Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Kent Hovind
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 271 of 349 (628213)
08-07-2011 3:54 PM
Reply to: Message 268 by jar
08-07-2011 3:17 PM


Re: Still evading the issue I see.
Please present the evidence of the creator or the method used by that critter to influence evolution.
Until you present evidence equal to the evidence of natural causes you have nothing.
Since I have now provided what you requested it is your obligation as an debater to respond to that rebuttal
Dont keep embarrasing yourself by avoiding the points and information You requested and I have provided
Do we need to put a mirror under your nose to see if you are still alive
My arguments are valid and I have provided what you have requested
if you cant answer the arguments atleast answer the questions
Your starting to look pathetic
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 268 by jar, posted 08-07-2011 3:17 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 272 by jar, posted 08-07-2011 4:02 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 272 of 349 (628215)
08-07-2011 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 271 by Dawn Bertot
08-07-2011 3:54 PM


Re: Still evading the issue I see.
You provided nothing as usual.
So far the only evidence is that of natural causes.
There is evidence of natural causes.
Please present the evidence of the creator or the method used by that critter to influence evolution.
Until you present evidence equal to the evidence of natural causes you have nothing.
Since there is evidence that there are natural causes but no evidence of a creator or any method used by that critter to influence evolution logic demands that until such evidence is presented that the creator or the method used by that critter be simply disregarded.
It really is that simple.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 271 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-07-2011 3:54 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 273 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-07-2011 4:06 PM jar has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 273 of 349 (628217)
08-07-2011 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 272 by jar
08-07-2011 4:02 PM


Re: Still evading the issue I see.
You provided nothing as usual.
Then demonstrate it in argument form, that is what this website is founded upon
Since I have now provided what you requested it is your obligation as an debater to respond to that rebuttal
Dont keep embarrasing yourself by avoiding the points and information You requested and I have provided
Do we need to put a mirror under your nose to see if you are still alive
My arguments are valid and I have provided what you have requested
if you cant answer the arguments atleast answer the questions
Your starting to look pathetic
Dawn Bertot
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by jar, posted 08-07-2011 4:02 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 275 by jar, posted 08-07-2011 4:08 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 276 by Percy, posted 08-07-2011 4:12 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 274 of 349 (628218)
08-07-2011 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 267 by Dawn Bertot
08-07-2011 3:15 PM


Re: Still evading the issue I see.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Great, now present the evidence that demonstrates that it is by SOLEY natural causes
No one claims there is evidence that non-natural causes do not exist.
We provide explanations that include causes we have evidence for, and we only have evidence of natural causes.
But you provide explanations that include causes you have no evidence for.
When comparing explanations with evidence to explanations with no evidence, it's no contest.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-07-2011 3:15 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-08-2011 9:56 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 393 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 275 of 349 (628219)
08-07-2011 4:08 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by Dawn Bertot
08-07-2011 4:06 PM


Re: Still evading the issue I see.
So far the only evidence is that of natural causes.
There is evidence of natural causes.
Please present the evidence of the creator or the method used by that critter to influence evolution.
Until you present evidence equal to the evidence of natural causes you have nothing.
Since there is evidence that there are natural causes but no evidence of a creator or any method used by that critter to influence evolution logic demands that until such evidence is presented that the creator or the method used by that critter be simply disregarded.
It really is that simple.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-07-2011 4:06 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 276 of 349 (628221)
08-07-2011 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 273 by Dawn Bertot
08-07-2011 4:06 PM


Re: Still evading the issue I see.
Dawn Bertot writes:
Since I have now provided what you requested it is your obligation as an debater to respond to that rebuttal
You provided evidence of the creator and of how he influenced evolution? Really? Where? Oh, and did God turn out to be Christian, Islam, Hindu, Buddhist or other?
I think you're providing wonderful examples of a couple of the creationist approaches to debate: making claims that you've proved things you've never proved, and misunderstanding how evidence works.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 273 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-07-2011 4:06 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-08-2011 10:08 PM Percy has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 277 of 349 (628236)
08-07-2011 11:05 PM
Reply to: Message 267 by Dawn Bertot
08-07-2011 3:15 PM


