Go Back   Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
GL4x4 Live! GL4x4 Casino

Politics, Government, or Religion Chat Bring your flamesuit!







Search
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old May 14th, 2007, 09:02 AM   #41
Dr. Kate
Doctor begins with D.O.
 
Dr. Kate's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-10-07
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 260
iTrader: (0)
Send a message via AIM to Dr. Kate
Quote:
Originally Posted by 87'YJ View Post
I argue that evolution IS NOT happening because regardless of humans involvement in earth, we cannot just change the "all powerful" process of evolution. It would "evolve" around human interference

You must realize that regardless of time, there would still always be missing links walking around every where! There would not be broken and clear species lines. there would be absolutely no species lines. There would be half fish half lizards, half man half monkey, half bird half goats everywhere. Not just possible skull pieces here and there. These things would be ALL over the place living among us.

That is evolutions main issue. How do you describe that evolution led us to a place that has distinct boundaries between species? It completely contradicts the theory.
Ok for one, you can't have half species...it's called genetics. Different species have EVOLVED to have different numbers of chromosomes, and other genetic elements. There has been excessive branching over time. Archaeopteryx was a reptile that had feathers...there's your half species.

Mules are a cross between a horse and donkey (different species, same genus) USUALLY the mule is sterile because the horse and donkey have different chromosome numbers, BUT every once and a while a mule is capable of reproduction...that is how evolution has occured over time.



Evolution didn't lead us anywhere, it has no ultimate porpose. It just happens because of mutations that occurs ever time a cell divides, or a species reproduces. Mutations are random, they can cause an organism to gain functions, lose functions, or die.

Some species are more prone to mutations than others. Bacteria are evolving all the time. They aquire the ability to resist drugs and avoid detection my our immune systems through mutations. That's why every year people need to get new flu shots, because the influenza virus is always evolving. HIV started as a primate disease, but mutated and evolved and as a result humans can now get HIV (mostly because our genes are so similar).

So, yes you are right in saying that we humans cannot stop evolution. We are sublect to it just like everything else. There is no way to predict when or where mutations will occur, so until the end of our time here on Earth...we humans are going to evolve. This is sometime YOU must realize.
Dr. Kate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 10:06 AM   #42
87'YJ
Jeeps, Journey and Jesus
 
87'YJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: Columbus
Posts: 1,651
iTrader: (2)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Kate View Post
Ok for one, you can't have half species...it's called genetics. Different species have EVOLVED to have different numbers of chromosomes, and other genetic elements. There has been excessive branching over time. Archaeopteryx was a reptile that had feathers...there's your half species.

Mules are a cross between a horse and donkey (different species, same genus) USUALLY the mule is sterile because the horse and donkey have different chromosome numbers, BUT every once and a while a mule is capable of reproduction...that is how evolution has occured over time.



Evolution didn't lead us anywhere, it has no ultimate porpose. It just happens because of mutations that occurs ever time a cell divides, or a species reproduces. Mutations are random, they can cause an organism to gain functions, lose functions, or die.

Some species are more prone to mutations than others. Bacteria are evolving all the time. They aquire the ability to resist drugs and avoid detection my our immune systems through mutations. That's why every year people need to get new flu shots, because the influenza virus is always evolving. HIV started as a primate disease, but mutated and evolved and as a result humans can now get HIV (mostly because our genes are so similar).

So, yes you are right in saying that we humans cannot stop evolution. We are sublect to it just like everything else. There is no way to predict when or where mutations will occur, so until the end of our time here on Earth...we humans are going to evolve. This is sometime YOU must realize.
I agree that you can't have half species!!! That is what I am trying to say. The theory of evolution says that you can! They say that there were half men-half monkeys running around. (Although the slow changes were over time, the arguement is still that these species changes occured and created half and half beings). And Archaeopteryx is a poor example. Just because it was a reptile with feathers doesn't mean that it was an interspecies link. A bat is a mammal with wings! Doesn't mean that its a half being, rather its a mammal from the order Chiroptera.

When you have 2 different species mating and creating an offspring, that is hardly evolution (in reference to your horse+Donkey= mule arguement). Especially when a mule can't reproduce (especially with another mule. I would like to see your documented case of reproduction especially since it is so rare, but regardless doesn't prove evolution, just genetic mutation). Not all genetic mutation is evolution. Most of it is fatal and given more time, will result in complete breakdown of an organism.

What you're speaking of with the bacteria is common MICRO-evolution not MACRO- evolution. MICRO evolution is changes within a species (e.g. dogs have several different breeds that can change through history). MICRO-evolution is true and happens everyday. MACRO-evolution is the gross and radical change from one species to another, jumping and connecting the boundaries between species. This does not happen today in our natural world and is still a theory. Many scientists and supporters like to blur the lines between the two to add truth to a theory.
87'YJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 01:24 PM   #43
Haggar
Covered in mud...
 
Haggar's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-06-05
Location: Oxford, MI
Posts: 17,385
iTrader: (52)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 87'YJ View Post
Haha. Just stirrin the pot!

I guess I'm totally mislead and have only half a brain. :tonka:

I've have and will continue to serve this "mystical being"
No, you have less than half a brain. If you had half a brain, you'd understand that religion is a crutch.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 87'YJ View Post
I argue that evolution IS NOT happening because regardless of humans involvement in earth, we cannot just change the "all powerful" process of evolution. It would "evolve" around human interference

You must realize that regardless of time, there would still always be missing links walking around every where! There would not be broken and clear species lines. there would be absolutely no species lines. There would be half fish half lizards, half man half monkey, half bird half goats everywhere. Not just possible skull pieces here and there. These things would be ALL over the place living among us.

That is evolutions main issue. How do you describe that evolution led us to a place that has distinct boundaries between species? It completely contradicts the theory.
LOL.

I don't think your 1st paragraph makes enough sense to even try to rebut. Try to come up with something coherent?


Your 2nd paragraph shows your lack of understanding how evolution actually functions. What, did you go to school in Georgia or something?


Global evolution from this point forward will be drastically changed, especially for the Human race. This is due to the elimination of one of the major drivers for evolution: isolation.

Looking again at humans. You want to say there are no differences, clear lines. But look at Africans. Tall, dark skinned. Look at Asians, light skinned and small builds. Look at American Indians, etc... There are physical differences, genetic differences there. Had society never advanced in appreciable amounts, these groups would never have travelled, and continued adapting to their local conditions. We have different populations, adapting to different climates, different diets, different terrain, etc. Allow that course to run out longer and you have increasingly bigger and bigger differences.

It was the dawn of civilization that has completely changed things. As organized states grew, the large scale movement of populations began. Ironically, it was the rise of religions that fueled so much of this conquest. Where a population might have been slowly evolving over thousands of years, a foreign invader could come in and, thorugh culling and breeding, reshape a population in a matter of years. The Mongols/huns still have their genetic marks on eastern europe after a millenium.

Other specifics, especially those on the shorter lifespan/smaller size end of the stick are likewise affected, bugs, insects, small mammals, small reptiles, etc. Where they originally were confined to areas(perhaps as big as a continent, but still confined nonetheless), imports, stowaways, etc, can bring huge changes. The africanized bees imported into south america are now wiping out the bee populations in north america, which themselves, are a cross from an earlier transport of european bees to the N.A. continent.


You wouldn't have goats that fly as there's no natural advantage there. There are plenty of fish with lizard like properties or lizards that swim. Those things happen in areas where there's an advanged for this, localize evolution. Same is true for cave species, which can be unique to the cave system that they've been trapped in for thousands of generations.

You are acting like its genetic mutation that happens fast. It happens slow, over tens, even hundreds of thousands or millions of years.


Saying there are clear lines is like sayign there are clear denominations of the church. That there are X number of religions, and a catholic is a catholic. And after ~2000 years, the catholic church is the same as it was 500, 1000, 1500 years ago.


Thats silly. There are branches of each major religion. But beyond that, each region has differences. And even each congregation, based on their local specifics, will be slightly different from other congregations. Eventually, some small group gains in popularity, or relevance to a point that they grow, become different enough, and now the get their own name.
Haggar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 01:32 PM   #44
87'YJ
Jeeps, Journey and Jesus
 
87'YJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: Columbus
Posts: 1,651
iTrader: (2)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post
No, you have less than half a brain. If you had half a brain, you'd understand that religion is a crutch.



Global evolution from this point forward will be drastically changed, especially for the Human race. This is due to the elimination of one of the major drivers for evolution: isolation.

Looking again at humans. You want to say there are no differences, clear lines. But look at Africans. Tall, dark skinned. Look at Asians, light skinned and small builds. Look at American Indians, etc... There are physical differences, genetic differences there. Had society never advanced in appreciable amounts, these groups would never have travelled, and continued adapting to their local conditions. We have different populations, adapting to different climates, different diets, different terrain, etc. Allow that course to run out longer and you have increasingly bigger and bigger differences.
You obviously didn't read the post of mine previous to the one you quoted!! I believe in MICRO-evolution. That is the general differences or changes that occur within species. For example dogs or humans. They are all different shapes and sizes, but still remain dogs and humans. (e.g. races of people or breeds of dogs)

All you are doing is agreeing with me.

If you want to refute my arguement, try to prove MACRO-evolution, the changes between species not within species. MACRO-evolution is what the theory of evolution is all about where it all "began" with a single celled organism that slowly had millions of non-fatal mutations over 10 million years and a monkey shaved walked and spoke english. MICRO-evolution is a widely accepted scientific fact of small variations within species. No one in any religion will argue this point.

Sorry, thats just my half a brain working a little too hard

Last edited by 87'YJ; May 14th, 2007 at 01:35 PM.
87'YJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 01:43 PM   #45
Haggar
Covered in mud...
 
Haggar's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-06-05
Location: Oxford, MI
Posts: 17,385
iTrader: (52)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 87'YJ View Post
Sorry, thats just my half a brain working a little too hard
Again, you have been shown to have less than 50%, stop rounding up.



The difference between micro and macro is words.

Evolution is evolution. Its like 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon. (there's a sig quote for ya, bitches!)

With a billion years of diverisification, the fanout is what we have today. All things would be considered micro evolution, except for incomplete fossil records.
Haggar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 01:46 PM   #46
Haggar
Covered in mud...
 
Haggar's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-06-05
Location: Oxford, MI
Posts: 17,385
iTrader: (52)
Quote:
Originally Posted by 87'YJ View Post
If you want to refute my arguement, try to prove MACRO-evolution, the changes between species not within species. MACRO-evolution is what the theory of evolution is all about where it all "began" with a single celled organism that slowly had millions of non-fatal mutations over 10 million years and a monkey shaved walked and spoke english. MICRO-evolution is a widely accepted scientific fact of small variations within species. No one in any religion will argue this point.
What you are saying is that you accept 1 + 1 = 2, and 1000000 + 1 = 1000001, but that its not possible to start at 1, keep adding 1 to it, and eventually end at 1000001, because your arm woudl get tired and you'd run out of pencils.

Idiot.
Haggar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 02:13 PM   #47
Dave Kerwin
web wheeling, hard.
 
Dave Kerwin's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-18-05
Location: SE MI
Posts: 6,667
iTrader: (9)
Haggar has a huge internet penis, thats all I have to contribute.
Dave Kerwin is online now   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 02:40 PM   #48
kickstand
sHaMoNe!
 
kickstand's Avatar
 
Join Date: 09-20-06
Location: fenton
Posts: 30,106
iTrader: (46)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveKerwin View Post
Haggar has a huge internet penis, thats all I have to contribute.
I was just about to ask where kerwin went.....I agree with said comment about mr. never wrong.
kickstand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 06:02 PM   #49
Dr. Kate
Doctor begins with D.O.
 
