Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8898 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-25-2019 10:25 AM
28 online now:
Coragyps, Diomedes, dwise1, PaulK, Phat (AdminPhat), Tangle (6 members, 22 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,634 Year: 3,671/19,786 Month: 666/1,087 Week: 35/221 Day: 6/29 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
56
7
89
...
35NextFF
Author Topic:   Trilobites, Mountains and Marine Deposits - Evidence of a flood?
edge
Member
Posts: 4470
From: Colorado, USA
Joined: 01-09-2002
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 91 of 518 (485910)
10-12-2008 11:38 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by roxrkool
10-12-2008 11:16 PM


Re: How long under water is the issue here.
Hey, Rox, que pasa? I'll send an email.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by roxrkool, posted 10-12-2008 11:16 PM roxrkool has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19759
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 6.4


Message 92 of 518 (485926)
10-13-2008 9:34 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by roxrkool
10-12-2008 11:16 PM


Re: How long under water is the issue here.
Hey Rox, cool to see your boot again. How did the thesis defense go?

2) the Appalachians are cored by metamorphic rocks, not volcanic, and were formed via tectonism (i.e., continent-continent collision); and

3) neither the Himalayas, Alps, nor the Tibetan Plateau are volcanic systems, but also the result of tectonism.

Which, of course, explains why the marine fossils are in the sedimentary layers of these mountains, while the lack of volcanism in those areas refutes the concept of the fossils being thrown out on top (even though this can't explain the ordering in mature sediments and several other more temperate problems).

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 90 by roxrkool, posted 10-12-2008 11:16 PM roxrkool has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by roxrkool, posted 10-14-2008 12:37 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 976 days)
Posts: 1493
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 93 of 518 (485965)
10-14-2008 12:37 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by RAZD
10-13-2008 9:34 AM


Re: How long under water is the issue here.
Thesis is old news now and I couldn't be happier. Thanks for asking.

The defense was... fairly anticlimactic, actually. Afterwards, though, I thought I would want to go out and get drunk to celebrate the end of Hell. But it turns out I just wanted to go home and take a nice, long, unencumbered nap.

Hey, Edge. Got your email. :)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by RAZD, posted 10-13-2008 9:34 AM RAZD has acknowledged this reply

    
Architect-426
Member (Idle past 2702 days)
Posts: 76
From: NC, USA
Joined: 07-16-2008


Message 94 of 518 (486075)
10-15-2008 5:53 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by RAZD
09-29-2008 11:46 PM


Re: flood == volcanic destruction? <---Big Time Super-Mega!!!
Hi Razd, thanks for your reply, just a few explanations.

So it is your interpretation that volcanism was used even though the bible does not explicitly so state.

What else do you suppose "with the earth" could be? It does not say "with a bunch of rain". Yes it did rain of course, but that was a result of the destruction (volcanic) action, and then the mega tsunamis causing the waters to rise. Read on in Scripture, you'll find it, seek and you will find my friend....keep in mind, the word "volcano" did not exist in Hebrew (volcan was the roman god of fire).

Again, I see no mention of earthquakes, nor of transformation, just flood water.

I recommend reading the book of Job. He lived shortly after the flood. Quakes and volcanism go hand-in-hand as you probably know that St. Helens blew its lid after a series of quakes. Quakes are also referred to quite a bit in Scripture by the way.

And interestingly, none of these kind of accounts are recorded in the flood story, as far as I can remember: please cite your chapter and verse for that evidence.

Well no one survived but 8 people, and I think they had a few things to do while it was all happening. Accounts were passed on, thats why we have the story today.

Back to Krakatoa...

Yes in fact there was heavy rain, mud rain to be exact as recorded by a sea captain (by the way 33 ships were sunk). I don't have the account in front of me but I will post some of it later.

And yes, sea water was the source of the tsunami. If a "little" volcano like Krakatoa can cause this much devastation, just think what a mega Krakatoa could do! What I meant was Krakatoa eruption X 1000 X dozens of global localities for a "series" of explosions = mega disaster. I'm actually working on the numbers so I will need more time on this...

Ah yes, the old world wide conspiracy theory.

Just simply the reality of politics here. I am an architect by profession, but I am also a politician.....I have to "feed the machine". All professions are riddled with politics, its the way of the world, unfortunately.