Re: Evidence Of The Creator
I made such a mess of my message to Dawn Bertot that I am deleting it and have posted it (abe: without the ":abe"s) () in a General Reply box. I've been trying to find the message to which I was replying, expending so much time that I gave up and submitted the tidied up message in general reply.
Edited by Buzsaw, : Change and add words for clarity
Edited by Buzsaw, : Change wording.
Edited by Buzsaw, : Add word to enforce point
Edited by Buzsaw, : Ditto
Edited by Buzsaw, : Change wording for clarity
Edited by Buzsaw, : Delete and re-post
Edited by Buzsaw, : No reason given.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 267 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-07-2011 3:15 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 278 of 349 (628242)
08-08-2011 12:46 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by dwise1
07-30-2011 10:11 PM


Re: Evidence Of A Creator
Dawn Bertot writes:
My evidence for the creator is the same as your evidence that existence is solely by natural causes. its called, existence, law, order,, purpose, (abe: complexity) and design
Hi Dawn. Imo, you can scratch existence as unique evidence of the creator because it's not unique to Creationism.
I see their evidence for law and order, purpose and design as problematic for them. Precious little in this real life as we observe it works like they say chaotic soup allegedly morphed a bit of itself into life under highly unlikely odds, which in turn allegedly morphed itself from an alleged simple organism to finally morph life into all of the law, order, (abe: complexity and design we observe today.
Once chaos allegedly morphed itself into a substantial advanced state of complexity, they can at least produce a weak argument for evolvement into something more orderly and complex. I say weak argument because of the lack of transitional macro-evolved fossils existing and the more advanced culturally and techy we become, the weaker and sicker be become as humans, relative to cancer, heart disease, etc. Animal species become extinct; no replacements evolving, pollution, diseases of animals on the increase, pestulances, etc.
I see their illogical and un-doable morphing of the alleged first life as problematic). It would be highly illogical and unlikely for that first stage to survive in very chaotic and unfriendly lifeless environment from which it allegedly came.
Life without a method of ingesting and processing non-living sustenance would die, according to all that we observe in real life. It would be very difficult for something having no ingrained DNA involving information to survive. Modern life, having all of the ammenities like DNA) would even likely die in such an environment it left to itself in that state.
Purpose. Most of what we observe in real life is indicative of purpose ecologically. In abiogenesis, what drive would the simplest organism for survival? None whatsoever.
Now, we move to an aspect of evidence; corroborating evidence with evidence so as to enforce the aggregate of evidence which we're required to cite. Not that they will ever admit to a smidget of it At least we can strengthen our own position in our own minds so as not to become dissuaded from it as folks like Cavediver et al have done.
Creationists have fumbled the evidence ball due to apathy and reliance on blind faith. Faith should not be blind. The great Apostle Paul advised to "Prove all things." in his 1st letter to the Thessalonians, yet he is know as a great man of faith.
Corroborated data, such as distances, positions, temperatures, elements, forces, etc relative to the compatibility of our planet for life adds to your list. These, individually and alone may, perhaps, afford them some skepticism, but corroborated with your list, builds on our arsenal of evidence.
Sadly, precious few creationists have studiously corroborated and harmonized the amazing prophecies of the Biblical record. Our pulpits are essentially silent about them. The sheeple in the pews haven't a clue, nor do they care.
Having studied them for decades, they have become a significant factor in convincing me of the existence of higher intelligence existing in the Universe. Again don't expect any amount of this evidence to be acknowledged by our secularist friends. Poor deluded folk.
Corroborating prophecy with prophecy and pigeonholing them into the proper time frame is not for novices. It's been a 66 year study for me. The more I read and analyze them, the more I see their significance as we observe their fulfillment in what is turning out to be the 'latter times."
Suffice to say that anyone willing to observe, learn and apply can add the fulfilled prophecies relative to the end time phenomenal restoration of dispersed ancient Israeli Jews to their prophetically promised Promise Land for these end of the Gentile age times to the list of corroborated evidence of the creator, Jehovah, the Biblical one and only god.
Archeology: ICR, Moller et al to cite a couple of many, have cited evidence None dare admit lest they become accountable to a higher power are just one more of the many evidences creationists can cite.
This is where creationists and secularists interpret some of the same data according to the hypothesis which they begin from. One sees what is observed from their perspective an another from theirs.
Culturally: Corroborate all of the above with the observed phenomena of religion. Nearly all cultures in all of recorded human history have had a religious bent, involving fear, awe and worship, due to the belief that higher intelligence exists in the Universe than what we humans have.
I and others have cited the gap between the animals and human-kind. Biblically this is explained in that we were designed creatures, imaging our designer.
Our intelligence is substantially higher enough than that of the most intelligent other life that we have the ability to manage all other life, taming the wild, slaughtering for food, training them for beasts of burden, etc.
Again, this is all cited in the Biblical record, stating that Adam should have rule over the animal kingdom and cultivate the plant kingdom, etc.
Phenomena of good and/vs evil relative to higher powers existing in the Universe, a good creator/designer ruling and managing the Universe and an evil force/devil; one to be feared and (abe: worshipped, able to bless and to curse; the other, literally raising hell in the Universe
Regarding cursings and blessings, history attests to the fact that nations and cultures which practice idol worship, the occult, heathenism, atheism, etc have been the less blessed, prosperous and free, by and large, (I say 'by and large') than those nations which apply the Biblical (I say 'Biblical'), not necessarily religious, but Biblical fundamentals.
I'm sure I've missed some evidences which corroborate the arsenal of evidence which creationists should be citing, whether or not the skeptics admit to it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by dwise1, posted 07-30-2011 10:11 PM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by Butterflytyrant, posted 08-08-2011 4:58 AM Buzsaw has replied
 Message 294 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-09-2011 5:06 PM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4421 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