Dr. Kate's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-10-07
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 260
iTrader: (0)
Send a message via AIM to Dr. Kate
Quote:
Originally Posted by 87'YJ View Post
I agree that you can't have half species!!! That is what I am trying to say. The theory of evolution says that you can! They say that there were half men-half monkeys running around. (Although the slow changes were over time, the arguement is still that these species changes occured and created half and half beings). And Archaeopteryx is a poor example. Just because it was a reptile with feathers doesn't mean that it was an interspecies link. A bat is a mammal with wings! Doesn't mean that its a half being, rather its a mammal from the order Chiroptera.

When you have 2 different species mating and creating an offspring, that is hardly evolution (in reference to your horse+Donkey= mule arguement). Especially when a mule can't reproduce (especially with another mule. I would like to see your documented case of reproduction especially since it is so rare, but regardless doesn't prove evolution, just genetic mutation). Not all genetic mutation is evolution. Most of it is fatal and given more time, will result in complete breakdown of an organism.

What you're speaking of with the bacteria is common MICRO-evolution not MACRO- evolution. MICRO evolution is changes within a species (e.g. dogs have several different breeds that can change through history). MICRO-evolution is true and happens everyday. MACRO-evolution is the gross and radical change from one species to another, jumping and connecting the boundaries between species. This does not happen today in our natural world and is still a theory. Many scientists and supporters like to blur the lines between the two to add truth to a theory.
Ok for one, I already stated that I don't think MACRO evolution makes sense. and as for Archaeopteryx... it is a good example of evolution seeing as it is the ancestor of todays birds. It had feathers, it might have "flown" for short distances, and and yet wait...it was a reptile because it had dense bones, and scales! Amazing!

And please stop restating everything I say. You restate stuff I've mentioned and then try to twist it as if I didn't know what I was talking about in the first place. I mentioned earlier that most genetic mutations are fatal...some are not though, and those lead to evolution once enough build upon each other to cause a change.


In response to your statement that genetic mutation is not evolution...you are wrong...Genetic mutation is the foundation for evolution. Take a class on evolution, read a book or two on it, but be careful you might actually learn something.
Dr. Kate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 06:35 PM   #50
RockyMtnMike
Senior Member
 
RockyMtnMike's Avatar
 
Join Date: 02-14-06
Location: Brownstown
Posts: 1,315
iTrader: (6)
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlatFender View Post
My question is this:
We still have monkeys
We still have people
Why dont we have any of the inbetweeners?

Evolution sounds nice, but God created the earth, in six days, and rested on the seventh.

X2
RockyMtnMike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 07:02 PM   #51
clint357
Web Wheeler Extraordinair
 
clint357's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-13-07
Location: grand rapids
Posts: 2,278
iTrader: (4)
http://www.naturalhistorymag.com/mas...7_feature.html

How on Earth can you believe that the fossils you see in museums, like an alligator that is 40ft. long, EVLOVED into the current creatures we see today, but it's impossible that WE EVOLVED from something. If you use history as a lesson you will be more likely to predict the future. Look at the Greeks, they had a god for everything from rain and wind to grass and water. Now we know that they could not concieve the scientific reasons for these phenomenons so they used these gods as explanations for these occurances. Think about all of the past religious myths that have been debunked by science. Do you think that there are no more mysteries that can be explained by science? Also keep in mind that the Bible, which I assume most of you are basing your arguements on, is a book that was written at an unknown time by an unknown author about something that happened 2007 years ago. There are also the "forbidden" Dead Sea Scrolls which tell a different story. So which story do you believe, the one written over 2000 years ago, or the one being written right now by some of the smartest people on earth?
clint357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 07:18 PM   #52
87'YJ
Jeeps, Journey and Jesus
 
87'YJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: Columbus
Posts: 1,651
iTrader: (2)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Kate View Post

In response to your statement that genetic mutation is not evolution...you are wrong...Genetic mutation is the foundation for evolution. Take a class on evolution, read a book or two on it, but be careful you might actually learn something.
I understand that the whole theory of evolution is based on mutation, but the fact that mutation exists does not prove your theory of evolution. Make sense?

