to do here these days. Which, if you think about it*, is a good thing. *(I've always been a fan of the Biscuit Conditional )

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 25 2013,09:38    Quote (Kantian Naturalist @ June 24 2013,21:08) I suppose that this thread isn't a good venue for getting into a serious argument about Plato.  All I'll say for now is that I think that the Plato-as-precursor-of-totalitaranism interpretation, made popular by Popper, is a really flawed reading of Republic.   Anyway, we don't have to get into it, especially if this isn't the right kind of forum.  It's a nice forum for making fun of the persona at Uncommon Descent, and I'm happy to keep it light and mocking. i'd be interested in reading your argument for this there sure as shit aint else going on up in here lol aint no way in hell i am actually going to that UD shitbin to read comments or posts -------------- You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: June 25 2013,11:02    Is Sal about to get banned? After this post, it seems likely: http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....ting-id Of course, those are three OK reasons to reject ID.  I can think of much, much better ones. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

sparc Posts: 2089 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 25 2013,12:09    Unfortunately, Denyse doesn't cross post all her Best Schools writings at UD. Thus, you will have missed this one which clearly demonstrates her complete lack of self-awareness. But since she ended it with Quote Share and Enjoy I decided to do exactly this: Quote 18 June 2013 The best advice you will ever hear about how to be a good writer Denyse O'Leary Sit down. No, really. I am a professional writer. I know many people who would love to be writers (or so they tell me at workshops). But one problem is that they are (usually quite properly) occupied with other matters. So they don’t actually write. One must write a great deal to get good at it (no different from basketball or soccer). But it is difficult to write while standing or running, so take the time to … sit down. While we are here, talent is vastly overrated. Have you ever heard people complain about all the rubbish that leads in the best seller charts? Well, what does THAT tell you? Those people sat down. Maybe it would be better if they hadn’t, but here we are. Writing is one game you can only play if you sit down. It's obvious that she doesn't have talent that could be overrated but why did she never got herself a chair? -------------- "[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God." - William Dembski -

CeilingCat Posts: 2363 Joined: Dec. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 25 2013,12:14    Quote (OgreMkV @ June 25 2013,11:02) Is Sal about to get banned? After this post, it seems likely: http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....ting-id Of course, those are three OK reasons to reject ID.  I can think of much, much better ones. From that OP:   Quote BAD REASONS TO REJECT ID 1. Theology! There are some Christian theologians who believe in eternal life, the resurrection of the dead, the resurrection of Christ, but believe God wouldn’t design life based on whatever theological viewpoint they have such as their interpretations of the writings of Thomas Aquinas. I put this at the top of the list of bad reasons to reject ID. That's a direct slap in the face to vjtorley.  If this is the opening of a tard fight, Sal is way overmatched.  Which is not much of a complement to Torley. Did anyone notice that the first one to three replies to a Sal OP are usually made by Sal?  And that all of his references are to his own postings?

CeilingCat Posts: 2363 Joined: Dec. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 25 2013,12:20    William J Murray has a post that's odd even for him: Quote The stolen concept fallacy is a form of self-refutation. From Wikipedia: Stolen Concept – the act of using a concept while ignoring, contradicting or denying the validity of the concepts on which it logically and genetically depends. In an ongoing, multi-thread sub-debate at The Skeptical Zone, I have been making the case that when materialists argue, they necessarily employ stolen concepts, such as those referred to by the following terms and more: “I”, “we”, “prove”, “evidence”, “reason”, “logic”, “determine”, “conclude”, “error”, “fact”, “objective”, “subjective”, etc. He goes on to explain that paragraph to his satisfaction.  The tards shower him with praise. Link

CeilingCat Posts: 2363 Joined: Dec. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 25 2013,12:24    From the William J Murray post above: Quote 9 kairosfocus June 25, 2013 at 8:17 am KN: Now that my net connexion is up for the moment, why not enlighten us in a nutshell as to how serious naturalism escapes the concerns that are highlighted by WJM above? Compatibilism? Self Emergence? Etc? KF Translation: I paid my bill.  Constitutional crisis is over.

Soapy Sam Posts: 659 Joined: Jan. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: June 25 2013,12:38    Quote (CeilingCat @ June 25 2013,18:20) William J Murray has a post that's odd even for him:     Quote The stolen concept fallacy is a form of self-refutation. From Wikipedia: Stolen Concept – the act of using a concept while ignoring, contradicting or denying the validity of the concepts on which it logically and genetically depends. In an ongoing, multi-thread sub-debate at The Skeptical Zone, I have been making the case that when materialists argue, they necessarily employ stolen concepts, such as those referred to by the following terms and more: “I”, “we”, “prove”, “evidence”, “reason”, “logic”, “determine”, “conclude”, “error”, “fact”, “objective”, “subjective”, etc. He goes on to explain that paragraph to his satisfaction.  The tards shower him with praise. Link ... and "kipper", "elastic", "grout", "latitude", "red", "beetle", "compose", "darling", "guitar", "extensive", "stratum", "horse", "self-important bulllshitting fucknut"... -------------- SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

damitall Posts: 331 Joined: Jan. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: June 25 2013,12:49    Quote (CeilingCat @ June 25 2013,12:20) William J Murray has a post that's odd even for him:   Quote The stolen concept fallacy is a form of self-refutation. From Wikipedia: Stolen Concept – the act of using a concept while ignoring, contradicting or denying the validity of the concepts on which it logically and genetically depends. In an ongoing, multi-thread sub-debate at The Skeptical Zone, I have been making the case that when materialists argue, they necessarily employ stolen concepts, such as those referred to by the following terms and more: “I”, “we”, “prove”, “evidence”, “reason”, “logic”, “determine”, “conclude”, “error”, “fact”, “objective”, “subjective”, etc. He goes on to explain that paragraph to his satisfaction.  The tards shower him with praise. Link I've no doubt he BELIEVES he has made a case. But he says he believes exactly what he wants to believe, regardless of evidence. So UD is his natural home.

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 25 2013,12:58    Quote 9 kairosfocusJune 25, 2013 at 8:17 am KN: Now that my net connexion is up for the moment, why not enlighten us in a nutshell as to how serious naturalism escapes the concerns that are highlighted by WJM above? Compatibilism? Self Emergence? Etc? KF Or theism, which presupposes its own correctness, Gordon Mullings.... -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Tracy P. Hamilton Posts: 1239 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 25 2013,15:15    Quote (OgreMkV @ June 25 2013,11:02) Is Sal about to get banned? After this post, it seems likely: http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....ting-id Of course, those are three OK reasons to reject ID.  I can think of much, much better ones. "Bad" Argument 3 is Bad design. So an engineering firm can't fire somebody by arguing that engineer is incompetent, because someone could make a shallow argument for bad design.  Riiiiiiiiggghhht. -------------- "Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV "The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen "We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

steve_h Posts: 544 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 25 2013,16:09    Quote (OgreMkV @ June 25 2013,18:02) Is Sal about to get banned? After this post, it seems likely: http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....ting-id Of course, those are three OK reasons to reject ID.  I can think of much, much better ones. oh noes, he made things even worse with Mafia style outing tactics   Quote Very nice to hear from you Gordon

Pages: (356) < ... 303 304 305 306 307 [308] 309 310 311 312 313 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard