RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (13) < 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... >   
  Topic: Coloration of animals, mimicry, aposematism, Is really natural selection behind it?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 07 2007,02:25   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Oct. 05 2007,15:19)
Still deaf, Marty? Surely Bratislava must have ear doctors, even tho their level of science education seems iffy.
...

Your way of discussion is very mean and stupid. You are a troll and provocateur.


----
"PERCENTAGE OF YOUNG PEOPLE AGED 22 WHO HAVE SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED
AT LEAST UPPER SECONDARY EDUCATION, 1997"


Slovakia, Sweden and Czech republic are at the top.

http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/educ/indic/rapinen.pdf

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 07 2007,03:12   

Quote (VMartin @ Oct. 07 2007,02:25)
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Oct. 05 2007,15:19)
Still deaf, Marty? Surely Bratislava must have ear doctors, even tho their level of science education seems iffy.
...

Your way of discussion is very mean and stupid. You are a troll and provocateur.


----
"PERCENTAGE OF YOUNG PEOPLE AGED 22 WHO HAVE SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED
AT LEAST UPPER SECONDARY EDUCATION, 1997"


Slovakia, Sweden and Czech republic are at the top.

http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/educ/indic/rapinen.pdf

You still here VMartin? Don't let the door hit you on your way out now!

--------------
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

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 07 2007,10:03   

Martin

go here for someone who has reviewed the cases of spiders that are ant mimics.  If you are at the public library computer you may be able to download it, but if you are sitting under the bushes in your neighbors backyard pirating bandwith from their wireless you may not get JSTOR.  

but simply put there is a shitpile of evidence for morphological and behavioral mimicry adaptations.  

and you still never said WHAT YOUR OPINION IS about how mimicry arises.  Dishonest asshole.

--------------
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

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 07 2007,11:04   

Quote (VMartin @ Oct. 07 2007,02:25)
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Oct. 05 2007,15:19)
Still deaf, Marty? Surely Bratislava must have ear doctors, even tho their level of science education seems iffy.
...

Your way of discussion is very mean and stupid. You are a troll and provocateur.


----
"PERCENTAGE OF YOUNG PEOPLE AGED 22 WHO HAVE SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED
AT LEAST UPPER SECONDARY EDUCATION, 1997"


Slovakia, Sweden and Czech republic are at the top.

http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/educ/indic/rapinen.pdf

Then what's YOUR excuse, Marty? Dropped out of school at age 12?

Seriously, get your ears checked. You can't hear a thing people say to you.

--------------
"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

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2007,13:49   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 07 2007,10:03)
Martin

go here for someone who has reviewed the cases of spiders that are ant mimics.  If you are at the public library computer you may be able to download it, but if you are sitting under the bushes in your neighbors backyard pirating bandwith from their wireless you may not get JSTOR.  

but simply put there is a shitpile of evidence for morphological and behavioral mimicry adaptations.  

and you still never said WHAT YOUR OPINION IS about how mimicry arises.  Dishonest asshole.

There are people who believe in extraterrestrials and there are people who believe there are ants' mimics.

You can send your funny pictures and your funny articles whenever you like - the same do believers in extraterrestrials. They have also their articles and their pictures.

What is interesting is the fact that another ignorant here adolescentdidnotknowanything mentioned in the thread about evolution of horse that there are amazing numbers of beetles' species. I don't know if the poor guy has ever realised this fact more deeply. It could have occured him that some of them could look like ants by pure chance. And this is the solution of the problem of ant's mimicry. There are so many forms of beetles that some of them looks like ants. It is no way "mimicry".

Many beetle species which look like ants live in caverns. But because there live no ants darwinists cannot claim that these beetles are ants' mimics. They simply ignore them.

On the other hand there live many thousands insect species inside anthills. Only very few of them look like ants.
Did "natural selection" forget to shape them or what? Obviously natural selection moulded only few of them. It is very weird, isn't it?

I am glad that selectionists realised the fact at last  after so many years Heikertinger adressed it. Heikertinger called proponents of ants and wasps mimicry only as "Hypothetiker".

In your article there is written that  "...since even myrmecophiles which lack morphological resemblance to ants may mimic chemical or textural characters of their hosts".

Of course one should have asked what was the reason of "morphological resemblance" when you can live in anthills without such "morphological resemblance" and thrive there well - as vast number of ants' guests prove.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2007,14:02   

Marty:

Are you claiming that there is no such thing as mimicry in nature at all?

Quote
Of course one should have asked what was the reason of "morphological resemblance" when you can live in anthills without such "morphological resemblance" and thrive there well - as vast number of ants' guests prove.


What's YOUR explanation of "morphological resemblance", Marty?

Too stupid to have one, or too afraid to say what it is?

--------------
"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

  
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2007,14:52   

Hypothetically, Marty, what do you think would constitute evidence of mimicry?

--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
Steviepinhead



Posts: 532
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2007,18:34   

This is the V-one's "answer" to the question of mimicry--there's Shitloads'O'Beetles, so a few are bound to look like ants by pure chance?

Man, that is so pitiful.  I'm tempted to dredge up one of the better written IDist's "Teh Oddz R 2 Long" canards to refute him with.

"Of all the ant tunnels, in all the ant hills, in all the world, she walks into mine."   She being a beetle what looks just like an ant that belongs in this here gin joint, er, ant tunnel...

  
Henry J



Posts: 4001
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2007,21:38   

Quote
This is the V-one's "answer" to the question of mimicry -- there's Shitloads'O'Beetles, so a few are bound to look like ants by pure chance?


That pretty much sums up my understanding of how mimicry arises in the first place: with a huge number of species, the odds of not getting a few that look somewhat alike would be quite low. If it happens that the resemblance reduces risk of attack, or makes food more accessible, then that leads to a conclusion that VMartin won't like.

Henry

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,13:05   

Marty:

Since you've logged in, here's a chance to give a straight answer for once in your life. Please answer the following question:

"I do not believe that there is any such thing as mimicry in nature."

a) agree
b) disagree

If you can handle that one, many of us would also like to hear what definition of "morphological resemblance" you do advocate.

No more tedious babbling about 'Darwinists'. It's getting old.

--------------
"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

  
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,13:15   

I think Marty has made it clear that he does not believe "mimicry" exists in nature.  But what isn't clear is what criteria he is using to come to that belief.  I'd still like to know what, specifically, would constitute hypothetical evidence of mimicry for him.

--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,13:19   

Quote (improvius @ Oct. 10 2007,13:15)
I think Marty has made it clear that he does not believe "mimicry" exists in nature.  But what isn't clear is what criteria he is using to come to that belief.  

You're probably right, but I want him to come out and SAY he doesn't believe mimicry exists. For some reason, he's doing his usual unconvincingly evasive routine with this.

Quote
I'd still like to know what, specifically, would constitute hypothetical evidence of mimicry for him.


Good luck with that.  ;)

--------------
"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

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,13:20   

Quote (improvius @ Oct. 09 2007,14:52)
Hypothetically, Marty, what do you think would constitute evidence of mimicry?

First of all we should define mimicry. This is the definition I have already proposed:

To consider something to be mimicry:

1) there is a resemblance to other species.
2) This resemblance give some survival advantage to the species.
3) This resemblance aroused due Natural selection.

Some guys here are unable to comprehend this definition and their posts are full of gibberish. It is enough for them when some pets look like another pets and the guys here think they are observing "mimicry".

Of course in such naive notion also placental and marsupial wolfs represents mimicry, but experts
here haven't instructed us yet which is the model and which is the mimic, hehe.

On the other hand survival advantage for species that looks like wasps is still an unproved and very dubious idea and even if true it was sure not natural selection from predators that led to such resemblance.

The same for the so called mimics of ants. There live many thousands species in anthills and only few of them look like ants - and also these resemblances are very superficial.

There is no need to suppose that ants in anthills carried out selection for resemblance of some species but they did'n care for all of the forms and shapes of the species  that create majority of their guests.

Summa: there is no such thing as mimicry of ants or wasps, even if darwinists like to present it.

Of course presenting some nice pictures of "mimicry" in "scientifical" darwinian text-books may look convincingly. Untill you compare other forms and shapes of related species.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,13:28   

Quote
Summa: there is no such thing as mimicry of ants or wasps, even if darwinists like to present it.


Is there any such thing as mimicry of any other kind of organisms, Marty?

   
Quote
Of course one should have asked what was the reason of "morphological resemblance" when you can live in anthills without such "morphological resemblance" and thrive there well - as vast number of ants' guests prove.


So Marty seems to be saying evolution is false because not all organisms evolve identically.

Which is basically a recycling of the 'why do we still have apes?' argument.

Marty, do you have any kind of scientific education at all?

Quote
1) there is a resemblance to other species.
2) This resemblance give some survival advantage to the species.
3) This resemblance aroused due Natural selection.


Marty, we told you about 'aroused'. Check your dictionary again.

--------------
"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

  
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,13:39   

Well, I give up.  I can't argue against something that I can't parse.

In any case, here's another article about a toxic frog mimic: http://news.mongabay.com/2006/0313-frogs.html

--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,13:48   

Quote (improvius @ Oct. 10 2007,13:39)
Well, I give up.  I can't argue against something that I can't parse.

I think I can parse it:

 
Quote
To consider something to be mimicry:

1) there is a resemblance to other species.
2) This resemblance give some survival advantage to the species.
3) This resemblance aroused due Natural selection.


So I think what Marty the Wacky Slovakian Creationist is saying that there is no such thing as mimicry because there's no such thing as Natural Selection. Why isn't there? Well, because he SAYS so, obviously.

His condition number 2 is irrelevant because he gives himself an escape clause anyway:

 
Quote
On the other hand survival advantage for species that looks like wasps is still an unproved and very dubious idea and even if true it was sure not natural selection from predators that led to such resemblance.


So he's basically saying 'mimicry doesn't benefit any species and even if it did, it's still false because natural selection doesn't exist'.

Why? Well, because Marty said so, of course!

 
Quote
Some guys here are unable to comprehend this definition and their posts are full of gibberish.


It's ironic to be accused of writing gibberish by VMartin, but Marty seems not to have irony in his system. (Sarcasm is not the same as irony.)

--------------
"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

  
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,13:58   

Ok, but WTF do you make of this one:

Quote
There is no need to suppose that ants in anthills carried out selection for resemblance of some species but they did'n care for all of the forms and shapes of the species  that create majority of their guests.


--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,14:02   

Quote (improvius @ Oct. 10 2007,13:58)
Ok, but WTF do you make of this one:

 
Quote
There is no need to suppose that ants in anthills carried out selection for resemblance of some species but they did'n care for all of the forms and shapes of the species  that create majority of their guests.

Well, Improvius, if a reptile hatched a bird there is no ancestor in common view, you know.

--------------
"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

  
improvius



Posts: 807
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,14:06   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Oct. 10 2007,15:02)
Quote (improvius @ Oct. 10 2007,13:58)
Ok, but WTF do you make of this one:

   
Quote
There is no need to suppose that ants in anthills carried out selection for resemblance of some species but they did'n care for all of the forms and shapes of the species  that create majority of their guests.

Well, Improvius, if a reptile hatched a bird there is no ancestor in common view, you know.

Thanks, that makes perfect sense now.  I'll be sure to ask you again if anything else arouses.

--------------
Quote (afdave @ Oct. 02 2006,18:37)
Many Jews were in comfortable oblivion about Hitler ... until it was too late.
Many scientists will persist in comfortable oblivion about their Creator ... until it is too late.

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,14:41   

yeah martin is playing semantical silly-buggers, obvious from his 3 part definition of mimicry.

martin when you have something interesting to say about mimicry i'll be listening.  until then i will remain convinced that you are either 1) an idiot, 2) deep cover troll or 3) both.

why don't you tell us how freshwater mussels don't mimic oligochaetes to disperse glochidia onto fish.  that'd be another riot.

if the opportunity arouses, that is.

--------------
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

  
Henry J



Posts: 4001
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,15:21   

The definition of "mimicry" should not say anything about how that mimicry arose.

  
BWE



Posts: 1896
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,15:58   

My Cephalopods were pretty damn cool and Marty just spit on them since they weren't, um,... bugs. Or more accurately I suppose I should call them by their latin name: ugbays.

The octopi actually mimic color, shape and behavior! And they choose which preditor to mimic based on the danger they find themselves in. Tell me they aren't mimicking.

Phfftht.

--------------
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

   
JohnW



Posts: 2198
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,16:01   

Quote (BWE @ Oct. 10 2007,13:58)
My Cephalopods were pretty damn cool and Marty just spit on them since they weren't, um,... bugs. Or more accurately I suppose I should call them by their latin name: ugbays.

The octopi actually mimic color, shape and behavior! And they choose which preditor to mimic based on the danger they find themselves in. Tell me they aren't mimicking.

Phfftht.

But they don't mimic ants, do they?

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it.
- Robert Byers

  
Henry J



Posts: 4001
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,16:15   

Those octopi are mimicking all right, but not by being already similar to something else, but by being smart, flexible, and colorful, and using all of those traits.

Henry

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,23:52   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 10 2007,14:41)

martin when you have something interesting to say about mimicry i'll be listening.  until then i will remain convinced that you are either 1) an idiot, 2) deep cover troll or 3) both.


Your judgment of my person is as valid as your  idiotic opinion of beetles "mimicking" ants. Either you are a cretine or neodarwinian stupido. Or both.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 10 2007,23:54   

Quote (VMartin @ Oct. 10 2007,23:52)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 10 2007,14:41)

martin when you have something interesting to say about mimicry i'll be listening.  until then i will remain convinced that you are either 1) an idiot, 2) deep cover troll or 3) both.


Your judgment of my person is as valid as your  idiotic opinion of beetles "mimicking" ants. Either you are a cretine or neodarwinian stupido. Or both.

Hey, Marty my troll, do you believe in common descent? You never did tell us.

--------------
"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

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 11 2007,23:47   

Maybe darwinists think that lies and hypocrisy is something common and normal also in the nature. They think they can see such hypocrisy also in insect realm and they call it mimicry. You know all the messy stuff about wasps or ants and their so-called "mimics".
But such "mimicry" is nothing else as a convergent evolution or a pure coincidence of similarity of animals.  
"Mimicry" no way supports their fantasies. It reveals more darwinian way of thinking.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 12 2007,03:11   

Quote
Maybe darwinists think that lies and hypocrisy is something common and normal also in the nature.

There is plenty of it in this thread already. You see what you look for VMartin. If you think mainstream science is engaged in a massive conspiracy then when you look for the evidence you'll certainly find if even if it's not really there.
 
Quote
They think they can see such hypocrisy also in insect realm and they call it mimicry.

That makes sense...NOT
 
Quote
You know all the messy stuff about wasps or ants and their so-called "mimics".

Oh yeah, that.....whatever dude.
 
Quote

But such "mimicry" is nothing else as a convergent evolution or a pure coincidence of similarity of animals.  

Oh, thanks for explaining it. I was wondering. Some quite unlikely co-incidences don't you think? Oh, of course you don't think, sorry.
 
Quote
"Mimicry" no way supports their fantasies. It reveals more darwinian way of thinking.

Only a true professional like yourself can have a fantasy with no supporing evidence. Who needs actual evidence to support their craziness? Certainly not VMartin!

--------------
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

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 12 2007,09:04   

Quote

"PERCENTAGE OF YOUNG PEOPLE AGED 22 WHO HAVE SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED
AT LEAST UPPER SECONDARY EDUCATION, 1997"
Slovakia, Sweden and Czech republic are at the top.


Dumbshit, graduation rates have nothing to do with overall quality of science education.

You answered my question for me.

Quote
Maybe darwinists think that lies and hypocrisy is something common and normal also in the nature.


Another ignorant, whiny, dishonest creationist. Big surprise.

Go home, troll, cuddle with Davison, whatever. You're not wanted here.

--------------
"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

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 12 2007,11:05   

Anignorantfromdarwinianparty

             
Quote

Oh, thanks for explaining it. I was wondering. Some quite unlikely co-incidences don't you think? Oh, of course you don't think, sorry.


What coindidences are you babbling about? Stop scribbling nonsense and  answer these questions first:

1) Do you believe that all 6.000 species of Syrphidae (hoverflies) are mimicking wasps? If no, where do you see a division line between mimics and non-mimics?

2) Do you believe all 600 species of Sessidae (clearwing moths) are mimicking wasps? If no, where do you see a division line between mimics and non-mimics?
 
             
Quote

Only a true professional like yourself can have a fantasy with no supporing evidence. Who needs actual evidence to support their craziness? Certainly not VMartin!


I am not a professional - just like you. But it's not my fault that modern darwinists are not as clairvoyant systematics and systematic's experts as were their adversaries like Franz Heikertinger. Scientists of the past didn't just pick up two species and presented them as mimicry. They were aware that we should take into consideration all species from "model" group and all species from the "mimic" group and compare them. By comparing color patterns of whole  insect families we can often immediately dismiss many cases of mimicry as it is presented by darwinists. We are often facing convergent evolution or pure coincidence and not "mimicry".

Let say we have models having these color patterns in their group (family):

E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 E9 E10

and so-called mimic having these color patterns in it's group (family):

A3 B3 C3 D3 E3 F3 G3 H3 I3 J3

A darwinist picks up  E3 from both group and he shows it to children: "Look children, what a nice mimicry! There is natural selection behind it, science, you know.".

The poor darwinist is either an ignorant or a hypocrite. He is only comparing some similarities from transformation sequences.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
  365 replies since Sep. 21 2007,11:31 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (13) < 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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