In fact 99.99% of genetic mutation is fatal to the host. So, with reasoning, the more time it takes, the LESS chance there is that mutations would succeed in changing the host.

I'm not attacking anyone on here by calling them uneducated. I've read severl pro and con books on the subject and took all of the engineering and pre-med bio classes at Ohio State, so I at least have a basis of understanding on the subject. Not that by any means makes me an expert, just someone who likes to challenge theories to find truth!
87'YJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 07:21 PM   #53
87'YJ
Jeeps, Journey and Jesus
 
87'YJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: Columbus
Posts: 1,651
iTrader: (2)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haggar View Post


The difference between micro and macro is words.

Evolution is evolution. Its like 6 degrees of Kevin Bacon. (there's a sig quote for ya, bitches!)

With a billion years of diverisification, the fanout is what we have today. All things would be considered micro evolution, except for incomplete fossil records.

I'm just using terms that most science books today use for evolution. If you go to any debate on the subject, you will hear the terms MICRO and MACRO evolution over and over. It is an important difference if you understand the concept.
87'YJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 07:34 PM   #54
87'YJ
Jeeps, Journey and Jesus
 
87'YJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: Columbus
Posts: 1,651
iTrader: (2)
Here you go and excerpt of a debate posted by Dr. Lee Spetner


At the outset, I shall establish an important and necessary guideline in this discussion of evolution. The word evolution is generally used in at least two different senses, and the distinction between them is important. On the one hand, the word evolution is used to denote the descent of all life from a putative single primitive source. It is the grand sweep of evolution that is supposed to have led from a simple beginning, something perhaps simpler than a bacterium, to all organisms living today, including humans. This descent is supposed to have occurred through purely natural means. Neo-Darwinian theory (NDT), which is the prevailing theory of evolution, teaches that this development occurred through random heritable variations in the organisms followed by natural selection. I shall denote the word evolution used in this sense as Evolution A. When evolution is discussed for popular consumption, it is most often Evolution A.

The second sense in which the word evolution is used is to denote any kind of change of a population. The change can sometimes occur in response to environmental pressure (artificial or natural selection), and sometimes it can just be random (genetic drift). I shall denote the word used in this second sense as Evolution B. Evolution B has been observed. Evolution A is an inference, but is not observable. The distinction between these two meanings of evolution parallels the distinction between macroevolution and microevolution, but the two pairs of terms are not identical. Evolution A is certainly what is called macroevolution, but what is called macroevolution is not identical with Evolution A. In any case, I prefer to use the A and B to avoid having to carry whatever baggage might go with the macro/micro distinction.

The distinction between these two meanings of evolution is often ignored by the defenders of Neo-Darwinian evolution. But the distinction is critical. The claim is made for Evolution A, but the proof offered is often limited to Evolution B. The implication is that the observation of Evolution B is a substantiation of Evolution A. But this is not so. Since Evolution A is not an observable, it can only be substantiated by circumstantial evidence. This circumstantial evidence is principally the fossil record, amino-acid-sequence comparisons, and comparative anatomy. Circumstantial evidence must be accompanied by a theory of how it relates to what is to be proved. NDT is generally accepted to be that theory. The strength of the circumstantial evidence for Evolution A can therefore be no better than the strength of NDT.
87'YJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 07:37 PM   #55
87'YJ
Jeeps, Journey and Jesus
 
87'YJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: Columbus
Posts: 1,651
iTrader: (2)
You can read the debate here

http://www.trueorigin.org/spetner1.asp

Tells both sides and is argued by much more intellegent men/women (at least me with my less than half brain :tonka: ) than are on this board. Check it out!

