02-28-2005, 02:41 AM | #121 | ||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Darkness
Posts: 1,211
|
8k words really is too short, i'll probably hve to start snipping out people's quotes, but I'm a lazy lazy person.
Quote:
Well we KNOW it's not impossible, otherwise why would we be arguing about it? And we don't know for sure that it's a certainty either, which leaves us somewhere about... ignorant.... We just don't KNOW. And have no way of knowing, unless someone offers us another universe to test.... Assuming they even exist of course. Quote:
One, dating. Which is here mostly for completeness, since it's fairly well accepted that the old testemant translations we have are dated prior to the compilations of early new testements. Two, interpretation. Which is a much more valid complaint. The new testements were composed after the initial prophcies were made, and there is the question of whether the author(s) conciously or unconsciouly changed their records to suit well known prophetic utterences. Note also that I refer to them as utterences, because like most prophecies they are vague and unspecific, and can be interpreted to fit a wide range of occurences. Thirdly, there is the problem of divine inspiration. Just because the original author of a prophecy believes it to be divinely inspired, does not mean that it isn't a form of precognition. Which is why such evidence is ANECDOTAL, not EMPIRICAL. At least as far as applying to the question of a supreme being. It MIGHT be empirical when applied to more limited questions such as "how well DO the prophecies in the old testement reflect the written record in the new testement" or even "how well does the written record of the new testement fit the historical evidence". Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ... |
||||||
02-28-2005, 02:59 AM | #122 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Darkness
Posts: 1,211
|
Quote:
After all, you're the one who doesn't seem to like the idea of species. All fish would be fish archetypes, from rays to sharks to tuna. They can't interbreed, but since they all share these same characteristics - gills, lateral tail movement for propulsion, fins etc., they must all be from some type of common archetype. So this one particular archetypal "fish" keeps getting tossed up on the shore, until it's descendants can cope with it. (Much like modern mudskippers). If there's any OTHER example of the fish archetype that's closer to the "frog" archetype, which one do you think it's going to be? None. Which leads one to the conclusion that there is likely to be a link there, especially since there's no evidence that these "frog" archetypes existed until fish had been around for a long time. At what point does the "fish" become a "frog"? Never? Then where did all these frogs come from? Lacking any other theory with any supporting empirical data, the only available conclusion is that those "fish" stopped being "fish" and became "frogs". Oh if you want to you can say that it was fluffy bunnies from dimension X that used magic mutation wands, or even that they thought up "frogs" wholesale on the spot, and dumped out several million of them because they liked the idea of "fish" with legs, but it doesn't make a hell of a lot of difference. It's UNLIKELY that it happened that way, but it still doesn't change the mechanism.
__________________
I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ... |
|
02-28-2005, 10:27 PM | #123 | |||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
I understand fairly well most of what you were saying on multiple universes. Unfortunately, I don't have a strong enough science background to comment . Thanks for taking the time to write that up.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I'll continue soon.
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." |
|||
02-28-2005, 11:29 PM | #124 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." |
|
03-01-2005, 01:03 AM | #125 | ||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Fountain Valley, CA
Posts: 6,343
|
Quote:
Also, there are many evidences from within the scriptures themselves that they were written by people doing their utmost to be accurate to the facts. Several things that could easily be viewed as embarressing to Christianity were included in there. For example, Jesus' cry on the cross, "Father, why have you forsaken me?", and the fact that women were the first people to see the resurrected Jesus (their testimony was considered basically worthless in that culture). Also if the gospel writers were willing to alter the true narrative of what occurred, they would logically have written words of Jesus to address certain issues that plagued the early Church, the foremost of these being circumcision. In the New Testament, Jesus says nothing on that subject. Rather then Paul being able to argue, "this is what Jesus said," he had to use Old Testament prophecies. Quote:
Quote:
The Jewish people were expecting a leader who would come in combat. That is part of the Biblical prophecies. The Messiah is supposed to come down in combat; this is particularly visible in the End Times prophecies of Zechariah. They did not understand that there were supposed to be two comings of the Christ. The Jewish people were severely disappointed in Jesus because he did not fulfill the prophecies of the great warrior that would lead them to national freedom. The Jewish Pharisees were probably glad that he didn't try to fulfill them, as so many false Messiahs before him had. The fact that some of the predictions of the Messiah (regarding the coming warrior that would free Israel) are attributed now to a Second Coming while in the time of Jesus they weren't can be viewed as an opposing point in Christianity's amazing display of prophetic fulfillment in Jesus. Nevertheless, what Jesus did fulfill is stunning on its own. The date of the Messiah's coming was predicted and fulfilled, his mission, the manner of his death, his resurrection, etc. I'd particularly like to bring up an Isaiah prophecy, my favorite of the prophecies of the Messiah that I've seen, which clearly shows the Suffering Servant role of Christ. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
If the world has indeed, as I have said, been built of sorrow, it has been built by the hands of love, because in no other way could the soul of man, for whom the world was made, reach the full stature of its perfection. ~Oscar Wilde, written from prison Oscar Wilde's last words: "Either the wallpaper goes, or I do." |
||||||
03-01-2005, 02:10 AM | #126 | |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
trying to catch up a bit ...
