Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 111 (8738 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-23-2017 9:35 PM
124 online now:
CRR, DrJones*, edge, Meddle, NoNukes, Tanypteryx, Theodoric (7 members, 117 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jayhawker Soule
Post Volume:
Total: 805,014 Year: 9,620/21,208 Month: 2,707/2,674 Week: 131/961 Day: 131/98 Hour: 0/8

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
567
8
910Next
Author Topic:   Aquatic Ape theory?
anglagard
Member (Idle past 78 days)
Posts: 2157
From: Big Spring, TX, USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 106 of 138 (554364)
04-07-2010 9:06 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by arrogantape
04-07-2010 8:30 PM


Henpecked Gorillas are from a Bugs Bunnny Cartoon
arrogantape writes:

My mind just can't wrap around the notion some ape (The Chimps and Gorillas split at 7 mil) female let the male know she is forsooth a housewife. To carry on the premise, the knuckle walker male set out on a perilous journey to find scarce food. There were predators, and territorial apes to avoid. Finally, after some harrowing near misses, he found some decent chewables, he gathered a bunch under his arm and carefully knuckled to home base. So here is the evolutionary impetus. There is an ever demanding bitch yelling at the male to get more!!!

Somehow, I don't think so.

Is food that scarce in a jungle or even a tidepool (which does not require total immersion in water)?

Are gorillas that helpless and 'wimpy?' (the relevant cartoon has been removed from YouTube for copyright violation). {ABE: Update: video available at http://www.jogyjogy.com/watch.php?id=19909 and http://www.220.ro/...Bugs-Bunny-Gorilla-My-Dreams/xwLT74oELU}

Do Savannah baboons hold their own against predators through teamwork, possibly like human ancestors may have done as well?

Your 'cute' misogynistic conjectures don't help your cause.

Please feel free to deal with the serious problems with various AAH conjectures as befits you ability to engage in serious debate.

Edited by anglagard, : No reason given.


The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
ó Salman Rushdie

This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. Itís us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen


This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by arrogantape, posted 04-07-2010 8:30 PM arrogantape has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18250
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 107 of 138 (554371)
04-07-2010 10:17 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by anglagard
04-07-2010 8:13 PM


Please Address these Additional Objections
Hi again anglagard, and those aren't the only objections.

Therefore in the interest of actually defending the Aquatic Ape Hypothesis could you actually explain any of the following evidence contrary to AAH proponent assertions: (numeric bulleting added by me to aid in ease of reading)

We also have the issue of a counter example in the Bonobos, or "pygmy chimps" (Pan paniscus):

http://songweaver.com/info/bonobos.html

quote:
In contrast, bonobos probably never left the protection of the trees. Their present range lies in humid forests south of the Zaire River, where perhaps fewer than 10,000 bonobos survive. ...

If this evolutionary scenario of ecological continuity is true, the bonobo may have undergone less transformation than either humans or chimpanzees. It could most closely resemble the common ancestor of all three modern species. ... the animal might be most similar to the primogenitor, since its anatomy is less specialized than is the chimpanzee's. Bonobo body proportions have been compared with those of the australopithecines, a form of prehuman. When the apes stand or walk upright, they look as if they stepped straight out of an artist's impression of early hominids.

Bonobos become sexually aroused remarkably easily, and they express this excitement in a variety of mounting positions and genital contacts. Although chimpanzees virtually never adopt face-to-face positions, bonobos do so in one out of three copulations in the wild. Furthermore, the frontal orientation of the bonobo vulva and clitoris strongly suggest that the female genitalia are adapted for this position.

Another similarity with humans is increased female sexual receptivity. The tumescent phase of the female's genitals, resulting in a pink swelling that signals willingness to mate, covers a much longer part of estrus in bonobos than in chimpanzees. Instead of a few days out of her cycle, the female bonobo is almost continuously sexually attractive and active.


http://www.williamcalvin.com/teaching/bonobo.htm

quote:
Apes last shared a common ancestor with the Old World Monkeys about 25 million years ago. Gibbons split off about 18 million years ago and orangutans about 12-14 million years back; the gibbon lineage split off the siamangs about 2.5 million years ago.