(2)
Message 279 of 349 (628252)
08-08-2011 4:58 AM
Reply to: Message 278 by Buzsaw
08-08-2011 12:46 AM


Re: Evidence Of A Creator
Hello Buzsaw,
You had a lot of posts in your thread so I just picked one that was of particular interest to me.
I and others have cited the gap between the animals and human-kind. Biblically this is explained in that we were designed creatures, imaging our designer.
Our intelligence is substantially higher enough than that of the most intelligent other life that we have the ability to manage all other life, taming the wild, slaughtering for food, training them for beasts of burden, etc.
This is all from an evolutionary perpsective...
All living creature have evolutionary advantage that allows them to gain an advantage in the niche they occupy. The particular evolutionary path that humans have taken to taken is intelligence. We are capable of altering the environment around us to make the best use of this advantage. However, take off all of your clothes and head down onto the savannah in africa and it may not be the case. There will be animals that can see you in the dark, who can smell you from a mile away, who can creep up on you undetected and who can kill you very efficiently with tooth and claw. The one thing we have to succeed is our smarts.
If you look at pretty much any other trait that we have, we are often far down the list when it comes to how good we are.
Our senses - There are animals who can see, hear, smell and taste with far better precision than us. Our sense of touch is also less than many creatures.
Reproduction - Without medical technology, many more women and children would die in childbirth. There are animals that can spawn hundreds of offspring in a single birthing. Even rats can have dozens of young in a single litter. Our young are also pretty much useless for at least a decade after birth. An impala can outrun a predator on the day of its birth. My daughter is more than a year old and has trouble navigating the living room.
Defence - We are woefully unprotected. Our skin is soft and easily broken as we have no armour or even a hide of decent toughness. We dont have horns or great strength. We dont have venom. We cant spurt anything nasty smelling at a predator. We dont have claws or impressive teeth. We dont have great speed or agility. Our main, instinctive form of defence, punching, often ends up breaking our hands as often as breaking something on an opponent. We have relatively low resistence to naturally occuring venoms and poisons.
Lifespan - We do live a fairly long life due to improved medical technology. But that is very, very recent. As recent as the middle ages, we only lived somewhere around the forties or fifties if we were lucky. There are animals who, with no medical intervention can live for over a century. There are jellyfish that are effectively immortal as they can regenerate every cell in their body. They will really only be killed through total mechanical destruction.
Food - we are extremly picky eaters. We cant eat something that has been dead for too long. Considering the vast number of plants there are, we can eat only a small percentage (unless you are interested in intense abdominal pain, vomiting, violent diarrhea and possibly death). We are not great at killing things and poor at telling what plants we should or should not eat.
The environment - We have little tolerance for extremes of heat and cold. We cant survive for more than a few days before water becomes a serious issue. Outside of the comfort of our homes, the environment is most often our enemy.
There are also many, many problems with the human body. Lower back, hip, knee and ankle problems because we have not quite become used to being upright being one of the most obvious ones. The designer was not so great if this current body is his best model (have a look in the mirror next time you get out of the shower, and wonder if this is really the best he could do).
Just how successful are we really? Our intelligence has allowed us to dominate this planet. We can domesticate many animals and slaughter others. But is that really a good thing? It could be argued that our intelligence has caused an awful lot of problems for us. We have made our lives very difficult. And we seem to be adding even greater complications the smarter we think we are getting. The phrase ignorance is bliss could be right.
Has our intelligence really got us that far. Is this better than being a spider? How many times do you look at the family pet and think it has the better life.
My point really is that it is difficult to argue that humans are superior to all other animals. We are currently the most dominant. But it is arguable if we are the best.
Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by Buzsaw, posted 08-08-2011 12:46 AM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by Buzsaw, posted 08-08-2011 9:47 AM Butterflytyrant has replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 305 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


