RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (1000) < ... 980 981 982 983 984 [985] 986 987 988 989 990 ... >   
  Topic: Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4244
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2008,10:17   

DS quotes Jerry Pournell:
             
Quote
Jerry Pournelle weighs in on intelligent design
DaveScot

Searching news.google.com for “intelligent design” I happened across a recent article by a favorite author of mine, Jerry Pournelle...
             
Quote
God, Earthlings, and Intelligent Design

Jerry Pournelle
Men’s News Daily, OP/ED
6/13/08

I don’t usually get into the “Intelligent Design” argument, because I don’t have a lot to add to it; but once in a while poseurs like Professor Richard Dawkins jump into the fray with such outrageous aplomb that I feel compelled to answer...

Example of Dawkins arguments:

“Intelligent design ‘theorists’ (a misnomer, for they have no theory) often use the alien scenario to distance themselves from old-style creationists: “For all we know, the designer might be an alien from outer space.” This attempt to fend off accusations of unconstitutionally importing religion into science classes is lame and disingenuous. All the leading intelligent design spokesmen are devout, and, when talking to the faithful, they drop the science-fiction fig leaf and expose themselves as the fundamentalist creationists they truly are.”

This statement is typical of Dawkins. It is also egregiously wrong. Begin with the last sentence: that only fundamentalist creationists assert the possibility of evolution influenced by aliens from outer space. This was in fact an hypothesis put forth by the late Sir Fred Hoyle in his book Evolution from Space ; and let me assure you that far from being a fundamentalist creationist, Sir Fred had a pretty sophisticated theory of how evolution might be influenced by extra terrestrials who were neither gods nor superbeings. Sir Fred’s theories would and did horrify fundamentalists...

I subscribed to Byte Magazine from about 1982 through 1997 and always enjoyed Pournell's "User's Column" (later "Computing at Chaos Manor"). I'm not particularly into science fiction, but always admired the guy for making a living writing books and playing with toys.

But in the above Jerry gets something wrong and Dave fails to spot it. Later, Dave missed something important.  

Jerry's lapse of logic: It doesn't follow from Dawkins' observation that the contemporary ID community disingenuously invokes the "ET" version of ID as cover for their patently religious motivations that he is asserting "that only fundamentalist creationists assert the possibility of evolution influenced by aliens from outer space." That simply does not follow, and Dawkins has not asserted that. Indeed, the only reason "ET-ID" makes sense as indirection is because there have been non-religiously motivated advocates of design. What Dawkins correctly observes is that the contemporary ID movement identified with Dembski, Behe, Meyers, Philip Johnson, etc. is both urgently religiously motivated and interested exclusively in the supernatural version of ID - and that they lie and engage in transparent indirection in an attempt to obscure that fact.  

Pournell later states:
       
Quote
I don’t spend a lot of time worrying about intelligent design because I have never had any concern about the impossibility of reconciling something like Darwinian Evolution and religion (nor indeed of reconciling reason and religion). This is probably due to my education at Christian Brothers College (now Christian Brothers High School) in Memphis during the 1940’s. Brother Fidelis was careful to teach the theory of evolution (although the Scopes Law had not yet been repealed and it was in theory illegal for him to do so) along with St. Augustine’s and St. Thomas Aquinas’s discourses on reason and science; and the concept that God could easily have created the universe in germinal causes and fixed laws, and allowed development to proceed with a bare minimum of miraculous interventions.

In other words, Dave, Jerry Pournell accepts "something like Darwinian evolution" and is sympathetic to theistic evolution, and is hence, by your blowhard-authoritative lights, a "spineless appeaser." He has "weighed in" on intelligent design by embracing two positions both you and UD reject and revile.

Dave, quickly invoke Emerson (foolish consistency, hobgoblins, all that.)

(Bold emphases are mine.)

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2008,10:18   

Quote (Albatrossity2 @ July 04 2008,10:11)
Quote (Ftk @ July 04 2008,10:03)
 Would you expand on that accusation?  Why am I wrong, and how would you answer the questions I addressed to Jack?

     
Quote
And see here as well.


Not a problem.  I apologize for accusing you of lying.  From what you said, it seemed obvious to me what had occurred, but if you state that that wasn't the case, then I will take your word for it.  

Thanks. I'm glad that what goes inside my head is "obvious" to you...

Re your question to Jack, I'll let him answer that. I'll just point out what he said is not remotely close to your interpretation of what he said.

But perhaps you can read his mind as well.

My question was legitimate, and I was asking it based on his words and Dave's statement that it's illegal to teach creationism in the schools.  I'm merely asking his opinion about whether it would be acceptable for teachers to teach about ID as long as it's not favorable toward ID.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2008,10:27   

Quote (Ftk @ July 04 2008,10:18)
My question was legitimate, and I was asking it based on his words and Dave's statement that it's illegal to teach creationism in the schools.  I'm merely asking his opinion about whether it would be acceptable for teachers to teach about ID as long as it's not favorable toward ID.

So what!

Can you really be that unintelligent?

A question for you FTK - do you think it would be acceptable to teach racial hatred as long as you don't favor it as a viewpoint?

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4244
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2008,10:35   

Seems to me that Ftk has a formal request pending to substantiate or retract her statement that Albatrossity2 is a liar before she can resume posting.

(My interest in recalling this is to avert UD-relevant posts being lost in a flood of Ftk-tizzy worthy of fountains of the deep. At minimum, pls port to the Ftk thread.)

ETA: I see that Ftk apologized. But the tizzy flood here remains a concern.

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2008,11:00   

DaveScot is asked
Quote
Off topic: can anyone tell me what’s happened to the “Brites” website? It appears to have gone dead.

His reply?
Quote
Rumor has it Galapagos Finch’s real name was discovered by the evos, outted, and because he’s at risk for job discrimination for public support of ID he decided discretion was the better part of valor and buried the site.


How deluded is DS? Mark's has been open in his support for ID all along, FFS he's working with Dr Dr Dembski.

Tard

My understanding it was all taken down because they thought it would be funny to say the site had been "expelled" or something. At least, IIRC, that's what the last gloppy post said.

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
sparc



Posts: 1737
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2008,12:45   

DaveScot
Quote
Rumor has it Galapagos Finch’s real name was discovered by the evos, outted, and because he’s at risk for job discrimination for public support of ID he decided discretion was the better part of valor and buried the site.
I guess Robert Marks will be delighted to be kind of officially outed by DaveScot.

--------------
"[...] 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 -

   
Advocatus Diaboli



Posts: 197
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2008,13:32   

It could be a very clever ruse from Dave. All to distract us from the _real_ person behind Brites.

Or not.

--------------
I once thought that I made a mistake, but I was wrong.

"I freely admit I’m a sociopath" - DaveScot

"Most importanly, the facts are on the side of ID." - scordova

"UD is the greatest website of all time." stevestory

   
stevestory



Posts: 9040
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2008,13:53   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ July 04 2008,12:00)
DaveScot is asked
 
Quote
Off topic: can anyone tell me what’s happened to the “Brites” website? It appears to have gone dead.

His reply?
 
Quote
Rumor has it Galapagos Finch’s real name was discovered by the evos, outted, and because he’s at risk for job discrimination for public support of ID he decided discretion was the better part of valor and buried the site.

'discretion is the better part of valor', you no doubt remember, is what the fat and reprehensible Falstaff said to justify his cowardice, after hiding during an attack.

   
tsig



Posts: 322
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2008,16:53   

Quote (Ftk @ July 04 2008,10:11)
Quote
And, of course, it doesn't even apply because Forrest's speech was not going to be in a public school, but was rather going to be a public event.



So, you would have no problem with Dembski speaking about the same issues at said event?

edit:

[for clarification, let me rephrase that...

So, you would have no problem with a teacher emailing other teachers about a lecture given by Dembski on the same topics as Forrest would address?]

No problem at all. But I guess you would fire them.

  
stevestory



Posts: 9040
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2008,20:03   

FtK, how have you missed the hundreds of messages on this board where we have alerted each other to talks by Dembski, Behe, Wells, West, Luskin, etc?

Here's a whole thread where we discuss trying to get someone to go to a creationist conference.

Your side doesn't always allow us into the discussions, but we still try to go.

   
Dr.GH



Posts: 1969
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2008,21:32   

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ July 04 2008,08:17)
DS quotes Jerry Pournell:
               [quote]Jerry Pournelle weighs in on intelligent design
DaveScot

Searching news.google.com for “intelligent design” I happened across a recent article by a favorite author of mine, Jerry Pournelle...

If you scan down the comments section, I made a few suggestions for Pournelle.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4244
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2008,21:53   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 04 2008,22:32)
[quote=Reciprocating Bill,July 04 2008,08:17]DS quotes Jerry Pournell:
               
Quote
Jerry Pournelle weighs in on intelligent design
DaveScot

Searching news.google.com for “intelligent design” I happened across a recent article by a favorite author of mine, Jerry Pournelle...

If you scan down the comments section, I made a few suggestions for Pournelle.

That you did. I hadn't read the comments. I hope Pournelle did.

The last comment is DaveScot fawning over Pournelle.

(Cups hands) HEY DAVE! While you're at it be sure to tell Jerry that he's a spineless appeaser!

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
stevestory



Posts: 9040
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,00:35   

Overwhelming Evidence:

Quote

Patrick
Lenski Confirms Behe's Main Thesis of EoE

My first opinion of Schlafly’s behavior was that he was overreacting to Lenski’s work and making a fool of himself in the process.


Patrick! You might have a brain after all!

Quote
And Lenski is not directly responsible for the way his work is being trumpeted as the salvation of Darwinism.


Hmmm...this could go either way....

Quote
Which I think is hilarious, considering it appears to be a confirmation of Behe’s main thesis if anything else.


...Aaaaand you're an idiot.

http://www.overwhelmingevidence.com/oe/node/561#comment-2007

   
stevestory



Posts: 9040
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,00:39   

(Scene: front porch at the Story household, 2078:)

kids: "Grandpa! Tell us about The Tard!"
Grandpa Story: (smacks lips) "Well...back in my day...you couldn't even look the tard right in the face without wearing Welder's Goggles...Burn yer eyes right out their sockets it would...."
kids: "woooooooo...."

   
stevestory



Posts: 9040
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,00:42   

"Tell us more, Granpa..."
"Well,...aright...had a fella by the name a 'Gil Dodgen'. Decided computers could only model what they was experiencin'. Saw a computer model about domestic violence, beat his wife half to death with the tower case of some ol' Dell. Real bad things. Don't reckon it's right to tell kids about it."
"oooooooooo"

   
stevestory



Posts: 9040
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,00:56   

"yeah. that site didn't last long. See, it was run by this guy name a Davetard, and he had a sextuple heart attack in late '08'. Said he had a whole Chee-to lodged in his left ventricle. Real sad how that went down. But, Que sera, sera. After that, they tried to go on. Paul Nelson spent a few decades sayin' he'd deliver on Ontogesomething Depth. Never did really settle things. Some guy name a Salvador took it up for a while, wound up in a Mexican prison for trafficin' in underage boys. Movement never did recover."

   
sparc



Posts: 1737
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,01:38   

Quote


...Aaaaand you're an idiot.

http://www.overwhelmingevidence.com/oe/node/561#comment-2007

I guess Patrick doesn't care as long as he gets 6 OE user points for that. He's the only one (+16) beside D'OL (+80) with an increasing user point number since since June 18th.

--------------
"[...] 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 -

   
BWE



Posts: 1896
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,01:44   

Quote
Anyway, I’m going to buy a copy as soon as it hits the Movie Depot. I’ll show it to my evolutionist cousins. It’s always fun to watch them squirm a little over their evolution lefty kinds of fantasies they trot out every now and then when they come over for the holidays.

It’s getting so they don’t even want to talk about it any more. Seriously, send one to a relative. I’m thinking about it.

link

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
Bob O'H



Posts: 1997
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,11:52   

Quote (tsig @ July 04 2008,16:53)
Quote (Ftk @ July 04 2008,10:11)
Quote
And, of course, it doesn't even apply because Forrest's speech was not going to be in a public school, but was rather going to be a public event.



So, you would have no problem with Dembski speaking about the same issues at said event?

edit:

[for clarification, let me rephrase that...

So, you would have no problem with a teacher emailing other teachers about a lecture given by Dembski on the same topics as Forrest would address?]

No problem at all. But I guess you would fire them.

In fairness to FtK, no she wouldn't:
Quote
Personally, I think firing her was kind of silly unless there are other underlying problems with her work habits.

So, she sent an email around highlighting a lecture Forrest was giving…so what? Does that justify firing her?

If the gal thinks she has a case, what they are essentially saying is that, in the future, any time an ID proponent is lecturing, ID sympathetic teachers would also be allowed to notify the staff and other educators in the area on the public school’s dime.

Why fight that?


--------------
It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

   
Lou FCD



Posts: 5379
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,14:09   

Quote (stevestory @ July 05 2008,01:56)
"yeah. that site didn't last long. See, it was run by this guy name a Davetard, and he had a sextuple heart attack in late '08'. Said he had a whole Chee-to lodged in his left ventricle. Real sad how that went down. But, Que sera, sera. After that, they tried to go on. Paul Nelson spent a few decades sayin' he'd deliver on Ontogesomething Depth. Never did really settle things. Some guy name a Salvador took it up for a while, wound up in a Mexican prison for trafficin' in underage boys. Movement never did recover."

Grandpa, tell us the one about JanieBelle.  That's my favorite.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4244
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,15:02   

Quote
False, trivial, obvious
idnut.com.au

Where is ID on this scale?

That would be "false."

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,15:18   

Quote (Lou FCD @ July 05 2008,14:09)
Grandpa, tell us the one about JanieBelle.  That's my favorite.

Did Tyler tell you what happened to him when his girlfriend found messages from JanieBelle on his blog?

  
stevestory



Posts: 9040
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,15:40   

On another thread this was posted:

Quote
Bettawrekonize



Posts: 1
Joined: July 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,16:23  
For those of you that think Uncommondescent only discriminates against evolutionists, I would like to suggest that it's not true. They also seem to have banned me for no apparent reason. When I tried to login and it said invalid password. So when I tried to reset my password it said something to the extent of, "Invalid Key." I made another account and managed to post onto there and one of the mods said that it does show I was banned and he doesn't know why, but he will ask. After a while, I was able to login with my original account but when I post, my posts never make it to the awaiting Moderator confirmation screen and they never get posted. So I am assuming that I am "suspended" indefinitely? I was never told why I was banned and I was never told why my account seems to be suspended indefinitely. I think there is something wrong with their policy in general, not just against evolutionists in particular. Whatever, it's their forum and if everyone gets banned for no apparent reason (and no opportunity to redeem themselves), eventually no one will pay attention to them.


Betta, your treatment is fairly typical. They'll ban anybody, at any time, for any reason, whether Young Earth Creationist, Old Earth Creationist, "ID Theorist", evolutionist, or whatever. They'll ban you for talking too much about the bible or too much about atheism. They'll ban you for not reading Dembski or for quoting Dembski verbatim. They've banned more people in a week than we've banned in years. They're so intolerant, and ignorant of basic science and reasoning, that we have great fun watching them and laughing.

Creationists and ID supporters get much better treatment here than on Dembski's own blog. We just aren't mean and scared enough to ban many people. We have one or two people who are unnecessarily rude, but if you ignore them, it's a nice place to hang out regardless of your perspective.

   
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,16:04   

Quote (sparc @ July 04 2008,10:45)
DaveScot  
Quote
Rumor has it Galapagos Finch’s real name was discovered by the evos, outted, and because he’s at risk for job discrimination for public support of ID he decided discretion was the better part of valor and buried the site.
I guess Robert Marks will be delighted to be kind of officially outed by DaveScot.

I suspect what really happened is that Marks realized that posting cartoons that made him look like a severely maladjusted 14-YO boy was not exactly the kind of behavior that a supposedly dignified college professor and leader of real-sciency-like ID research is supposed to be indulging in.

 
Quote
At risk for job discrimination


Puh-leez, it's no secret that he's a creationist plus he's tenured. Besides, if he left Baylor, he could always go start an animation studio at the D.I. I hear the kids these days really 'dig' that hip and edgy stuff.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
stevestory



Posts: 9040
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,16:31   

Betta said (on the wrong thread):

Quote
You know, the thing is that I tried to E - Mail many of the moderators before (including Dembski among others) and my E - Mails never got through. I tried to E - Mail the uncommondescent legal services (or whatever that is) and it never got through either (they get bounced back). It could be the case that their E - Mail boxes are full.


I've gone to UD before in search of emails and not found a way to contact anybody there. It's weird. Anyone have an explanation for this?

   
stevestory



Posts: 9040
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,16:37   

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....obvious

Quote
5 July 2008
False, trivial, obvious
idnet.com.au

Where is ID on this scale?

Bruce G. Charlton Editor-in-Chief, Medical Hypotheses

“An old joke about the response to revolutionary new scientific theories states that there are three phases on the road to acceptance: 1. The theory is not true; 2. The theory is true, but it is unimportant; 3. The theory is true, and it is important – but we knew it all along.


ID is not on that scale. That scale is for revolutionary new scientific theories. ID is on the scale for quack nonsense:

1. The theory is disregarded as obviously wrong by the scientific community. Several people figure out how to make money off the public with it. 2. The theory is disregarded as obviously wrong by the scientific community. Several people figure out how to make money off the public with it. 3. The theory is disregarded as obviously wrong by the scientific community. Several people figure out how to make money off the public with it. 4. The theory is disregarded as obviously wrong by the scientific community. Several people figure out how to make money off the public with it....

   
stevestory



Posts: 9040
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,16:45   

Bill Dembski is the Alex Chiu of Information Theory

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4526
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,18:10   

Jerry Pournelle could stand to do a bit more fact-checking.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
stevestory



Posts: 9040
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,18:16   

Will I shock anyone by revealing that Jerry Pournelle was an engineer? I doubt it. And he appears to be an idiot when it comes to science:

Quote
Pournelle has expressed support for several viewpoints that differ from the general scientific consensus. These include skepticism on a significant human contribution to global warming and on evolution, and he has advocated research to directly investigate Peter Duesberg's controversial views on the cause of AIDS. Pournelle has also commented on possible links between race and IQ (as evident in Lucifer's Hammer and The Burning City). He emphasizes that in some cases, particularly when the effects of wrong decisions could be disastrous, contrarian research by competent researchers is valuable as insurance.

Although claiming not to be a proponent of Intelligent design, he argues (in opposition to many critics) that it can generate falsifiable hypotheses that contribute to the understanding of evolution. He regards proposals to teach Intelligent Design in public schools as less damaging to education than the expert-dominated, centralized educational systems he sees as a prerequisite for banning such proposals. Pournelle has made several references in his blog to Hoyle's fallacy as an argument against Darwinian evolution.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki....c_views

   
Maya



Posts: 702
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2008,18:17   

Quote (stevestory @ July 05 2008,16:31)
Betta said (on the wrong thread):

 
Quote
You know, the thing is that I tried to E - Mail many of the moderators before (including Dembski among others) and my E - Mails never got through. I tried to E - Mail the uncommondescent legal services (or whatever that is) and it never got through either (they get bounced back). It could be the case that their E - Mail boxes are full.


I've gone to UD before in search of emails and not found a way to contact anybody there. It's weird. Anyone have an explanation for this?

I found william.dembski@iscid.org and wdembski@sbts.edu pretty easily, and I'm just a grad student in the biology department (send him my love when you write).  Surely some of you computer studs could do better.

I've got an ex-Marine friend who would love to, um, lecture DaveScot on the principles of the Corps.

  
  29999 replies since Jan. 16 2006,11:43 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (1000) < ... 980 981 982 983 984 [985] 986 987 988 989 990 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]