Humans evolved from an ape species that existed about 6 million years ago (sometimes called "Pan prior"). About 2.5 million years ago, the common chimpanzee and the bonobo became separate lineages, as did bipedal woodland apes (e.g., Australopithecines) and our Homo lineage (in white). About 1 million years ago, both the gorilla and chimpanzee lineages split into east and west subspecies because of ice age droughts. Extinctions are shown by terminated bars; only arrows represent extant species.

What we have with Bonobos is the closest living relative to Ardipithicus in behavior and ability, adapted to both tree climbing and bipedal locomotion. Neither Ardi nor Bonobos are obligate bipedalists, but are able to transition between bipedal and quadrapedal locomotion.

We also have face to face sex without swimming ability.

Walking and sex accounted for without water adaptation, in one of our closest relatives.

Personally I also consider it highly likely that walking and apparent bareness did not evolve at the same time, but I do believe that humans were bare before venturing onto the savanna.

When you look at the facts about human hair there is strong evidence that it is a sexual selection adaptation:

(1) it is sexually dimorphic, and the appearance of hairlessness is much more evident and consistent in females, suggesting that they were the selected sex (while male apparent hairlessness is due to genetic cross-over, and shows much more variation).

(2) the appearance is not due to actual loss of hair - we have as many hairs per sq.in. as chimps of equal size - but to the hair being kept at a juvenile stage, rather than progressing to an adult stage. This allows females to look younger, and thus be more sexually appealing.

(3) the killer for the aquatic ape theory for human hair, imho, is the sexual dimorphism: if it were an advantage for survival then it should be equally expressed in both sexes, and the aquatic ape theory has no explanation for the dimorphism.

These issues also need to be addressed.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by anglagard, posted 04-07-2010 8:13 PM anglagard has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by arrogantape, posted 04-07-2010 11:08 PM RAZD has responded

  
arrogantape
Member (Idle past 2020 days)
Posts: 87
Joined: 09-26-2008


Message 108 of 138 (554380)
04-07-2010 10:56 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by anglagard
04-07-2010 8:13 PM


Re: Please Address the Primary Objections
(Preface)

Sorry anglard (Love the painting) I did not see your suggestion we take a couple at a time. I am very pleased to meet someone willing to talk points.

I will not defend the AAH. I have no interest in them. From their site aggressors, I sense the group tries too hard. They are amateurs, and fall to their own exuberance.

1.) Specialized skin - There are several types of skin and hair solutions to an aquatic lifestyle. There is no set rule. My model is a primate who is a casual visitor to water use. I do not agree to a aquatic specialist.

2) hair patterns - Not my argument

3) ? I do not know what the point is here. I do know that what may be difficult to impossible on land can be accomplished with the body submerged.

4) Salty tears - Haven't looked into this, and is of little interest to me. I am not a member of AAH.

5) Who cries? - Not of interest, sorry.

6) salt glands - I do have to wonder, when many animals seek out salt rich minerals, including the Gorilla, how the copious salt loss we go though when sweating is replaced? Animals that don't sweat go out of their way for salt replenishment. We sweat it away.

7) Salt again - we like salt this time. I answered that above. We need more salt than a Gorilla.

8) Human babies swim - Nice try by the AAH- but I know other species do too.

9) diving - all animals exhibit diving reflex - yes, but few mammals will dive, and fewer still will go for crabs, bivalves, water weeds, crayfish, etc...... There are folks who dive for such food these days.

10) Holding breath - no argument here.

11) Dropping larynx - Interesting, but not necessary.

13) Downward facing nostrils - All I know is diving is a lot more comfortable than jumping from high into water. Water rushing into the sinuses is not a pleasant feeling.

14) bipedalism less efficient - the author was writing in the past. Ardi was no brachiator. In fact the literature says she was a slow deliberate climber, and a slow bipedal on the ground. This slight awkwardness would put Ardi in a difficult spot. --- unless --- she was a diver and swimmer.

15) Proboscis Monkeys bipedalism - Scenes where the proboscis monkey is wading is quite convincing they are very good at walking while wading. Contrary to what the writer says, there are few monkeys that use this type of walking at length. If anyone knows of a skeletal study of the Proboscis I would like to look it up. Don't you want to know if there are any modifications in the pelvis?

16) Safety of the water - Contrary to the author's statement, there are three primates I know of that sleep in trees over the water. Snakes, leopards, chimps are but a few tree climbing enemies. Sure there are crocs, and water snakes. Living off the water is not a free lunch. Obviously the tradeoff between escaping to the water or not is a successful gamble.