Look forward to your comments
87'YJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 11:26 PM   #56
Dr. Kate
Doctor begins with D.O.
 
Dr. Kate's Avatar
 
Join Date: 04-10-07
Location: Okemos, MI
Posts: 260
iTrader: (0)
Send a message via AIM to Dr. Kate
Quote:
Originally Posted by 87'YJ View Post
You can read the debate here

http://www.trueorigin.org/spetner1.asp

Tells both sides and is argued by much more intellegent men/women (at least me with my less than half brain :tonka: ) than are on this board. Check it out!

Look forward to your comments
I'll try to read it in my spare time. (I do honestly want to read it, but I really don't have the time to do it right now. I apologize.)
Dr. Kate is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 14th, 2007, 11:31 PM   #57
Miffy
Senior Member
 
Miffy's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: My home
Posts: 5,824
iTrader: (0)
Send a message via Yahoo to Miffy
:dunie: :stan2:

just using the smilies.........
Miffy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th, 2007, 06:14 AM   #58
clint357
Web Wheeler Extraordinair
 
clint357's Avatar
 
Join Date: 03-13-07
Location: grand rapids
Posts: 2,278
iTrader: (4)
Nothing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by clint357 View Post
http://www.naturalhistorymag.com/mas...7_feature.html

How on Earth can you believe that the fossils you see in museums, like an alligator that is 40ft. long, EVLOVED into the current creatures we see today, but it's impossible that WE EVOLVED from something. If you use history as a lesson you will be more likely to predict the future. Look at the Greeks, they had a god for everything from rain and wind to grass and water. Now we know that they could not concieve the scientific reasons for these phenomenons so they used these gods as explanations for these occurances. Think about all of the past religious myths that have been debunked by science. Do you think that there are no more mysteries that can be explained by science? Also keep in mind that the Bible, which I assume most of you are basing your arguements on, is a book that was written at an unknown time by an unknown author about something that happened 2007 years ago. There are also the "forbidden" Dead Sea Scrolls which tell a different story. So which story do you believe, the one written over 2000 years ago, or the one being written right now by some of the smartest people on earth?
No arguements to this?.....Wierd.
clint357 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th, 2007, 02:58 PM   #59
Buggy_Tim
(513) 891-8372
 
Buggy_Tim's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-05-05
Location: Sault Sainte Marie
Posts: 11,613
iTrader: (12)
Quote:
Originally Posted by clint357 View Post
No arguements to this?.....Wierd.
Show me the fossil that connects us to anything....

You can't. It's called the missing link for a reason.
Buggy_Tim is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th, 2007, 03:24 PM   #60
87'YJ
Jeeps, Journey and Jesus
 
87'YJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: 11-07-05
Location: Columbus
Posts: 1,651
iTrader: (2)
Quote:
Originally Posted by clint357 View Post
No arguements to this?.....Wierd.
I tried to read it, but I couldn't find a point.

Your arguement is flawed anyway. The Dead Sea Scrolls were verbatum (carbon dated back to 400B.C.) to the bible we have today. Only further proving the accuracy of the bible (the same way the Rosetta stone helped with biblical translation accuracy).

Don't forget that scientists throughout history have been wrong too. For example, the earth was not flat, the earth was not the center of the universe, cell theory , Einstein's cosmological constant and other physics, these are all issues that had wrong theories and are still being learned about.

I'm sure we'll find that many of the sciences being taught in school today are wrong in the future as more in depth study and technology surfaces (as many people that went ot school in the 40's and 50's learned). The point I am making is that, just because someone is a scientist doesn't mean they are not biased or wrong (and that certainly applies to the creationism side as well!!)
87'YJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply
Great Lakes 4x4. The largest offroad forum in the Midwest > General 4x4 Stuff > Politics, Government, or Religion Chat
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:40 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright 2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2005 - 2012 Cracker Enterprises - Powered by Linux
vB Ad Management by =RedTyger=
Page generated in 0.33342 seconds with 50 queries