Quote:
Of course truth has something to do with science! A scientist working for a cure for AIDS will try to find out the truth about how certain chemicals react with the AIDS virus. Now I won't disagree that something may appear to be true and then we find out differently, but so what? Then we discover it WASN'T true and we continue to seek the truth of the matter. Macroevolution either occurred or it didn't. If YOU are right and it occurred, we'll NEVER know If, however, I am right and it did NOT occur because God created animals, plants and people pretty much how they are nowdays, along with the wonderful adaptation design elements that lets us breed different species within a kind, and that lets kinds adapt to their environment in countless cases (and die out in other cases, but that doesn't make the amazing adaptations any less wonderful) then you and I will know the truth someday. That should be interesting, to say the least!
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! |
|
03-01-2005, 02:40 AM | #127 | ||
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Quote:
Quote:
Even if birds change so much that they can't breed anymore, so what?! They're still birds. And if the two new species undergo changes and make 4 more species that can't breed among themselves, so what? They're still birds! You are free to extrapolate to the high heavens but to me, it's like someone saying to me, "Going from one-celled thingies to birds would take at least millions of years and gazillions upon gazillions of steps based upon theoretical beneficial mutations. We can observe birds adapting to their environment in such a way that we've decided to proclaim a new species, esp. if they can't interbreed anymore. IOW, we have SEEN steps 1 to 5. Now I am asking you to take ON FAITH steps 6 thru 6 gazillion billion." I just cannot buy it without throwing my integrity to the wind. It is extrapolation to an absurd point. Over and over I OBSERVE that basic animal/plant kinds REMAIN basic animal/plant kinds, just as the Bible states. Even with the very fast reproducing species like flies, they remain flies. Sometimes you can fiddle with genes and get flies with crumpled wings, flies with two heads, etc., but gosh darn if they aren't still flies. I just do NOT think the proposed mechanisms are supported by data! Beneficial mutations? About the best around is the sickle cell anemia one, which is certainly not entirely beneficial. Again, what we OBSERVE, over and over, is the vast, VAST majority of mutations are either neutral or harmful! The number of beneficial mutations required for even ONE kind of animal we see today to emerge from a one-celled thingy is mind-boggling. I imagine even dealing with ONE animal, we're talking about statistically impossible. Dealing with the millions of living things we have today, it's impossible upon impossible. Sure, people can say, "if there's even ONE change in a gazillion billion, then maybe we hit it!", but IMO, that's not rational. I mean, why even develop statistics, then, if you're going to ignore when something is called statistically impossible? What I hear from most evolutionists is, "hey, we can't scientifically test if some powerful being made things or not, so we will ASSUME that we got here thru mechanisms that do NOT depend upon a powerful being, and see if we can come up with mechanisms that might work." Well, the ones they came up with just don't satisfy me - they're too unlikely, and they are too unsupported by actual data - they're supported by extrapolations. To me, accepting the theory of evolution requires too much faith. I just can't do it.