17) Safety in the Savannah - obviously the author wasn't aware the Savannah model has been tossed due to ardi being in a forested wetland.

18) Body temperature - An AHA point. I am not defending AHA.

19) Hymens - whatever

20) sensory whiskers - We do know that we can hear through our jaw. My hearing was tested far above normal. I could feel the faintest sounds, rather than hear it. Men grow beards. I wonder how far that trait goes back. Perhaps it is an outgrowth to sensory whiskers.

21) fat deposition - Just place a woman next to any primate you wish to use, and see who has the smooth curves from shoulder to feet. The subcutaneous fat is far more obvious. They bare no resemblance to any ape.

22) sweat glands - I didn't know seals sweat. Makes sense to me. Any animal that ingests too much salt needs to have a means to vacate the salt.

23) Waterproofing - I have to wash daily, the oil glands are so productive. We may have lost some of this use, since we have been running around the inlands.

24) Sex positions - The author shied away from this one. The face to face copulating we do is rather unusual. I am not embarrassed (don't you just love that word) to say I have made sex in the water. Face to face is the way to go.

25) Brain food - AAH are arguably correct here. There is a tiny old world monkey, the Talapoin, that dives for food. It has a very impressive brain case. While other monkeys are lucky to find a beetle or spider now and then, the little Talapoin picks up plentiful juicy denizens of the water world. This tiny monkey is my hero.

26) Darn! is that all?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by anglagard, posted 04-07-2010 8:13 PM anglagard has not yet responded

    
arrogantape
Member (Idle past 2020 days)
Posts: 87
Joined: 09-26-2008


Message 109 of 138 (554383)
04-07-2010 11:08 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by RAZD
04-07-2010 10:17 PM


Re: Please Address these Additional Objections
You know Raz, the Bonobo is your best argument. I love the Bonobo. I would love to know them as my ancestor.

How do I upload a picture?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by RAZD, posted 04-07-2010 10:17 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 111 by RAZD, posted 04-07-2010 11:33 PM arrogantape has responded

    
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 77 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 110 of 138 (554386)
04-07-2010 11:24 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by arrogantape
04-07-2010 8:30 PM


Hi, Ape.

arrogantape writes:

My mind just can't wrap around the notion some ape (The Chimps and Gorillas split at 7 mil) female let the male know she is forsooth a housewife. To carry on the premise, the knuckle walker male set out on a perilous journey to find scarce food. There were predators, and territorial apes to avoid. Finally, after some harrowing near misses, he found some decent chewables, he gathered a bunch under his arm and carefully knuckled to home base. So here is the evolutionary impetus. There is an ever demanding bitch yelling at the male to get more!!!

I don't appreciate your caricatures of my arguments. Please address them as they are and try to refrain from embellishing them with your cornball humor.

Curiously, the situation I depicted is remarkably similar to the way apes live today, except that they don't carry their food very far from where they find it. Perhaps the evolutionary pressures exerted by predators forced Ardipithecus to carry its food back to a safe lair where it could be consumed.

This explanation is far simpler, and merges far more clearly with the data we have about ape and early human lifestyles, than does the aquatic ape hypothesis. It's frankly silly to think that anything more than this sort of simple explanation is needed to explain the evidence we have seen.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by arrogantape, posted 04-07-2010 8:30 PM arrogantape has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by arrogantape, posted 04-08-2010 1:13 AM Blue Jay has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18250
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 111 of 138 (554388)
04-07-2010 11:33 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by arrogantape
04-07-2010 11:08 PM


Re: Please Address these Additional Objections
Hi arrogantape,

How do I upload a picture?

To upload a picture you will need to use a picture service, like image shack or photo bucket - both free services for posting pictures on the web and then providing a source for linking.

To link a pictue use the ubb codes [img]picture url[/img] or [img=300]picture url[/img]

This is [img=50]http:⁄⁄www.evcforum.net/Images/Avatars/1880.gif[/img]

The second sets the initial view size at 300 pixels wide (you should not use more than 500 pixels to keep the size within normal display width for the forum.

also check out (help) links on any formatting questions when in the reply window.

For other formatting tips see Posting Tips

Remember to cite sources when you post pictures as well as when you quote articles.

Enjoy.