By the way here is a recent article on "science woes" as a result of politics.

http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2008/929/1?rss=1

Well, interestingly I didn't think of is as a conspiracy theory, but now that you mentioned it, Charles Lyell and 'ol Chucky D had a thing going on. Theories are built upon until you get a "mountain"....which is what were really talking about here so yes, lets get back to your topic. I'll address some of the mountain formation in other posts as I see I need to respond to.

Of course the other alternative is the reality that the earth IS in FACT old.

Of course its old. How old? Well it looks like that debate will go on into infinity. For me, I'm not going to take any assumptions as hard facts simply because the "known" conditions are, in fact UNKNOWN, added to imperfect rock samples, added to imperfect humans, added to imperfect equipment, then you get FAAAR from perfect results. Then come the "fudge factor"...

Anyway enough on this subject, but I tell you what....if a scientist can successfully retrieve a sample of iron, nickel, or God knows whatever else is in the very CORE of the earth, put it into a spectro-blaster and come up with 4.6 billion years on the nose, then I'll say "your right, its OLD!", but it won't shake my Faith, the earth was still made, and destroyed, by God.

Cheers


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by RAZD, posted 09-29-2008 11:46 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by Coragyps, posted 10-15-2008 6:23 PM Architect-426 has not yet responded
 Message 97 by bluegenes, posted 10-15-2008 6:50 PM Architect-426 has not yet responded
 Message 100 by RAZD, posted 10-15-2008 10:02 PM Architect-426 has not yet responded

    
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5377
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 95 of 518 (486079)
10-15-2008 6:23 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by Architect-426
10-15-2008 5:53 PM


Re: flood == volcanic destruction? <---Big Time Super-Mega!!!
What I meant was Krakatoa eruption X 1000 X dozens of global localities for a "series" of explosions = mega disaster.

And Noah didn't mind, because he was in a gopherwood box? And why are there no traces of any of these titanic explosions a few thousand years ago?


"The wretched world lies now under the tyranny of foolishness; things are believed by Christians of such absurdity as no one ever could aforetime induce the heathen to believe." - Agobard of Lyons, ca. 830 AD
This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Architect-426, posted 10-15-2008 5:53 PM Architect-426 has not yet responded

    
Architect-426
Member (Idle past 2702 days)
Posts: 76
From: NC, USA
Joined: 07-16-2008


Message 96 of 518 (486081)
10-15-2008 6:34 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Coyote
09-29-2008 8:19 PM


Re: flood == volcanic destruction? <---Big Time Super-Mega!!!
Hi Coyote, some additional thoughts..

At this very recent age you must look to archaeologists and sedimentologists, not geologists, for your evidence.

We obviously see this event completely differently. I see the evidence (as recorded in Scripture as "my" opinion really makes no difference whatsoever) in the rocks, sediments, history etc. Mountains were thrown down, land was tilted, overturned, the earth was "melted", land was lost, etc. so the rocks were definitely changed, they were "metamorphed". The entire map was changed as the earth was completely obliterated.

You bring up an interesting point on sediments. I work with geotechnical engineers quite a bit on construction projects. Here, just under the topsoil, you have "sandy-silty-clay", or "silty-sandy-clay" or even "clayey-silty-sandy" material, and there are always boulders scattered throughout before you hit solid rock. Now where do you think all this material here in the Appalachians came from?

Sand - formed via mechanical (water)erosion of rocks , also formed when molten material is ejected into water as it immediately explodes into pieces.

Clay - bits of igneous rock flattened and mixed with water and sometimes organic material. Bentonite (as an example of a clay, not found here)in particular is volcanic and is formed as it is filtered through seawater.

Silts - grain size rocks mixed with organic material, typically formed at the bottom of bodies of water.

Boulders - well we all know what a boulder is but you should see some of the monsters we dig up. You have to ask, "now how did that 10 ton mass get there?" Then I have to get more money from the client to remove it....

Conclusion - mass destruction and flooding.

Besides, you would think that the Egyptians and other early civilizations would have noticed.

The Egyptians did not exist before the flood, they are in fact Mizraim (Arabic Misr). Probably a bit off topic but an interesting one as I am also fascinated by archeology.

Face it, the idea of a global flood 4,350 years ago is a religious belief, one that is contradicted by the overwhelming evidence of science.

Oh I love science, and science, archeology, history, current events, etc. all prove Scripture. Besides the Bible is not a religious book, I am not religious, so how could it be a "religious belief"?