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! |
||
03-01-2005, 03:02 AM | #128 | ||||||
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Quote:
You said something along the lines of that if there was a god, then extinction proved that he didn't care much about the world. I responded by saying, in a teasing way, that you had no imagination, if that's the only possible theory you could come up with. I can come up with a few more Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I think creationism as described in the Bible fits the data better than evolutionism. I think you are being close-minded in only looking at "how new species originate" - I think you need to look at the possiblity of a two-pronged POV. I think new species originated in two ways - the first way was an initial act of creation that made at least thousands of different plants/animals fully formed and functioning. The second way was that due to a great design, these life forms came complete with a genetic DESIGN that allowed adaptation to environment and the creation of sub-species to an amazing degree. The fossil record certainly supports this view. We see species in the fossil record that are still around today. We see species that are wonderful in their variety and functionality. We do NOT see things that show steps from fishy-things to giraffes. And that's why the evolutionists had to develop punctuated equilibrium. There is NO problem saying that a hooved horse came from a multi-toed horse, if they're both horses. Of course, we'll never know (unless I'm right, as I mentioned before!). Where I DO have a problem is saying that horses came from fishy-thingies, which we do NOT see ANY evidence of, IMO, beyond the first few steps of the required 6 gazillion billion steps.
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! |
||||||
03-01-2005, 03:12 AM | #129 | |||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Darkness
Posts: 1,211
|
Quote:
And it is thought that it's a good possibility such episodes are cyclic, happening every 50-60 billion years... Though be advised that has to be a wildly innacurate estimate. Quote:
If you only have ONE occurence, there's no way to calculate the odds... If you try to do probability with a sample size of one, you're going to come out with 0 or infinity (certainty). Quote:
__________________
I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ... |
|||
03-01-2005, 03:26 AM | #130 | ||||||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Darkness
Posts: 1,211
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
I'm not sure how I'd try to twist in texts, and it's probably best I don't try to.
__________________
I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ... |
||||||
03-01-2005, 03:33 AM | #131 | ||
Elf Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Darkness
Posts: 1,211
|
Quote:
Truth is a philosophical construct. Quote:
Truth exists "out there" in the realm of the metaphysical. I know I'm starting to sound like a broken record, but I keep running across so many people who mix and match their science and philosophy that I'm starting to think that we need more philosophy classes in the core curriculum...
__________________
I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ... |
||
03-01-2005, 03:41 AM | #132 | |
Elf Lord
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Darkness
Posts: 1,211
|
Quote:
As long as people understand that, I don't really CARE what they choose to believe. As long as they understand that it's a philosophical choice and it has no place in scientific debate, then they are welcome to debate the philosophy of it all they want. I shall be away engineering the destruction of the earth for a period of time. If I should fail, I suppose I will return after a week or so...
__________________
I have harnessed the shadows that stride from world to world to sow death and madness... Queer haow a cravin' gits a holt on ye -- As ye love the Almighty, young man, don't tell nobody, but I swar ter Gawd thet picter begun ta make me hungry fer victuals I couldn't raise nor buy -- here, set still, what's ailin' ye? ... |
|
03-01-2005, 03:52 AM | #133 | |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Oh, rats, you're online now, Blackheart! I was hoping I'd get to finish catching up!
I think I will close off tonight, anyway - long day. And I'll close with some thoughts I had while doing the dishes. I was thinking about what you said: Quote:
Before I continue, I'll take a quick rabbit trail, as befits my Entmoot title I'm not interested in winning any debate. I'm not interested in debating at all, in and of itself. What I am interesting in is determining what is true, to the best of my abilities. And what you say, I actually, really think about and consider. Now back to my thought. See, if the question is finding a "model for how new species originate", and you're talking about things like how those new species of finch originated to such an extent that they couldn't interbreed with the base species, then THAT is a question that is within the realm of science. But ... if your question INCLUDES things like how new species originate, including how fish archetypes led to giraffes - THEN a philosophical aspect has been introduced into a scientific question, because an entirely unproven philosophical assumption has been made that fish archetypes DID lead to giraffes! Do you see what I'm saying? The main problem I have with the TOE is that it mixes philosophy with science, and claims its all science, when it is NOT. Would you please carefully think about this, and let me know your opinion? Thanks! Goodnight
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! |
|
03-01-2005, 03:56 AM | #134 | |||
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! |
|||
03-01-2005, 03:58 AM | #135 | |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Quote:
Best wishes for an enjoyable time away from things, altho I hope you fail to destroy the earth
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! |
|
03-01-2005, 11:30 PM | #136 | |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
Quote:
Human fetuses do NOT have gills!! You're talking about pharyngeal folds, and although they might superficially resemble gills, they are NOT gills, and have NOTHING to do with gills or the function of gills. In a reptile, mammal, or bird, they develop into other structures entirely, such as the inner ear! All these so-called "gill slits" are, are folds which appear in the neck region, and they have NOTHING to do with gills. This false idea of human embryos having gills is just a leftover from the recapitulation theory, which was pretty much discarded in the 1920s.