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


• • • Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click) • • •

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by arrogantape, posted 04-07-2010 11:08 PM arrogantape has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 112 by arrogantape, posted 04-08-2010 12:53 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
arrogantape
Member (Idle past 2020 days)
Posts: 87
Joined: 09-26-2008


Message 112 of 138 (554399)
04-08-2010 12:53 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by RAZD
04-07-2010 11:33 PM


Re: Please Address these Additional Objections
Thanks, Raz, I will look into doing that. I have a cool pic I want to use....

One thing you, Bluebird, and all here would agree with me, we are all evolutionists. Perhaps I should venture outside this fun topic. I have a good knowledge of the Bible, and evolution. This thread is the only place where I am not mainstream

To tell the truth, I shouldn't be doing this. I am going to have a spinal operation soon, and pecking on keys is feeling like a bit of purgatory.

On the in the water transformation I will always be a believer. I sense the notion is getting legs outside the AAH.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by RAZD, posted 04-07-2010 11:33 PM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

    
arrogantape
Member (Idle past 2020 days)
Posts: 87
Joined: 09-26-2008


Message 113 of 138 (554400)
04-08-2010 1:13 AM
Reply to: Message 110 by Blue Jay
04-07-2010 11:24 PM


Sorry Bluebird,

In my defense, I am in a lot of pain. There are two spinal operations in my near future. I shouldn't be hunched over the keyboard. I have to tell you, though, I was a bit hurt by the way you depicted your rejection of primate behavior as specious as would be a salamander and a frog.

There was as much as 240 million years between the advent of the salamander and the split to the frog. The old world monkeys are just 30 to 40 million years separate from us. Like us, they have a binocular vision, clever hands, and an ability to learn. When I see that a monkey can dive into the water for safety, and food, I can't see why a smarter Hominem couldn't have done the same.

The chimpanzees live in two different environments. The Bonobo is living a life style apart.

I think with all the Leakey intertwined politics it is no wonder macho was fuzed into the evolutionary model.

Anyway the Savannah theory has bit the dust. The environment Ardi was found in is a world of dense woods, meadows, streams, lakes, and springs. Sounds like Eden to me.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 110 by Blue Jay, posted 04-07-2010 11:24 PM Blue Jay has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by Blue Jay, posted 04-08-2010 10:20 AM arrogantape has responded
 Message 126 by Blue Jay, posted 06-04-2010 8:09 PM arrogantape has responded

    
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5512
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 114 of 138 (554428)
04-08-2010 8:33 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by SweeneyTodd
04-07-2004 2:45 AM


Weak theory based on anecdote
AA theory claims that relatively hairless bodies (like aquatic and semi-aquatic mammals such as walruses, hippos, dolphins, etc) are evidence for life in water.

This seems like a very weak theory for the simple fact that we should see corresponding droves of aquatic apes today, which we don't find. Sure, most primates can swim, but so can dogs, so can cats, so can most mammals when push comes to shove. More importantly there is not a single primate that spends the majority of its time in water. Of those that are most active in aquatic environments are all very, very hairy.

I don't see a connection.

Hair, I believe, became less relevant when neanderthals were wearing the hides of other animals because their hair alone was insufficient to warm them during the last ice age. I would say that is a stronger connection than aquatic apes.


"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston
This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by SweeneyTodd, posted 04-07-2004 2:45 AM SweeneyTodd has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by Huntard, posted 04-08-2010 9:11 AM Hyroglyphx has responded

    
Huntard
Member
Posts: 2854
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 115 of 138 (554431)
04-08-2010 9:11 AM
Reply to: Message 114 by Hyroglyphx
04-08-2010 8:33 AM


Re: Weak theory based on anecdote
Hyroglyphx writes:

Hair, I believe, became less relevant when neanderthals were wearing the hides of other animals because their hair alone was insufficient to warm them during the last ice age. I would say that is a stronger connection than aquatic apes.


There's one problem with this though. Neanderthals aren't our ancestors.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by Hyroglyphx, posted 04-08-2010 8:33 AM Hyroglyphx has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Parasomnium, posted 04-08-2010 9:23 AM Huntard has responded
 Message 119 by Hyroglyphx, posted 04-08-2010 10:58 AM Huntard has responded

    
Parasomnium
Member (Idle past 75 days)
Posts: 2191
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 116 of 138 (554433)
04-08-2010 9:23 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by Huntard
04-08-2010 9:11 AM


Re: Weak theory based on anecdote
Huntard writes:

There's one problem with this though. Neanderthals aren't our ancestors.