(2)
Message 280 of 349 (628273)
08-08-2011 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 264 by Dawn Bertot
08-06-2011 9:18 PM


Re: Logic demands
The good thing about the only two logical possibilites is that no amount of information ever gathered will provide an alternative suggestion, nor will it overthrow those choices. it cant be changed.
Why did the big bang go bang?
Scientist: we dont know
Creationist: creator
What was there before the big bang?
Scientist: we dont know
Creationist creator
Whyt started life?
Scientist: we have a few working hypothesis
Creationist: creator
How did life came to be as it is now
Scientist: Evolution
Creationist: creator
Why does gravitiy wor as it does?
Scientist: we are working on it we have some working hypothesis
Creationist: creator
........
Yea your creator theory works for everything lets jut dump all science down the drain and go with the creator theory it worked so well in the past remember the dark ages???

This message is a reply to:
 Message 264 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-06-2011 9:18 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 286 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-08-2011 10:02 PM frako has replied

  
Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 281 of 349 (628277)
08-08-2011 9:47 AM
Reply to: Message 279 by Butterflytyrant
08-08-2011 4:58 AM


Re: Evidence Of A Creator
Butterflytyrant writes:
This is all from an evolutionary perpsective...
All living creature have evolutionary advantage that allows them to gain an advantage in the niche they occupy. The particular evolutionary path that humans have taken to taken is intelligence. We are capable of altering the environment around us to make the best use of this advantage. However, take off all of your clothes and head down onto the savannah in africa and it may not be the case. There will be animals that can see you in the dark, who can smell you from a mile away, who can creep up on you undetected and who can kill you very efficiently with tooth and claw. The one thing we have to succeed is our smarts.
Hi, Butterfly. You need to re-read my message, to which your response applies. I acknowledged that once information and complexity is observed, evolutionists can make a weak argument for their perspective.
You appear to have missed my important point, that your problem lies mostly in the abiogenesis and early stages of alleged evolution. I cited reasons why this makes the case for the creationist ID PoV.

BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by Butterflytyrant, posted 08-08-2011 4:58 AM Butterflytyrant has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 282 by Butterflytyrant, posted 08-08-2011 11:21 AM Buzsaw has not replied

  
Butterflytyrant
Member (Idle past 4421 days)
Posts: 415
From: Australia
Joined: 06-28-2011


(1)
Message 282 of 349 (628285)
08-08-2011 11:21 AM
Reply to: Message 281 by Buzsaw
08-08-2011 9:47 AM