Thanks


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Coyote, posted 09-29-2008 8:19 PM Coyote has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by bluescat48, posted 10-15-2008 7:14 PM Architect-426 has not yet responded
 Message 99 by Coyote, posted 10-15-2008 7:36 PM Architect-426 has not yet responded
 Message 101 by roxrkool, posted 10-15-2008 10:14 PM Architect-426 has not yet responded

    
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 557 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 97 of 518 (486084)
10-15-2008 6:50 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by Architect-426
10-15-2008 5:53 PM


The real flood/catastrophe that nearly destroyed humanity?
ARCHITECT-426 writes:

Well no one survived but 8 people, and I think they had a few things to do while it was all happening. Accounts were passed on, thats why we have the story today.

Back to Krakatoa...

Not 8 people, but about 10,000, and not Krakatoa, but go a few hundred miles north-west and back in time about 70,000 years, and you've got a possible theory for the origins of some of the flood mythologies, especially as tsunamis could have reached eastern Africa, where many of our ancestors could well have been.

This would rely on the seemingly unlikely possibility of stories being passed down over 3,000 generations, but the Lake Toba eruption is the closest known thing to your scenario.

The Jewish tribal god, of course, couldn't have been involved, as he hadn't been invented at that point in time. ;)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Architect-426, posted 10-15-2008 5:53 PM Architect-426 has not yet responded

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2269 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 98 of 518 (486086)
10-15-2008 7:14 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Architect-426
10-15-2008 6:34 PM


Re: flood == volcanic destruction? <---Big Time Super-Mega!!!
Oh I love science, and science, archeology, history, current events, etc. all prove Scripture. Besides the Bible is not a religious book, I am not religious, so how could it be a "religious belief"?

Because it is religious mythology.


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Architect-426, posted 10-15-2008 6:34 PM Architect-426 has not yet responded

    
Coyote
Member (Idle past 185 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 99 of 518 (486087)
10-15-2008 7:36 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Architect-426
10-15-2008 6:34 PM


Re: flood == volcanic destruction? <---Big Time Super-Mega!!!
One small bit of evidence: when I excavate an archaeological site, and have a continuous record of cultural development for 6,000 years I feel that is good evidence that there was no global flood (with or without volcanoes) at the appointed time of 4,350 years ago.

If there was a flood of that magnitude I think I would notice some evidence. But no, the human cultures in my area developed happily for some 8-10,000 years untroubled by any such flood. The mtDNA was not replaced by that of Noah's kin either. There was continued development, in place, for all that time.

The conclusion: no flood.

You are welcome to your beliefs; just don't mistake them for science.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Architect-426, posted 10-15-2008 6:34 PM Architect-426 has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19759
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 6.4


Message 100 of 518 (486096)
10-15-2008 10:02 PM
Reply to: Message 94 by Architect-426
10-15-2008 5:53 PM


Re: flood == volcanic destruction? <---Big Time Super-Mega!!! = bedtime story.
Thanks ARCHITECT-426

What else do you suppose "with the earth" could be? It does not say "with a bunch of rain". Yes it did rain of course, but that was a result of the destruction (volcanic) action, and then the mega tsunamis causing the waters to rise. Read on in Scripture, you'll find it, seek and you will find my friend....keep in mind, the word "volcano" did not exist in Hebrew (volcan was the roman god of fire).

So it is your interpretation that volcanism was used even though the bible does not explicitly so state.

My interpretation is that this is just a mythological story embellished from previous versions from earlier cultures and that was based on a local flood.

Certainly we do not have any factual information here.

I recommend reading the book of Job. He lived shortly after the flood. Quakes and volcanism go hand-in-hand as you probably know that St. Helens blew its lid after a series of quakes. Quakes are also referred to quite a bit in Scripture by the way.

According to the same mythological source, and earthquakes also occur independently of volcanism.

And yes, sea water was the source of the tsunami. If a "little" volcano like Krakatoa can cause this much devastation, just think what a mega Krakatoa could do! What I meant was Krakatoa eruption X 1000 X dozens of global localities for a "series" of explosions = mega disaster. I'm actually working on the numbers so I will need more time on this...

And you are still woefully short of the required destructive energy, by magnetudes.

The second problem is that you still do not explain any of the evidence we see in the geological record - none of it. All this topsy-turvy world being thrown from one end of the globe to the other may make for a nice bed-time story, but it does not explain the extensive sedimentary beds of peaceful mature marine growth that occurred over thousands of years of gradual deposition on tops of other layers of peaceful mature marine growth.

Strangely, volcanic layers are infrequent contributors to the geological record, and few (if any) reach the global distribution that the Yucatan meteor event reached (and that was pretty thinly spread).