Is that really a problem, though? Neanderthals probably weren't the only members of the Homo genus who were wearing hides. The general argument still sticks.


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Huntard, posted 04-08-2010 9:11 AM Huntard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by Huntard, posted 04-08-2010 9:42 AM Parasomnium has not yet responded

  
Huntard
Member
Posts: 2854
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 117 of 138 (554437)
04-08-2010 9:42 AM
Reply to: Message 116 by Parasomnium
04-08-2010 9:23 AM


Re: Weak theory based on anecdote
Parasomnium writes:

Is that really a problem, though?


It could look like a problem when written like this. It's like he is saying that because neanderthals wore hides they lost their hair, meaning that the common ancestor of neanderthals and sapiens had lots of hair. This does nothing to dicredit the aquatic ape theory, because neanderthals didn't evolve into humans, so it can be easily said that the cause of losing hair by neanderthals is irrelevant to the cause of sapiens losing its hair. If that makes any sense.

Neanderthals probably weren't the only members of the Homo genus who were wearing hides. The general argument still sticks.

Oh yes, the general argument sticks. And is probably the cause. Sapiens lost its hair because it was unneccesary when it began wearing hides. It's just that neanderthals wearing hides is not an answer to sapiens losing it's hair.

Maybe it was just semantics, it's best to be clear in these cases though.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by Parasomnium, posted 04-08-2010 9:23 AM Parasomnium has not yet responded

    
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 77 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 118 of 138 (554441)
04-08-2010 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 113 by arrogantape
04-08-2010 1:13 AM


Hi, Arrogant Ape.

Do have a problem with my name? Bluebirds and blue jays are not the same thing. You're trying too hard to be cute and clever.

arrogantape writes:

I have to tell you, though, I was a bit hurt by the way you depicted your rejection of primate behavior as specious as would be a salamander and a frog.

There was as much as 240 million years between the advent of the salamander and the split to the frog. The old world monkeys are just 30 to 40 million years separate from us.

Timeframe doesn't matter. You've pointed out three examples of things that are not on our direct line of descent. So, even if those animals are adapting to the water (and, as RAZD has argued, they are not), what does this mean for us? The animals that fit between us and those monkeys in the Tree of Life are not aquatic, so, clearly, their aquaticism is not related to any putative aquaticism in our heritage.

They're irrelevent.

-----

arrogantape writes:

Anyway the Savannah theory has bit the dust.

What is the "savannah theory"? Is it just the idea that we evolved on the savannah?
What does that have to do with the impetus for evolving bipedalism?
Is walking not viable in woodlands or in mixed woodlands/grasslands?

The alternatives to the aquatic ape hypothesis are not really as reliant on there being a savannah as you seem to think they are.


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by arrogantape, posted 04-08-2010 1:13 AM arrogantape has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by arrogantape, posted 04-08-2010 12:59 PM Blue Jay has not yet responded
 Message 123 by RAZD, posted 04-08-2010 10:07 PM Blue Jay has not yet responded

  
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5512
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 119 of 138 (554449)
04-08-2010 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by Huntard
04-08-2010 9:11 AM


Re: Weak theory based on anecdote
There's one problem with this though. Neanderthals aren't our ancestors.

They share a common ancestor that would have been aquatic if the premise of the OP is correct. Obviously if one goes far back in lineage, you would able to trace which "ape" went aquatic. We don't see anything like that.


"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston
This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Huntard, posted 04-08-2010 9:11 AM Huntard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 125 by Huntard, posted 04-09-2010 3:24 AM Hyroglyphx has not yet responded

    
Hyroglyphx
Member
Posts: 5512
From: Austin, TX
Joined: 05-03-2006


Message 120 of 138 (554453)
04-08-2010 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by arrogantape
10-08-2009 8:53 PM


H floresiensis has been found thousands of miles from Africa. This creature had long wide flat feet. It couldn't walk or run well, but could most likely swim like a champ.

Is it remarkable that it would swim well being that it was island-bound?

H floresiensis's trash showed a varied diet including water born food.

Again, is that remarkable? That would be like marveling over the inhabitants of Easter Islander's diet being mainly seafood.


"Political correctness is tyranny with manners." -- Charlton Heston
This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by arrogantape, posted 10-08-2009 8:53 PM arrogantape has not yet responded

    
Prev1
...
567
8
910Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017