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! |
|
03-02-2005, 09:39 AM | #137 | |||
Co-President of Entmoot
Super Moderator Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 8,397
|
Quote:
How can we be sure they have nothing to do with gills though?
__________________
"I can add some more, if you'd like it. Calling your Chief Names, Wishing to Punch his Pimply Face, and Thinking you Shirriffs look a lot of Tom-fools." - Sam Gamgee, p. 340, Return of the King Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
03-02-2005, 11:31 AM | #138 |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
sorry, was a bit emphatic ...
No, they're not gills, and have no connection with gills at all. It's just one of those false ideas that are still hanging around, because it supported a popular idea at one point in time. Just like you see Haeckel's embryos (which were falsified) still hanging around...
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! |
03-02-2005, 11:42 AM | #139 | |||
Co-President of Entmoot
Super Moderator Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 8,397
|
Quote:
I still think it's possible for pharyngeal folds and gills to have come from a similar source or something. On second though, I think I'll drop this argument. I know squat.
__________________
"I can add some more, if you'd like it. Calling your Chief Names, Wishing to Punch his Pimply Face, and Thinking you Shirriffs look a lot of Tom-fools." - Sam Gamgee, p. 340, Return of the King Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
03-02-2005, 01:20 PM | #140 |
Half-Elven Princess of Rabbit Trails and Harp-Wielding Administrator (beware the Rubber Chicken of Doom!)
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not where I want to be ...
Posts: 15,254
|
In brief - Haeckel (1834-1919) was a guy who was most famous for doing some drawings of early vertebrate embryos. Darwin used these drawings to support some of his ideas (he mentioned Haeckel in "The Origin of Species"). Darwin thought, briefly, that the human embryo at a very early period could hardly be distinguished from other vertebrate embryos, and that this supported the idea of common descent.
Biologists have known for over a century that Haeckel faked his drawings to exaggerate the similarities and squash the dissimilarities, yet they're still in some textbooks, and people still refer to them. Further, the stage that Haeckel labeled "first" is actually midway thru development, and the embryos are even more dissimilar in the first stages. As far as p. folds and gills - I imagine by now, there have been enough dissections performed, and enough embryos studied, to show that the folds are NOT gills and indeed turn into inner ears and other non-related parts. Certainly if there was evidence that the folds WERE gills, we would certainly hear about it very loudly! As it is, it remains one of those leftover ideas that just stubbornly hang around, like the peppered moth (a vastly flawed experiment) and the Galapagos finches (the beaks were pre-existing in the population, and the only thing that happened was that they became more prevalent - they didn't come about by beneficial mutation by any means. And after the drought, the beak types went back! The effects were NOT cumulative.)
__________________
. I should be doing the laundry, but this is MUCH more fun! Ñá ë?* óú éä ïöü Öñ É Þ ð ß ® ç Ã¥ â„¢ æ ♪ ?* "How lovely are Thy dwelling places, O Lord of hosts! ... For a day in Thy courts is better than a thousand outside." (from Psalm 84) * * * God rocks! Entmoot : Veni, vidi, velcro - I came, I saw, I got hooked! Ego numquam pronunciare mendacium, sed ego sum homo indomitus! Run the earth and watch the sky ... Auta i lómë! Aurë entuluva! |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Evidence for Evolution | jerseydevil | General Messages | 599 | 05-18-2008 02:43 PM |
How to teach evolution & Evidence for Creationism II | Nurvingiel | General Messages | 528 | 08-05-2006 03:50 AM |
Evidence for Creationism and Against Evolution | RÃan | General Messages | 1149 | 08-16-2004 06:07 PM |