Of course its old. How old? Well it looks like that debate will go on into infinity. For me, I'm not going to take any assumptions as hard facts simply because the "known" conditions are, in fact UNKNOWN, added to imperfect rock samples, added to imperfect humans, added to imperfect equipment, then you get FAAAR from perfect results. Then come the "fudge factor"...

Current scientific thinking is that it is a little over 4.55 billion years old. Curiously the errors and mistakes can be corrected by repeating the analysis. Strangely different systems used agree on the dates. Interestingly no creationist can explain the correlations ...

But that is getting off topic on this thread, see Age Correlations and an Old Earth: Version 1 No 3 (formerly Part III) for an example of some, and to continue any discussion on this issue (tree rings agree within 37 years after 8,000 years AND they correlate with climate and 14C levels, and that's just the beginning).

Here we need an explanation of the existing factual layers of sedimentary marine deposits that show thousands of years of peaceful uninterrupted mature marine growth.

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 94 by Architect-426, posted 10-15-2008 5:53 PM Architect-426 has not yet responded

  
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 976 days)
Posts: 1493
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 101 of 518 (486097)
10-15-2008 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Architect-426
10-15-2008 6:34 PM


Re: flood == volcanic destruction? <---Big Time Super-Mega!!!
You bring up an interesting point on sediments. I work with geotechnical engineers quite a bit on construction projects. Here, just under the topsoil, you have "sandy-silty-clay", or "silty-sandy-clay" or even "clayey-silty-sandy" material, and there are always boulders scattered throughout before you hit solid rock.

Haven't you ever been to a mountain river? I've seen boulders the size of buses and of course the river bed is full of sand, silt, and clay. If you've ever been to Alaska, you might see extensive braided stream systems of the same material. Nothing odd about this grouping of material, really.

Now where do you think all this material here in the Appalachians came from?

The Appalachians??

Sand - formed via mechanical (water)erosion of rocks , also formed when molten material is ejected into water as it immediately explodes into pieces.

It is very, very simple to tell the difference between glass, which is what forms from nearly instantly chilled "molten material," and minerals such as quartz, magnetite, feldspar, pyroxene, etc. Glass is amorphous (lacks internal crystal structure), while minerals have crystalline structure. As such, glass sand deposits are extremely rare and most are likely associated with impact structures. The sort of sand you are seeing in North Carolina is of the mineral kind.

Clay - bits of igneous rock flattened and mixed with water and sometimes organic material. Bentonite (as an example of a clay, not found here)in particular is volcanic and is formed as it is filtered through seawater.

Your understanding of clay is cursory.

There are two types of clay, the mineral variety (e.g., kaolinite, montmorillonite, ect.), and the particle size variety (< ~5 um). They do not have to come from igneous rocks (though much clay does), it has not been physically flattened, it does not have to come with water, and organic material is extraneous.

Bentonite, the mineral kind, is most certainly not a primary volcanic mineral, but most often forms from the alteration of volcanic-derived material such as ash. When ash (which is glass) is erupted from a volcano and happens to land on a lake, eventually it settles on the lake bed. Over time, the ash devitrifies (from amorphous to crystalline) and forms a clay mineral such as bentonite.

Silts - grain size rocks mixed with organic material, typically formed at the bottom of bodies of water.

It is not accurate to call silt a "rock." Silt is predominantly individual minerals. Neither is silt "formed at the bottom of bodies of water," but is instead formed from the physical break-down of rocks, which is then transported via fluvial, glacial, glaciofluvial, eolian, etc. processes, and deposited subaerially or in submarine environments.

They are simply smaller sand grains.

Boulders - well we all know what a boulder is but you should see some of the monsters we dig up. You have to ask, "now how did that 10 ton mass get there?" Then I have to get more money from the client to remove it....

Conclusion - mass destruction and flooding.


Sure, a large flood can move large boulders, but so can glaciers. This is still not enough evidence for a global flood if that is what you are suggesting.

Depending on the sediments, you might have evidence for a local flood. If you could trace your gravel deposit continuously across the entire country and throughout every continent, then you might have a good global flood argument.

Edited by roxrkool, : No reason given.