Re: Evidence Of A Creator
hey Buz,
You psot covered a whole heap of different points. i just picked one.
My response only applies to the one part that I included in my post.
Which part of my post did you think was a weak argument for evolution? I was not really trying to defend the theory. I was trying to point out that saying that humans use of their intelligence as proof of a creator is not likely to work.
You said -
I and others have cited the gap between the animals and human-kind. Biblically this is explained in that we were designed creatures, imaging our designer.
Our intelligence is substantially higher enough than that of the most intelligent other life that we have the ability to manage all other life, taming the wild, slaughtering for food, training them for beasts of burden, etc.
The statement that I was disagreeing with was that our intelligence is a good supporting arguement of a creator. By all means keep using it, it is a valid arguement. Its just not a partiularly strong one for the reasons I mentioned. I dont think we are all that great of a design. I think that if there was a God, he would no doubt be able to do a bit better. At least from what I have read of his abilities. At the very least, he should have worked out a way to prevent armpit hair from becoming knotted.
You do make a lot of other points that I chose not to discuss as it would have taken me all day. You fit a lot into one post. And there are others who know more about the different areas. Some of what you posted about, my knowledge is limited. better to leave it alone than make myself look like a moron by making blind unsubtantiated claims.
your problem lies mostly in the abiogenesis and early stages of alleged evolution. I cited reasons why this makes the case for the creationist ID PoV.
If science never, ever works out how abiogenesis works. Or the current theories are proven to be totally incorrent. If it is proven tomorrow that the current theories of abiohenesis are proven to be 100% wrong. There will be no change or impact of any kind on the Theory of Evolution. It is almost like saying that the theories we have on how stars form cannot be true because we cant prove how the universe was formed. I hope that was not too much of a straw man but it seemed relevant to the forum. My point is that abiogenesis is irrelevant to the the Theory of Evolution. Thats why we have creationists who are also evolutionists. Because the way it started does not matter. As to the early stages of evolution, you will have to let me know what time period we are talking about. The first 100 years, the first 1000 years, the first 1000 million years?
I found a really good tree of life image that I will add to this post and might add to some others because it is so good. You might be able to use it to help in some of your arguments too. It is always good to have a good to know your enemy.
So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred battles without a single loss.
If you only know yourself, but not your opponent, you may win or may lose.
If you know neither yourself nor your enemy, you will always endanger yourself.
Sun Tzu
hey folks, this is probably the best tree of life representation I have ever seen. Pretty poor at the current scale but head to the link for a better view.
here is the link to the image -
http://evogeneao.com/images/Evo_large.gif
it is from this website -
http://evogeneao.com/tree.html
Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.
Edited by Butterflytyrant, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by Buzsaw, posted 08-08-2011 9:47 AM Buzsaw has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 283 by Percy, posted 08-08-2011 1:36 PM Butterflytyrant has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22389
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 283 of 349 (628292)
08-08-2011 1:36 PM
Reply to: Message 282 by Butterflytyrant
08-08-2011 11:21 AM


Re: Evidence Of A Creator
Butterflytyrant writes:
Pretty poor at the current scale but head to the link for a better view.
If you hover over the image in your message and click on it it becomes just as big. Click again and it shrinks to fit back in the message. Large images are automatically resized by the forum software.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by Butterflytyrant, posted 08-08-2011 11:21 AM Butterflytyrant has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 284 of 349 (628298)
08-08-2011 3:01 PM
Reply to: Message 262 by Dawn Bertot
08-06-2011 7:03 PM


Re: Logic demands
If law order and purpose are not equal in evidence of a designer, to the answer of soley natural causes, then it would follow logically that you could or do have the means to demonstrate your position from start to finish.
Right back atcha. You need to show, with evidence, that laws, order, and purpose are caused by a supernatural designer. This is the claim you are making, so it is up to you to supply the evidence. The burden of proof is on you, not me.
Really taq? Please explain how your positionl and mine, do not stand or fall together. Given the available evidence
You mean "Why do I reject a false dichotomy?". That should answer itself as well.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 262 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-06-2011 7:03 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 288 by Dawn Bertot, posted 08-08-2011 10:22 PM Taq has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 285 of 349 (628328)
08-08-2011 9:56 PM
Reply to: Message 274 by Percy
08-07-2011 4:06 PM


Re: Still evading the issue I see.
No one claims there is evidence that non-natural causes do not exist.
I know that
We provide explanations that include causes we have evidence for, and we only have evidence of natural causes.
This is a very misleading statement. You have no evidence of causes as you suggest, not in the context of our discussion. It is not what caused a tree, but what caused anything. Where you do not know this, you have no evidence at all
.
But you provide explanations that include causes you have no evidence for.
Wrong. I have no evidence of causes for anything outside the scriptures. I only have two logical alternatives. Im sorry if God or an eternal being is unpalatable, but he is clearly oneof those choices provided by the available evidence
When comparing explanations with evidence to explanations with no evidence, it's no contest.
there is no comparison, because there is no direct evidence on either side, but evidence nonetheless
Its fairly easy to see why both should be taught as science
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 274 by Percy, posted 08-07-2011 4:06 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024