Edited by roxrkool, : Better quotes.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Architect-426, posted 10-15-2008 6:34 PM Architect-426 has not yet responded

    
Architect-426
Member (Idle past 2702 days)
Posts: 76
From: NC, USA
Joined: 07-16-2008


Message 102 of 518 (486098)
10-15-2008 10:43 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Coragyps
09-29-2008 9:37 PM


Re: How long under water is the issue here.
Would that be the Bertha Rogers well drilled in the 70's out near Elk City, Oklahoma? If so, I'm a little puzzled that "scientists" were surprised at finding water there. It was drilled into the Arbuckle, which was known long before then to be an ocean-laid limestone that was later changed to dolomite - by rainwater. The petroleum folks would have been very surprised to not find water there.

The one I was referring to was the one in the Soviet Union.

http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=567

Its interesting, isn't it that petroleum is found floating on top of subterranean water.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Coragyps, posted 09-29-2008 9:37 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

    
Architect-426
Member (Idle past 2702 days)
Posts: 76
From: NC, USA
Joined: 07-16-2008


Message 103 of 518 (486099)
10-15-2008 10:59 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by anglagard
10-08-2008 1:03 AM


Re: Misconception Concerning Igneous Rock
I think you are confusing the term volcanic with the term igneous.

I'm not confused.... Igneous rock = "eruptive" rock...that didn't erupt...i.e. crystallized dried up Magma that originated very deep, and was very, very hot.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by anglagard, posted 10-08-2008 1:03 AM anglagard has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by roxrkool, posted 10-15-2008 11:36 PM Architect-426 has not yet responded
 Message 107 by anglagard, posted 10-16-2008 2:09 AM Architect-426 has responded

    
roxrkool
Member (Idle past 976 days)
Posts: 1493
From: Nevada
Joined: 03-23-2003


Message 104 of 518 (486100)
10-15-2008 11:36 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by Architect-426
10-15-2008 10:59 PM


Re: Misconception Concerning Igneous Rock
You are confused and now I'm confused by your statement.

An "eruptive" rock that didn't erupt? Huh? edited to add: Ahhhh... I see what you mean. You mean an IGNEOUS rock that didn't erupt. You mean plutonic rocks.

A volcanic rock is one that has been erupted onto the surface of the earth or cooled in the near-surface environment and typically contains finer-grained crystals.

A plutonic rock is an igneous rock that cools and solidifies deep within the earth and typically contains coarser grained crystals.

BOTH are igneous rocks, but only volcanic rocks are eruptive.

Edited by roxrkool, : No reason given.

Edited by roxrkool, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Architect-426, posted 10-15-2008 10:59 PM Architect-426 has not yet responded

    
Architect-426
Member (Idle past 2702 days)
Posts: 76
From: NC, USA
Joined: 07-16-2008


Message 105 of 518 (486101)
10-15-2008 11:45 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by Minnemooseus
10-08-2008 1:15 AM


Re: Way off-topic, and probably very wrong
Hey Minnemooseus,

How about some references for these assertions? My impression is that you are pulling this info out of thin air, or perhaps just misunderstand what is volcanism.

Sure. Some recommended reading:
Encyclopedia of Volcanoes
Volcanism; Hans-Ulrich Schmincke
Volcanoes; Rosi, Papale, Lupi
All Geology books by Geikie (he was fascinated by volcanism and had a very keen eye)

A few web sites:

The Canadians have done a great job identifying volcanic edifices and calderas. Browse thru this and you will be amazed just how many are "known".
http://gsc.nrcan.gc.ca/volcanoes/index_e.php

Now this is way cool!! (as my sons would say). I hope you can see the video of this underwater eruption recorded by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration - NOAA (gotta love that name!)
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2008/06/12/underwater-volcano.html

It is estimated that 75% of all volcanoes are undersea. A lot going on down there to say the least. Now just think what will happen to little hard-shelled sea critters if they get caught up in that mess...

Here is some info on the largest tephra eruptions known. Note the Fish Canyon Tuff and La Garita caldera in the San Juan Mtns Colorado. Snowshoe mountain is a huge resurgent dome complex just south of Creede.
http://users.bendnet.com/bjensen/volcano/largerup.html
http://staff.aist.go.jp/s-takarada/CEV/newsletter/lagarita.html

Interesting article on Soufrière Hills volcano.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/10/081009144101.htm

Article on mass extinction by undersea volcanoes. Of course I don't agree with the time scale...
http://www.futurepundit.com/archives/005370.html

I hope this helps.

Edited by ARCHITECT-426, : wrong link


This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by Minnemooseus, posted 10-08-2008 1:15 AM Minnemooseus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 106 by bluescat48, posted 10-16-2008 12:10 AM Architect-426 has not yet responded

    
Prev1
...
56
7
89
...
35NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019